From the Wealth Summit—September 2017—an interview with Dana Anspach regarding asset-liability matching for retirement income planning.
Dana is an expert in asset-liability matching as a retirement income strategy. See more and a full transcript on www.RetireWire.com
Asset-Liability Matching for Retirement Income Planning
In an ideal world, we would all experience incredibly high investment returns while experiencing zero volatility and risk. However, the markets obviously do not operate in such a way, which is why Dana Anspach, CEO, and Founder of Sensible Money, LLC, joins the Wealth Summit to discuss an asset-liability matching strategy that can help prepare you for retirement.
-Accumulation vs. Decumulation
-Asset-Liability Matching Compared to Other Retirement Income Planning Strategies
-Other Retirement Income Strategies That May Make Sense
-Time Segmentation Approach
The perfect investment would accomplish the desired level of safety, income, and growth in a portfolio simultaneously, without having to sacrifice a portion of any category. This simply is not possible.
The sooner you realize this, the better off you’ll be in retirement. However, Dana will discuss a few sufficient alternatives.
The accumulation phase of your career follows the efficient frontier, which is the basis for how portfolios are structured. This frontier measures risk versus return.
The more stocks you add to the portfolio, the more you increase your potential for both return and volatility. The typical portfolio will be structured to maximize growth while minimizing risk.
One of the most important aspects of the decumulation phase is sequence risk, which depends on the time you withdraw your money from your portfolio. Dana’s graph stresses the importance of withdrawing money during an upturn in the market as opposed to during a downturn.
How does asset-liability matching compare to other retirement strategies? The “total return” approach works well in bull markets but can be scary in down markets. This plan uses your typical 60/40 allocation model.
The “income only” strategy focuses on high-yield dividend-paying hybrid investments. You only spend the divided. This plan experiences even more volatility during recessions than the “total return” strategy.
The “guaranteed income” approach is for those who need as much income as possible and typically consists of buying annuities.
Finally, the “asset-liability matching” approach matches investments to the point in time you’re going to need to use them.
Dana describes the time segmentation of asset-liability matching as laying down a railroad track as you drive down it. Five percent should be kept in cash, while thirty-five percent is put into fixed-income bonds. This fixed income should be divided into chunks and staggered out to be paid overtime.
The final sixty percent is in equities. As your equity portion experiences growth, the overflow of the equity bucket will pour into the fixed income bucket, adding an additional year or chunk of fixed income.
“What got you here, won’t get you there.” Retirement requires a different portfolio situation. While you can’t control the outcome, you can manage the risks. The ideal time to start exploring this asset-liability matching strategy is 10 years prior to retirement.