In short
Podcast Notes: The Rational Reminder Podcast
Episode 281
Lifecycle Asset Allocation and Retiring Successfully with Justin King
Episode Overview In this episode, the hosts Benjamin Felix, Cameron Passmore, and Dan Bortolotti explore lifecycle asset allocation, discussing empirical insights from Scott Cederburg's article, "Beyond the Status Quo: A Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice." They also delve into insurance types and their ownership structuring (personal vs. corporate) before reviewing Justin King's book, "The Retirement Café Handbook: Nine Accelerators for a Successful Retirement."
---
Key Topics Discussed
- Lifecycle Asset Allocation
- Empirical Insights:
- Importance of asset allocation as a major driver of long-term investment outcomes.
- Traditional methods like "age minus 100" or target date funds simplify complex optimization models but may rest on flawed assumptions.
- Volatility vs. Risk:
- Discusses the misconception that shifting to bonds reduces risk as retirement approaches.
- Emphasizes that long-term investors might benefit more from equities due to their potential for higher returns.
- Government Pensions:
- The role of pensions (e.g., Canada Pension Plan, Social Security) as fixed income assets that offset the need for bonds in a portfolio.
- Research Findings:
- Scott Cederburg's paper suggests that a steady 50% domestic and 50% international stock allocation may be optimal throughout an investor’s life, challenging traditional age-based strategies.
- Mark to Market Segment: Understanding Insurance
- Types of Insurance Discussed:
- Life Insurance: Best owned by a corporation for tax efficiency, allowing tax-free payouts to beneficiaries.
- Disability Insurance: Best owned personally to receive tax-free payouts upon claim.
- Critical Illness Insurance: Ownership depends on the purpose—personal need versus business continuity.
---
Insights from Justin King
- Book Overview: "The Retirement Café Handbook"
- Focuses on nine accelerators for a successful retirement, emphasizing planning, purpose, and health.
- Redefining Retirement:
- Transitioning from traditional views to a modern understanding of retirement's opportunities.
- Purpose:
- Encouraging individuals to retire *to* something meaningful rather than just *from* work.
- Lifelong Learning:
- It's never too late to acquire new skills or pursue passions.
- Health and Vitality:
- The importance of maintaining physical health for a fulfilling retirement.
- Planning for Longevity:
- Preparing for potentially lengthy retirements, often exceeding 30 years.
- Investment Role:
- Understanding the implications of financial decisions on retirement security.
- Care and End-of-Life Planning:
- Discussing preferences and practicalities surrounding long-term care.
---
Listener Engagement
- The hosts read and responded to listener reviews and questions, emphasizing the importance of community feedback and participation in financial literacy.
Final Thoughts
- The episode wraps up with recommendations for further reading and an invitation to engage with the podcast community, emphasizing the value of informed financial decision-making.
Useful Links
- Research Paper: [Beyond the Status Quo: A Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4590406)
- Justin King's Book: [The Retirement Café Handbook](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Retirement-Cafe-Handbook-Accelerators-Successful/dp/1739410300)
Conclusion This episode provides valuable insights on asset allocation, the role of insurance, and planning for a successful retirement, encouraging listeners to rethink conventional wisdom and engage deeply with their financial futures.
Written by AI. May contain mistakes. Listen to the episode to check what was said.
Transcript
Automatic transcript. May contain errors.0:03This is the Rational Reminder Podcast, a weekly reality check on sensible investing and financial decision-making from two Canadians. We're hosted by me, Benjamin Felix, and Cameron Passmore, portfolio managers at PWL Capital.
0:18Welcome to episode 281. And Ben, we're in the homestretch for this year. It's unbelievable how the end of the year is near and we're working on the end of the year show as always. I'll let you kick off introing this week's episode. The homestretch makes it seem like it's a race. I'd rather time slow down. Oh, no kidding. You just flew by. Can't believe it. The main topic for today is life cycle asset allocation with a fresh perspective is what I would call it. Scott Sederberg has a new paper on this topic. And so I'm mostly talking about that, but a few other things too. I think it's a pretty interesting segment.
0:54Definitely has me revisiting how to think about asset allocation. That's cool. We have Scott booked for later this year. So he'll be on to talk about this paper that I'll be referring to. But anyway, you get a taste of it today. Mark is back with the Mark to Market segment, and he's going to be talking about the different types of insurance, life, disability, and critical illness. And he's going to talk about which ones you should own in your corporation for a Canadian with a corporation versus owning the policy personally. And he's going to talk about some of the tax and other considerations that will drive that decision.
1:31Awesome. We're also going to be joined for this week's book review by fellow financial planner, Justin King from the UK to talk about his book, The Retirement Cafe Handbook, Nine Accelerators for a Successful Retirement. Then we're also going to look back at episode 177 with Dr. Anna Lemke, author of the book Dopamine Nation. Of course, we'll have the after show for the three of us that stick around. I hope it's not the three of us. That's like me, you, and one other person. So five of us will stick around. Cool. Anything else, Ben, to add? No, that's good. Let's go to the episode. All right, let's go to episode 281.
2:12Okay, Ben, let's get going with episode 281. You've got it great. That sounds like a pretty fresh, interesting perspective on an age-old topic. Yeah, I think so. So we're going to be talking about lifecycle asset allocation, and we're going to be looking at it through an empirical lens using Scott Cederberg's data that listeners are hopefully familiar with from when he was on as a guest. So here we go. So asset allocation, as our nerdy listeners know, is one of the most important drivers of long-term investment outcomes. So choosing the right asset allocation policy for your portfolio is super important.
2:47Mathematically, optimal asset allocation is really hard to solve because optimization models like main variance models are highly sensitive to assumptions about future returns and correlations and volatilities, which are all unknowable before the fact. Instead, what people tend to do is use rules of thumb, like their age minus 100 in stocks, or they just use a target date fund, like a single decision fund that changes its asset allocation over time to match your life stage, shifting from stocks to bonds over time. That's how people typically solve that problem because it is a really complex problem to solve.
3:20If there's an easy solution, people will tend to take it. Now, those solutions like the age minus 100 in stocks or 100 minus age in stocks or the target day funds, those solutions seem sensible given the perception that portfolio risk, we're measuring risk as volatility there. Portfolio risk should decrease as retirement nears and progresses. But that logic that shifting into of bonds decreases your risk. I think that may sit on false assumptions, which is what Scott's empirical work challenges. Asset allocation is the mix of stocks, bonds, other assets that make up your portfolio. Different assets are going to have different return characteristics, and they're going to tend to interact with each other in different ways, like stocks and bonds not moving up and down in lockstep.
4:09Finding that right mix of assets in a portfolio is important. It's kind of like there's the idea that your asset allocation is going to drive a lot of your outcome. So it's important from that perspective, but then the portfolio characteristics that you're going to get are also going to be driven by your asset allocation. So from whatever angle we want to look at it at, this is an important decision. Now in the mean variance portfolio theory, there is this mathematically optimal combination of risky assets based on the expected returns, expected volatilities, and correlations. And it's super attempting to use mean variance optimization to build or attempt to build optimal portfolios, but it has some practical problems.
4:49It is highly sensitive to its inputs, like I mentioned earlier, which are unknown future values. It only considers mean expected return and variance, but other return characteristics like return skewness and covariance with non-tradable assets are probably relevant to some investors, to most investors. The other mean variance issue is that it operates in a single period framework while most investors are concerned with multiple periods. In mean variance, you care about your volatility, your single period volatility, but long-term investors, which people may remember from our episode with John Cochran or John Campbell or both or Robert Merton.
5:32I was going to say Bob Merton as well. Pretty good name drops there. I don't know. People might remember that volatility for a long-term investor is not necessarily the best measure of risk. The other thing is that non-tradable assets in the mean variance framework, they don't really show up. That's, I guess, the covariance piece. You don't get the covariance with your labor income, but even beyond covariance, your human capital is not considered as an asset in most mean variance models. I guess you could try and model it. when you factor in labor income and multiple time periods, most models are going to suggest optimal portfolios that contain a mix of stocks and bonds with the allocation to stocks decreasing as people age.
6:13So that's where we get rules of thumb. And that's where target date funds get their allocations from. Now that advice that your portfolio should get more conservative measured by the allocation to bonds over time is super consistent across finance textbooks, personal finance books, industry courses, surveys. If you ask people what they think individually, everyone has the same view on this for the most part. Then the other place where it shows up is in default investment options for retirement plans, mostly in the States. I don't know if we have, that's just generally less prevalent in Canada.
6:52There are still, I think they're called life path funds that I've seen in some group plans. Then in target date funds is the other place where this idea shows up in a really big way. Now, fundamental to that advice, that your portfolio should get more conservative or conservative measured by the allocation to bonds over time is the idea that volatility in returns measures the risk of an investment. That risk is a complex topic, but what I'm going to argue here, largely based on Scott's paper, I guess. We've talked about this before. Scott's new paper is not the first time we've talked with this idea.
7:26For most investors, volatility is definitely important, particularly from a psychological perspective, or if you have a short time horizon. But for long-term investors, which most people are, people tend to think that when they retire is the end of their time horizon. But people can live for 30, 40 years in retirement, depending on when they retire and how long they live. It's one of the things that comes up in Scott's paper too, longevity risk. But anyway, People have typically very long time horizons unless they're very old or terminally ill or have a very specific objective in the near term that they're going to spend a lot of money on.
8:06A lot more investors than they might think if you ask them are long-term investors. And for long-term investors, volatility is more important psychologically than it is objectively or measurably. it's probably not the best measure of risk and it should not be the only measure of risk considered when you're thinking about how much risk you're taking. I think risk should be measured at least in part, at least this lens should be used as the probability of not meeting your future consumption goals. We look at that when we do financial plans. We're not building clients portfolios based on the volatility of the portfolio, that's one thing we think about, but we're also looking at a model of will you be able to achieve your long-term consumption goals?
8:53I think that's a better lens in general to look through. And that's what we've heard Ken French say as well. Now, one thing I want to mention here, just when we're thinking about asset allocation over the life cycle, is the role of government pensions. not government employee pensions, but just the government pensions that a lot of people pay into. Like in Canada, we have the Canada pension plan. In the United States, they have social security. Those are meaningful assets. So when you think about transitioning your portfolio from stocks to bonds over time, most people that are working regular jobs and earning a salary are paying, at least in Canada, pretty sizable amounts into their government pension plans.
9:32And these things are as close. I mean, I'll speak for the Canada pension plan, I guess. I know people worry about social security. I don't know enough about it to comment. But in Canada, CPP is in good shape. And it is an asset that gives you an inflation indexed annuity. It's an income stream adjusted for inflation that's around until you die, whenever that may be. That's as close as it gets to a risk-free financial asset. I mean, it is. That is the risk-free financial asset. Now in Canada in 2024, 11.9 % of your first$68 ,500 in salary is going to go toward Canada pension plan contributions.
10:10That's a contribution from you and from your employer. But there's really no separation there because if your employer didn't have to pay their half, they would probably just pay you a higher salary anyway. So it's still coming off your salary. That's part of your total compensation. So 11.9%, that initial CPP is designed to replace 25 % of your pensionable earnings, so 25 % of the 68 ,500. Then starting in 2024, we're also going to be making in Canada additional contributions to the CPP enhancement, which when it's fully in place in 2064, will increase the replacement rate on CPP to 33 % of your pensionable earnings, still up to a cap, which is around$24 ,000 in today's dollars.
10:52It's real money. No joke. It's real money. I didn't do this. I didn't capitalize it. I didn't look at what is the value of that in present value terms, but it's a big asset. It's a big asset for sure. It's a big chunk of cash. All that is just to say that if you're not shifting your portfolio toward bonds, your market asset portfolio into bonds over your life cycle, you are still accumulating this safe fixed income asset if you're contributing to government pensions. Okay. That was somewhat of a tangent, but I thought it was an important thing to mention. Maybe people will understand once they have the context of what I'm going to talk about next.
11:26Back to the idea of whether volatility is risk. A big thing that it depends on is how volatility is related to expected returns. If your stock portfolio drops by 20%, it's going to hurt. You're going to feel sad. It's not going to feel good. But if your portfolio's expected return increases when the portfolio drops, it may not actually affect your ability to fund your future consumption if you're a long-term investor. 20 % drop hurts the person who needs their money today. But if you need your money in whatever, 20 years, or if you're going to spend it down slowly over 20 years, the increase in expected returns can offset the drop in prices.
12:02And it can, like we talked about this with bonds, talked about how our clients' future consumption liabilities had longer duration than their bond portfolios. And so when interest rates went up, yes, bond prices fell, but our clients' financial plans actually looked better. And so the same thing can happen with stocks or bonds. Any asset that has some predictability in its expected returns. But that highlights a key difference between the single period investor who cares about the single period drop and the multi-period investor who cares about how the drop impacts expected returns. And it is the case empirically.
12:39And again, this is something we talked about with John Cochran and John Campbell. It does seem to be the case that expected stock returns increase when stock prices fall. There is some of that mean reverting behavior going on, and that likely reduces the risks of stocks for long horizon investors. But importantly, They still have to live with the year-to-year, day-to-day volatility in their portfolios. The interesting empirical question that follows from that is whether stocks provide better outcomes than bonds and cash in asset allocation for long-term investors as they save for and then pay for their retirements.
13:15If we model the life cycle of an investor, does it make sense to shift into bonds over time? As most people, I think it's safe to say, think that you should. So one of the keys to answering this question empirically is dealing with the limited amount of data available on asset class returns while maintaining important characteristics of returns like the aforementioned mean reverting tendencies of stocks, which are increasingly important at longer horizons. So if we're modeling the full life cycle of somebody from when they're 25 years old until the end of their life expectancy, we're dealing with a lot of years and any mean reverting tendencies and stocks are going to be more important at those horizons than they would be at a five-year horizon.
14:01So this new paper by Arna Kulova, Cederberg, and O'Doherty, titled Beyond the Status Quo, a Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice, tries to take on this challenge. Of course, listeners hopefully remember Scott describing his data and how they set it up, so I'm not going to spend too much time there. Go back and listen in his episode if you want to hear more about it. So they model the life cycle of a US couple who saves 10 % of their income during their working years and consumes during their retirement years. They begin to save a portion of their monthly income at age 25. And in the model, it is possible for their income to be interrupted so they can lose their job or something like that, at which time they will stop saving.
14:44And then at age 65, they retire and begin to draw on social security and to draw down their portfolio. They have uncertain longevity, which is modeled using the social security mortality tables. And they leave an inheritance upon the passing of the second spouse. And they use the 4 % rule for their portfolio withdrawals, which we know to be sub optimal. But from the perspective of modeling it, it's clean. And the reality is a lot of people are actually doing that, even though it may not be optimal. A topic for another day though. So to model asset returns, they use their data set, which is domestic stocks, international stocks, bonds, and bills.
15:25And it spans 38 developed countries and nearly 2 ,500 years of country month return data. And then they assess multiple lifecycle asset allocation strategies using that data to simulate a whole bunch of possible return experiences. I think they do a million simulations. Wow. And their block sampling method, and I know I said I wouldn't talk too much about their data methodology, but their block sampling method, they do a bootstrap simulation, but instead of just pulling single month observations or single year observations, they're pulling blocks of returns so that you can maintain some of the mean reverting tendencies and other characteristics of actual stock returns.
16:04That's interesting. That's one of the cool parts of their data setup in general. Now the results, which unsurprisingly, if you heard the title of the paper, challenging the status quo, the results challenge the status quo of life cycle asset allocation. Because rather than the traditional equity glide path, which is represented by a target date fund or 100 minus age in stocks kind of strategy being optimal, they find that a portfolio of roughly 50 % domestic stocks and 50 % international stocks is optimal for the full life cycle. You're not changing your asset allocation. There's no glide path.
16:39They find that a 50-50 domestic international stock portfolio is optimal, measured by its ability to accumulate wealth, improve consumption throughout retirement, and leave a bequest at death. And that's no fixed income. You're saying all equity. No fixed income. And I'll talk more about the no fixed income piece later because there's another angle they look at for should we have some fixed income in the portfolio. I've also got a little note on limitations. So I'll just say it now. They're using 10-year government fixed income as a proxy for bonds. We know there's a credit premium. We know there's a term premium.
17:13would including those premiums in the model affect the advice that comes out of the analysis. I think that's very possible. We can't know, obviously, because we don't have those data going back as far as they're looking at in this paper for their sample. But it's not conclusive, but within this model, the findings are very interesting and we're thinking about. The starting point there is 50 % international, 50 % domestic. They did look at reducing the domestic weight to 35 % because the comment was basically 50-50 is not bad for a US investor. That's probably a very reasonable portfolio. But for someone ex-US, like someone in Canada, where Canada is 3 % of the global market, maybe they don't want to be 50 % domestic, 50 % international.
17:55So they did look at lower weights and reducing the domestic weight down to 35 % actually produced small performance improvements. Small, but still they were there. but going further than that, so reducing domestic stocks further than that, actually caused performance to deteriorate on the metrics that they were looking at in the model. Wow. And they talked about this a little bit in the paper, but it suggests that someone in Canada, for example, despite our 3%, whatever it is, representation of the global market cap, we should still have a significant home country bias. What drives that? I don't know if that's discussed in the paper.
18:30I tried to find it, but didn't see it, but that's something that I definitely want to ask Scott about when he comes on. why would it be that such a significant home bias is empirically so beneficial but in any case it's some very nice confirmation bias because that's about what we do a third in canada so i'll take it from the perspective of retirement wealth accumulation they find that that portfolio the 50 50 all stock portfolio outperforms target date funds balance portfolios age-based asset allocation strategies and cash on mean, median, and 10th percentile outcomes. This isn't even like on average, it's better, but there's a worse left tail.
19:09No, the left tail is also better, which is crazy. Wow. I know. On wealth accumulation, I don't think anybody would be surprised to hear that. An all stock portfolio beats a balanced portfolio, for example, on expected wealth accumulation. I don't think that's a terribly surprising finding. The more surprising result is that all stock portfolios continue to produce better outcomes throughout the retirement period. So they produce better income replacement rates on average, which is partially a function of the greater wealth accumulation, but they also produce better left tail outcomes for retirement consumption.
19:42But in both cases, I forgot to mention this actually on the accumulation side, both in accumulation and decumulation, better on all metrics. So better on wealth accumulation, better on spending and better on retirement consumption in the left tail. So not just on average again, but also in the left tail. But in both cases, much bigger drawdowns. The all stock portfolios have much bigger drawdowns than bigger drawdowns. I don't know if much probably isn't fair, but the average drawdown in the stock portfolio is larger than it is in the balanced or the target date or the other alternative asset allocation strategies.
20:16That's a real consideration because people do struggle with volatility and they do struggle with drawdown. I don't want to minimize that, but there it is. So better results, but you got to live with the drawdowns. Another interesting point, and I alluded to this earlier, is that the all stock strategies look increasingly, their advantage is increasingly pronounced at longer lifespans. So the probability of ruin for the longest lived couples is much lower for people with all stock portfolios than it is for people with, for example, target date funds. So the higher expected returns of stocks effectively provide somewhat of a longevity hedge, I guess is the takeaway there.
20:55The all-stock portfolios also dominate the other asset allocation strategies on the bequest amount on average and again in the left tail. So right through the life cycle, accumulation, consumption, bequest, an all-stock portfolio dominates a portfolio with some bonds in it. Another really interesting perspective they look at is the equivalent savings rate that an investor would need to maintain the same expected utility or like the satisfaction, I guess, in retirement, taking a 10 % savings rate into a target date fund as the base case. So let's take the base case as this couple. They're going to start saving at age 25.
21:35They're going to put 10 % into a target date fund. And then we want to see if we used a different asset allocation strategy as opposed to a target date fund, how would that affect how much of the income you would need to save to achieve the same level of retirement utility? These data points are pretty crazy. Relative to the target date fund, if you instead allocated 100 % to high interest savings accounts or to bills, money market funds, that cash yield kind of thing, you'd need to save 50 % of your income to achieve the same retirement utility as someone using a target date fund, saving 10%.
22:06That one's not too surprising, but yeah. No, no. Yeah, not too surprising. Another reason though that cash is not so good for long-term investors, which is something we've talked about in past episodes. Now switching from the target date fund to the 50 % domestic, 50 % international stock portfolio, that reduces the required savings to 7.2 % of your income. Again, holding expected utility constant. So same retirement utility, but you're reducing your required savings amount from 10 % to 7.2 % of your income. That's meaningful. It is. Okay. Then they also looked at, from a mean variance perspective, you would expect adding some bonds to a portfolio of stocks to be optimal, to add some diversification benefits.
22:49They looked at what if you just added 5 % or 10 % in bonds to this globally diversified portfolio. And even that results in underperformance in all of the metrics that are being considered. Pretty conclusive within this sample specifically, pretty conclusive within the sample that intermediate government bonds are not doing too many favors to long-term investors. Now, I think a really important point though is that these data are very fun and compelling, but there is an important constraint that most of us have, which is our ability to behave well with volatile assets. And as I mentioned earlier, the all stock portfolios in this sample do have the largest average drawdowns of all of the different asset allocation strategies.
23:33the gap between investor returns and investment returns. If you look at how did a fund do versus how did investors in that fund do using time-weighted and dollar-weighted returns to make that comparison, investors tend to lose, depending on the sample, I found a bunch of papers on this actually, but it's around 2%, about 1.5 % to 2 % in market index type portfolios or just in equities in general. But that behavior gap, whatever you want to call it, that gap increases significantly with increasing volatility in the assets. All fine and good to say 100 % stock portfolio is better, but investors may not be able to stick with it.
24:14And empirically, they seem to lose more of their returns to inopportune timing decisions. I think assessing how much risk you can take involves, broadly speaking, I mean, this is a whole other topic we could do an episode on, but you've got to look at a psychometric assessment of your risk tolerance. And there are some pretty cool psychometric tests available to do that with. You've got to look at your capacity to endure short-term declines. If you put all of your money into 100 % equity portfolio, but you're planning to buy a house in cash tomorrow, probably not a good idea. So that's a capacity question.
24:48And to endure whatever the income interruption example that we talked about in their model. You've got to also think about your composure, which is how have you behaved during past experiences of market volatility? People have very different reactions. I know some people get very stressed out anytime the market's volatile. I know other people who don't worry about it in the slightest. Ken did talk about that, but when there's market events like that, there's always a story that goes along with it. It might not be the portfolio numbers. It's the news of the day that causes the concern or fuels the concern.
Read the full transcript
25:23Everyone is different. Every decline is different because the story is always different. And you've got to be able to live with that. Keep in mind, the data set we're looking at is massive, both in its time series, but also in the countries and events. Think of the world events that have occurred in the data series that Scott's using to do this modeling. You can't even imagine. We always hear the word unprecedented get thrown around, but you look at what's happened throughout history. There's a lot of wild stuff been happening. 2 ,500 years, you said, of country month return data. That's a huge assembly of returns from a whole bunch of different countries and lots of major events and obscure events that would have affected people's psyches have occurred in that time period.
26:03But in any case, people have to be able to stick with their portfolios. But if that performance gap is 4%, I'd be curious to ask Scott if they can model what is the break even on the behavior gap in stocks that would make adding bonds to the portfolio attractive? If investors expect to lose 2 % to the behavior gap in stocks, how much would that earn bonds and allocation in the portfolio? Assuming that's assuming, of course, the bonds don't have a behavior gap, which isn't true. So you have to model a relative behavior gap. It's something to think about. Now, financial advisors do seem to increase participation in the stock market and to boost the share of stocks and investors portfolios.
26:44That's worth considering. We just talked to Ioanni Lanema about his research on this. Trust in a financial advisor may also reduce the perceived riskiness of risky investments like stocks and allow risk averse investors to earn higher expected returns with an advisor than they would have on their own. And then again, Ioanni also talked to us about how longer duration client relationships with a financial advisor, which they use as a kind of proxy for trust in the relationship, increases client's willingness and ability to take risk with their investments and not bail out. And they use the great financial crisis crash as an event study there.
27:23So it's common to hear people say like, oh, you don't need financial advice because everyone should just buy index funds, which is kind of true, but a lot of people don't do that. but it is worth saying that like financial advisors are not always a solution it's important to watch out for high fees conflicts of interest which can easily offset any of those benefits so i mentioned the limitation on the fixed income series that they were using also equity factors like this is just using cap weighted equity funds but what would adding you know a value portfolio into the simulation look like my guess is value stocks would look pretty good but I don't know.
28:02Also, inflation-protected bonds could improve the outlook for adding bonds to a portfolio. But in Canada, those are being phased out right now. So I don't know how interesting that actually is as a point of discussion. And they've got tax inefficiency quirks too. But anyway, worth mentioning. That's mostly it. So contrary to traditional portfolio diversification and lifecycle investing advice, empirical evidence drawing on data from a huge survivorship bias-free sample of stock and bond returns suggests that a portfolio consisting of domestic and international stocks with a home country bias for non-US investors dominates balanced portfolios, age-based strategies, and target date funds on accumulation, consumption, and bequest objectives.
28:43Now, this research has definitely made me think a lot about asset allocation over the life cycle. It does have some limitations that I just mentioned. It's looking at government bonds and cap-weighted stock indexes. And it's also ignoring the fact that human investors still need to deal with the constraint of our own behavior in the face of market volatility and drawdowns. But overall, I think some pretty interesting stuff to think about. On behalf of the listeners, Ben, that was awesome. I'm glad to do that. So I know people are going to love that segment. People, it's worthwhile going back and listening to the past episode with Scott Cederberg, because that does dovetail into this beautifully.
29:21And you set up our upcoming conversation with him perfectly. This is a great and fascinating topic. It really is. Like the title of the paper says, it's challenging the status quo. It's really asking that question of, is it sensible for people to reduce their allocation of stocks over the life cycle? It may not be. Love it. Okay. Shall we go on to this week's Mark DeMarcus segment? Let's do it.
29:48Mark, what are you bringing for us today? Today, we're going to talk about insurance. We're going to talk about different types of insurance and we're going to talk about whether you should own them personally or inside your corporation if you're a small business owner or a incorporated professional. Love it. Great question. I didn't get the memo about the Mauve hoodies this morning so I wore my blue one. I'm upset. I do have a Mauve one I can wear next time if you give me a heads up. That's okay. You look good. Oh thank you. We'll do a better job of coordinating our wardrobes. There you go. Good.
30:18So let's get into it. So life insurance, disability insurance, and critical illness insurance are the three primary types of insurance outside of like property and casualty and liability insurance and that type of thing. And when you have a corporation, there are certain situations where you might want to hold these types of insurance in your corporation and other situations where you might want to hold them personally. So I just want to explain a little bit about the differences in the types of policies and why you might want to hold them in your corporation or personally. So before we get into the actual individual types of insurance, the reason you might ever want to do this hold it inside a corporation is because you can take advantage of paying the premiums using pre-tax dollars, or at least dollars that have only been taxed by the corporation, usually at a small rate.
31:02So if we think about somebody who's in the top personal tax bracket, has a corporation, and let's say their life insurance premium is say$100 a month, if they're in the top tax bracket, for them to earn$100 after tax personally, depending on the province, they're going to have to pay themselves, let's call it$200 personally, pay 50 % tax on that ballpark, and then they're going to have$100 left over to pay the insurance premium. But if your corporation owns it, your corporation generally is going to have to earn a lot less. If you're getting small business income that's taxed at the small business rate, your corporation might only need to earn, say,$110 or$115, pay the tax, and then still have that same$100 after tax to pay the insurance premium.
31:42So you're taking advantage of pre-tax or cheaper dollars to pay these premiums. Now with life insurance, that's usually a good thing. Your corporation would usually own the life insurance policy. Your corporation becomes the beneficiary of that life insurance policy on your life as well. And when you pass away, if that insurance payout takes place, it'll go to your corporation. But there's a mechanism there called the capital dividend account. And this is not like an account you open at a bank. It's a notional account, meaning really it's just on paper. And the life insurance payout, most of it or all of it, depending on the type of policy and a couple of other things, can come out of the corporation to your survivor tax-free.
32:19So even though you've used these cheaper corporate dollars to pay for those premiums, the end result is still, for the most part, a tax-free death benefit out to your beneficiaries. So in most cases, you would want your corporation to own your life insurance policies. The only downside there is it can take a little bit longer for your survivors to get the actual payout. Like if you own it personally and you pass away, the survivors can access that death benefit really, really quickly. But if it's owned by your corporation and your corporation has to go through the probate process and change directors and everything, that can take some time.
32:48So in cases where there's other assets that can be accessed by a spouse, like if you have maybe a TFSA that you're leaving to them or some non-registered investments or cash, and they're going to be okay waiting for that death benefit, then life insurance can be owned by your corporation and that's usually a good thing. So the second one is disability insurance. And disability insurance is a little bit different. So with disability insurance, if you become disabled, your disability policy is going to pay you an income. So it's not usually a lump sum. It's a monthly income. And if you own it personally and you pay the premiums personally, if you make a disability claim, the income that you receive is tax-free.
33:23And that's one of the major benefits. If you have, say,$7 ,000 a month in disability income and you've been paying those premiums tax out of your own pocket, not the corporation's, then that$7 ,000 a month is tax-free. That's ideal. But if your corporation owns that policy, or if your corporation pays the premiums for that policy, then it's usually a taxable benefit. And so that's often suboptimal. I mean, if you've got, let's say,$7 ,000 a month, same thing. You've used those cheaper corporate dollars to pay for those premiums. But when the money lands, when you make that claim, it's fully taxable.
33:58Now that might be okay. I mean, the thing is, it's a bit of a balance. It's a bit of a trade-off. Like you're using these cheaper corporate dollars. You're hoping you don't actually get disabled. You're hoping your best case scenario is you never have to make a disability claim and then you were able to pay for it with cheaper dollars. But at the end of the day, it's there to protect you from something and you probably don't want that income to be taxable to you. So generally speaking, you don't usually want your corporation paying for the disability policy. Make sense so far? Pretty straightforward.
34:22Gotcha. Interesting to think about it. I'm just thinking with a disability when you're paying personal tax on income from the corporation so that you don't have to pay tax on a possible disability claim. But it's kind of asymmetric. If you had to make a disability claim, the amount of tax you would pay, if you had it in your corporation as opposed to personally, would be much larger than the tax you'd expect to pay by paying the premiums personally. Well, not only that, but you can only insure yourself for disability up to certain percentages. And it depends. Just to give you an anecdote, I have a client.
34:51He makes about$350 ,000 a year. he's a salaried physician, the most we could get him approved for was$14 ,000 a month. And that's about, call it half of what his actual income is, but that's tax free. And so that actually gets him relatively close on an after tax basis to that$350 ,000. But if his disability policy of$14 ,000 a month, if that was taxable, then the gap between his current after tax income and the after tax disability income, if you were to make a claim, is actually pretty significant. So especially for higher income earners, having that disability benefit be taxable is going to leave a much larger income gap after tax.
35:27And then the last one is critical illness. The answer here is maybe. Do you want your corporation to own the critical illness policy? The answer is maybe. So life insurance, probably yes. Disability insurance, probably no. Critical illness, maybe. And I say maybe because often it depends on the type of business and the reason that you bought the critical illness policy. Again, I work with a lot of physicians, and most of the time, they're just a single shareholder of their own medical corporation, depending on the specialty. They don't often have a ton of overhead. Like if something happens to them, and they get a critical illness and need to make a claim, it's usually them personally that needs that money.
35:59It's not their business that needs the money. It's them personally that's going to need access to those funds. And that's a tax-free payout as well. In that case, if you own that critical illness policy personally, you pay the premiums personally, and you get paid out, it's after tax. So it's tax-free. But there are some types of businesses where what you're insuring against is the concern that a key person or a key shareholder or a key employee, if they get a critical illness, it's actually the business that might need an injection of capital. Maybe the business then needs to go out and hire headhunters to replace them or something like that.
36:27And so in those cases, it might make sense for the business to actually own the critical illness policy. And where there can be a disconnect is that if you actually need that money personally, not the business, but the business owns that policy and gets the payout, the money goes tax free to the corporation. But then for you to access it, you have to pay a dividend to get that money out and that becomes taxable. So you want to think about the ultimate destination for where that critical illness payout needs to go before structuring the policy either personally or corporately. So that's about it.
36:54It can get a lot more complex. There's a lot of other riders and features that you can add to many of these policies that might change some of the math or change some of the strategies on them. But I think at a high level, if you're thinking about insurance and you have a corporation, life, probably yes. Disability, probably no. Critical illness, it depends. And in all cases, you have to think about what your objectives are. Because even in the life case, if you need immediate liquidity at death for whatever reason, you could even have a small policy for that reason personally and then the rest in a corporation or something like that.
37:21I have a client who's done exactly that. the majority of the larger life insurance policy is held by the corporation and they've got a small one personally for the reasons you just described. That's a good point. Interesting. You got to have like a framework to think through it. What are you trying to accomplish? What are the tax implications? And then you can come to a decision from that. That's exactly it. So it's always in financial planning. Most of the time it depends. I think that's a reasonable framework for at least a starting point on thinking how to structure things, but it's going to come down to your personal circumstances.
37:48Cool. Good segment. Good stuff. Love it. Great. Thanks, Mark. Thanks, guys.
37:57All right, Mark, as always, it was awesome. Great to have him on. Let's go to our quick look back at a past episode in 60 seconds or less. So Dr. Anna Lemke was our guest, Ben, back on episode 177 back in November of 2021. She's a professor of psychiatry at Stanford and author of the excellent book, Dopamine Nation, Finding Balance in the Age of Indulgence. So dopamine is a term that we've all heard of, but what is it? How does it affect us? How does our body regulate it? This is exactly why we invited Dr. Lemke to join us and she clearly explained how our bodies regulate pleasure and pain and the role that dopamine plays in that balancing act.
38:36We also discussed what causes gambling to be addictive, how addictive is social media, whether working can be an addiction, and are there any positive attributes to addiction? And then she shared with us some strategies on how to protect yourself from the effects of this drive for dopamine, including how to stop addictive behaviors. At the end of the conversation, we actually talked about the impact that a dopamine-rich world has when we're making long-term financial decisions. And she suggested investing in the stock market is more like gambling than ever before. So this podcast is about decision-making for the long term and understanding the role of dopamine in that process is so important.
39:14And that was Dr. Anna Lemke back on episode 177. Oh, she was fantastic and the book is fantastic. So speaking of books, let's pivot to this week's book review. It's on the Retirement Cafe Handbook, Nine Accelerators for a Successful Retirement by Justin King. It's a bit of a backstory. As listeners know, I was in the UK a year ago, so the fall of 2022. And I had a chance to meet Justin, who is an advisor over there. and he told me about his podcast and invited me on actually. So I was on his podcast, The Retirement Cafe podcast, episode 169 in February of this year. And he decided to write a book, his second book that takes some of the lessons from that podcast.
40:02And he turned it into this workbook, which is really well done. And the book just came out in the fall of this year. So Justin's based in Christchurch, England, and is a chartered financial planner, registered life planner and created the firm MFP Wealth Management where he works with clients who are approaching or in the retirement stage of their lives. He's insanely curious about helping others achieve fulfillment in life and you'll hear that in this conversation with him. Justin's a pretty fired up kind of guy and really makes considering and planning for retirement really exciting. He's also the co-author of the book Ready, Steady, Retire, Plan Your Way to Success in a Redefined Retirement, and also has a YouTube channel, Justin underscore King.
40:47So he believes the retirement landscape is changing. We're living longer than ever, which should be great news. But instead of grasping all the opportunities a longer retirement has to offer, many people are just drifting into that stage of life ill-prepared for the amount of time that they hopefully have ahead of them in retirement. And the truth is a successful retirement won't happen by accident, which is why he wrote this book. So here we go. Let's go to our conversation with Justin King.
41:18Justin, welcome to the Rational Reminder podcast. Thank you very much for having me. Great to see you again and congratulations on your book. Thank you. I think the book is actually an incredible resource for anyone thinking about their retirement. Off the top, why did you write the book? I've had a podcast going out for the last four and a half, five years called the Retirement Cafe Podcast. And I realized that the more and more people I talked to, the more and more information that was out there. And then I suddenly realized that, you know, if you were coming to this fresh and you were suddenly like, oh, I'm thinking about retiring, I think I'll hook into this podcast.
41:51That sounds useful. Oh my gosh, four and a half years of episodes, how the flipping heck do you get through all that and then distill down to the bits that you want to know about. So wouldn't it be useful to have, in essence, a handbook that corrals all that information and that you could pick and choose the elements that you thought were useful? And then maybe from that, dive back into the podcast and listen to those experts that were giving you value. That is a very smart idea. Thank you. We also have five years of podcast episodes that I'm sure are very overwhelming for people to dive into.
42:24But we have not written a book. Well done on that. Can you describe the pyramid of the four levels of retirement preparation? I think you're referring to the overwhelmed and the drifting, participating and thriving in retirement, which is, of course, I think what we really want to be. We all want to be thriving and thriving in any part of our lives, I suppose. But I'm especially addressing this period of retirement to thriving. I think the overwhelmed thing that we all can identify with maybe at some point of our lives of just kind of going, you know, retirement, what on earth is that? Maybe in our 20s, we were also thinking of like, it's so far away.
42:58I don't even want to talk about it. Sadly, that feeling does carry on for a lot of people because, you know, it's complicated. I've got all these different types of retirement plans, pension schemes. What's the government going to give me? I don't really understand how that works. They seem to keep changing the rules. Life busy enough for me to have to try and deal with something that is hopefully 30 years away or 20 years away and then suddenly 10 years away. And then, oh, my God, I'm there. So I think people do get overwhelmed and then just kind of go, oh, it's a bit too complicated. and then we want them to move into that.
43:31Well, some people kind of drift along. I'm in my scheme, a workplace scheme. I'm in something. So I drift along with the river and as I move company and I get into a new scheme and I'm sure that's enough and I don't really pay much attention to it. I know I'm in that default investment fund that someone's kindly chosen for me on my behalf and we drift along. We meand along with the river. I want to go, you know, hold on. Let's take a bit of control. let's move above this line and really take some action. And then we get into participating, we kind of take some thought process about it. We kind of start to understand what our number is, what do we need to identify, and maybe when are we going to choose to retire?
44:10But I want to get people over that, this is the good enough line. I talk about Apple, if Apple had said the iPod was good enough, someone else would have invented the iPhone. We want to get right, what would be an amazing retirement? I've got all the bits in place, I've got all the things I should consider to make sure that I really thrive in that part of my life. I talk about this, of course. This could be a significant part of your life, maybe even a third of your life. I've met people now who've retired for longer than they were working. You mentioned thriving. I thought you had a very good description of the key items that matter in a successful retirement.
44:46You boil it down to vitality, choice, and joy. Can you talk about that? I think it was listening to all of these wonderful experts who, I was trying to go, okay, so how do I actually separate them out? Because everyone has got a different angle, I suppose, on what an amazing thriving retirement would look like. And of course, for some, it's all about health, the vitality aspect to make sure that we are healthy for as long as possible. What's the science around that? What are the key considerations? For some, it's just the main focus is all about the money. Have I got enough money to live on through that period of time?
45:20Or do I continue working? Or do I take up something else and be entrepreneurial in that point? The vitality aspect is hugely about the importance of making sure that that period of our life is great. The choices of the ability to do things. And of course, joy, let's make sure this is a wonderful, wonderful time. And then obviously we've got these different levers as well to help kind of support the vitality choice and joy. Love it. So your book focuses on the nine accelerators, as you call them. So before we get into them, and I want to go through them quickly, where did the idea of non-accelerators come from?
45:54All these different people were saying different stuff to me. There's not just one thing, is there, that is going to help kind of accelerate us up to make sure that we get to this fulfilling retirement, which is one of my end purposes. How do we get people to that point? And then look at what are the things that we can do, we can actually take action on, which is what I've called the accelerators. How do we make sure that what are the key components? If we were given the jigsaw puzzle to get to that fulfilling retirement, what are the key accelerators that would get us there quicker? All right, so let's go through them.
46:27I want to go through them one by one because they're all very important. Number one, talk about redefining retirement. It's not what our parents thought retirement was and our grandparents. This is a significant shift, isn't it, of getting your pension and maybe not being here five years later. As I mentioned before, you know, it could be possibly 30 years. So really just start to understand what would you like your retirement to look like? Forget what the magazines and the advertisers, the couple walking down the beach, what the advertisers, you know, holding hands, et cetera, say that it's all going to be about.
47:02You know, what is it? Redefine what your retirement is going to be like. How do you find out what's really, truly going to nourish you? Okay, the next accelerator. Can you talk about having a purpose? Often people can think of, I'm retiring from something. Okay, I want you to retire to something. Actually try and identify what is really going to be a wonderful thing. I talk about in the book, just imagine you are 90 years old and you're sitting in your rocking chair and you're maybe on your veranda and the sun's coming down and you're supping your favorite cocktail. And you're just thinking, you know what?
47:36Wow, what a period of life this was. How fantastic would that be? You know, if you were going to bed tonight and you turn out the light and you just went, yeah, I really, really did had a purposeful retirement. You know, I really nourished myself. I really attained the things that I wanted to do. Number three, it's never too late. So many people have inspired me. I always think about the people who start businesses in their 50s and 60s and 70s. They become entrepreneurial. They take up new skills. There was one lady we got in the UK called Iron Gran, Edwina Brocklesby. In her 50s anyway, she said to her husband, that she was going to run a 5k.
48:16And he was like, you can't even run for the bus. And then before you know it, throughout her retirement, she's doing Ironman competitions. Amazing. As I say, never too late to take up something brand new. You know, if you've thought of learning a language or thought of learning a new skill, taking up the piano, doing art, whatever it is. I worked with somebody who did some really good conversation about what is it that you haven't yet got to do. And she told me that she always kind of thought she'd like to be a nurse. And she's telling me this in her 60s. She wanted to do that in her 20s, but she had a family quite early on, large family, four or five children, and that had taken up her life.
48:56And we worked into her life, into her retirement, how she would now start caring for others. All right, can you talk about the science of living better for longer? Well, the science is really, really helpful now. There's so many people who are real experts, and it's available to us all over the internet now with YouTube and podcasts, et cetera, and of course books, about how we need to stay stronger, we need to nourish ourselves, we need to, what a healthy diet is. All the information is there. The living longer, what I also wanted about the living longer, this comes back to the vitality and the self-care, is if we can really establish and understand what will give us that vitality for longer, There's no point living another 30 years if it's really painful.
49:43Now, I appreciate there's an awful lot of people who are going to suffer stuff and there's little that can be done. But if there is things that you can do to make sure that you're living longer with health, then get the knowledge and start to implement on those things. The classic thing that I'm a great fan of is we know the significant muscle wastage as we get beyond 50. I am beyond 50. So I spend an awful long time every day trying to go lifting weights because we know that people have falls and they have injuries and then they get laid up in hospital for three or four weeks and then they really never recover from that.
50:21We cover, we had lots of experts talk about that in the book, in the podcast, and I've redefined it in the book to make sure that we understand this and then hopefully take action. And the next one's kind of related, taking control of your health and well-being. So it is that kind of flips over, doesn't it? So first of all, you've got to understand it. And second of all, you've got to implement it. And this is the classic thing of 20 cookbooks in the kitchen and you've never cooked a meal. Okay, we've got all the knowledge. That's all out there for us in the science. Now, what do we need to do about it?
50:50How do we absolutely take action and do something? And it is more than just a brisk walk. A brisk walk is brilliant, but it is more to it than that. Because there's all types of aspects to your health, of course, which is the social aspects of loneliness, being part of community, being part of something else. This comes back into the purpose aspect. Let's make sure that we're nourishing the whole of your life, not just the physical aspects of it. What is the big D? Dementia. The one we don't want to talk about, really. And we all probably know someone who's been affected by it, and we are kind of all terrified of it, aren't we?
51:28And there's been great steps, huge steps made into dementia research about what can be done to try and stave off the big D if it's coming to you. I've spoken to lots of researchers and people can live with dementia for a long period of time and relatively well. It's not a death knell immediately of lifestyle, etc. But it is something that we can all worry about. There are things that we can try and do to stave it off. And also if it does appear for your loved ones to understand it and for you to understand it. So again, knowledge here is power. Number seven, planning for a 30-year retirement. Now, I always joke, the easiest thing as a financial planner would be, of course, if we all had a date stamp, we knew our sell-by date.
52:15Because that 30 years, well, first of all, have we got 30 years? So that's the big question. We may only have three, but we've got to somehow plan for longevity. We've got a plan for this scenario where it could be possibly 30 years, it could be more, as I say, people who've retired for longer than they've worked. But that is the real tough puzzle of how do we counter inflation? How do we make sure our savings and investment lasts for those 30-year period? Which is a perfect transition into the next point, the role of investing. You guys cover this huge amount and are real experts at it. again, I'm trying to get to the point of understanding where the biggest danger I feel facing any retiree for a 30-year period is our capacity to make incorrect decisions is huge.
53:05And once you stop working, your ability to recover from a mistake gets less and less. Therefore, you owe it to yourself and your family to start to develop some understanding with advice or without advice of what would make a successful investment experience. Because you make a mistake at this period of your life, it could be absolutely devastating. You're trying to counteract possibly the biggest fear, the biggest unknown, which of course is inflation, prices moving. You're no longer possibly getting an increasing earnings that you've had throughout your career. You're trying to make sure that money lasts for as long as possible and possibly for your partner as well.
53:50Well put. And the last one, care and the end of life. It's probably not the top topic that everyone's really kind of looking forward to in their retirement, but it's a big thing. There's two aspects of it. Lots of people say, oh gosh, I forgot to put me in a care home. Then we have a line of one-way flights to Geneva here where you, you know, with hand luggage only where you can finish off your days. But it's a big conversation for families. Where would you like to have care if you need it? Is it something most people would love it to still be at home? What's the cost of that? How would you like it to be happening?
54:25And we get down to the actual practicalities of if it happened tomorrow, would you know who to call? Who are the suppliers? Who are the providers? Who are the people around you that your family could know, right? Okay, this is what mum would want. This is what dad would want. These are the people we could call. This is how we would implement a care package, a care system, and also the knowledge that you can hopefully pay for. Can you talk about how people can, as you put it in the book, become the hero of their retirement story? I do believe that this wonderful period of your lives, if you've got to that period where you've got some financial resources behind you, it could be the greatest opportunity that you've ever had.
55:07Maybe your children now have left home. Maybe you've now paid off the mortgage. And you go, oh my gosh, the freedom that I've created for myself to now live into whatever dream that I've got, to be purposeful, to be useful, to be a contributor, to take on all those new skills, those new ambitions, those new projects that you never possibly had time to do before. If you were writing yourself into that wonderful movie of amazing retirement, What would that hero do? The way you describe that, Justin, is exactly why I like the book so much. The book is just so full of hope and optimism and excitement about this period of one's life.
55:45So congratulations to you. You called it a handbook. What's the best way for a reader to get the most out of this book, in your opinion? I mean, obviously, just flick through it and go, OK, so where am I? Am I overwhelmed? Am I drifting along? Am I participating? What would a thriving retirement look like? And then maybe answer some of the questions, kind of the life planning questions. of, we'd mentioned before, you know, if I was sitting in that rocking chair and just then work backwards. I always think about, it's a mental model of backcasting. You know, if you were at the top of the mountain and looking back down it, seeing how you got there, that's kind of easier than looking up the mountain, trying to work out how to get to the top.
56:21So imagine yourself in that rocking chair, just going, you know, what are all the elements that we want to make a fantastic retirement? And then dip into the book for the bits that you're thinking, this is the bit that I actually need to consider more. Maybe I've worked a lot at the money aspect, but I haven't really thought deeply about what a truly purposeful retirement would look like or the health thing. I can see that's really important. Maybe I should invest as much time and effort as I've done with the financial planning into my health to make sure that when I get there or throughout that period, I'm as well as can be.
56:53Love it. The podcast is called The Retirement Cafe and the book is The Retirement Cafe Handbook, Nine Accelerators for a Successful retirement. Justin, awesome to have you on. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me. Thanks, Justin.
57:11All right. That was fun. That was a good conversation with Justin. Yeah, it was good. It's kind of fun having the authors come on like that. For sure. Get a chance for them to have their books get greater exposure too. Is there anything up lately in your world? I've been riding my bike a lot, which is not something that I expected to be doing at this time of year, but it's been clear. It hasn't been snowy here. We had a bit of snow, but it all melted. The ground's actually nice and firm. It might sound ridiculous, but I get nervous about the bears. I saw two bears this summer riding my bike. They're not scary.
57:44They're not intimidating. They don't do anything, but it still makes me nervous. I'm kidding. They could. That's the thing. Anyway, I was always super nervous about seeing a bear. Both times I saw them, they were cubs. And so I was like looking around, freaking out. I turned around and went back home because I was scared the mom was going to be hiding around the rock when I turned a corner or something. So anyway, this time of year, no bears, some really nice bike riding around the trails where I live. So that's been good. And your basketball injury is healed, it looks like. Oh, in my eye? Yeah.
58:15Mostly healed. A little rough last week. Yeah, I was looking a little rough. It happens. I've been playing basketball three nights a week. Really? Three days a week, two nights. And then on Sundays, I have a league on Sundays and I play in just pickup runs on Tuesdays and Thursdays. I never would have guessed, I don't know, three years ago that I would even be playing basketball because I'd hurt my back before the pandemic and my hips were super sore. And I was just like, I'm done playing basketball. And then I slowly got back into it a couple of years ago. And now I'm feeling great. Bodies are funny.
58:46And what percentage would you say you're back to compared to when you're playing in the States? It's a tough question. I'm not training nearly like I was then. Two weeks ago, I had a pretty good dunk in a game. That's something I never would have guessed would happen. I didn't do that very often in college, but I'm also at a different level of basketball. I don't know. It's hard to answer the question. I'm much smaller than I was. I was like 40 pounds of lean muscle heavier when I was playing. My former self could probably beat my current self up. I'd like to think I've gotten better at basketball as I've continued to play over time.
59:21But it's still pretty competitive. The league I play in is super competitive and the runs that I go to are also quite competitive. Awesome. Do you want to take a crack at this first review we got? We got Fred Raynaud from Canada and they said, best evidence-based finance podcast. Great range and depth about all things finance. The hosts are based in Canada, but most of the content should be relevant to an international audience. I'm a long-time listener, and I've learned so much from the Rational Reminder. Over the years, you're doing the public a great service by providing digestible information anchored in an evidence-based approach.
59:53Thank you. Very nice. We also got a couple of emails to our inbox. Hi, Ben and Cameron. First, thanks so much for the podcast. So much popular media and personal finances marred by excessive self-promotion gimmicks or simply bad information. RR is refreshing in its rigor and depth, but the show is still accessible and never boring. You've spoken repeatedly about landing many of your renowned guests simply because you're willing to ask them, and I wouldn't normally reach out like this, but with those comments in mind, why not? I'm trying to make a career change. I've been taking care of relatives the past few years, and I want to get involved in financial services, but the past and the industry seem less clear for people who don't have a more traditional route, such as a finance degree or an MBA.
1:00:35I'm trying to make a career change. Do you guys have any insights on this or experiences with handling, guiding career changers at PWL? I don't see many resources out there on this topic. I'm not sure where to look for this info and what's working or not for people in this kind of position. I'm not sure if the answer is just to bite the bullet and take what I can get with one of the industry giants, or if it's realistic to look for a more fitting role in a smaller local firm. I believe you both had fairly traditional career paths yourselves, so no worries if you're not familiar with this aspect of the industry.
1:01:07This might be a better question for the community forum, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to ask you two thanks and best wishes. and they asked me to withhold their name. So I've reached out and going to be talking to them shortly to see what insights it might be able to give. I think there may actually be a topic in the Rashmutter community about something similar. Maybe they can look for that. I laughed while you were reading that, and I want to say why, because out of context, it seems like I was, I don't know, it was an out of context laugh, but in the writing, you skip this part. It says, but the show is still accessible, never boring.
1:01:37And then bracket, not to personal finance investing nerds, at least. I laughed at that, but you didn't read it. So yeah, I did shorten the letter a little bit. We got another email, which again, I edited. It's still pretty long, but I wanted to drop you a quick message to say thanks for everything seven months ago. I knew strictly nothing about investing. It was completely financially illiterate. It was by chance I stumbled on a video. Then I was introduced to Paul Merriman from who I learned about small cap value. And thanks to Paul who discovered your show, CSI. I enjoyed it so much that after that, I started binge watching your entire channel.
1:02:10I learned so much from you from the small invalid premiums to the significance of adding emerging markets, the irrelevance of dividends, glamour stocks, and much more. I just finished watching your video on ESG investing. Videos that particularly stood out for me were investing for beginners, how to evaluate your investment decisions, investing in happiness, including the RR podcast, investing in your financial literacy, and renting versus buying a home. I've never been so happy to rent after watching that. it's always difficult to build trust about someone on the internet, especially regarding finance and investing channels, considering there are so many scams and lies out there.
1:02:47Nonetheless, the fact that you systematically backed up your information with peer-reviewed academic papers made it immediately compelling. Really appreciate all the work and efforts you put in CSI and the RR podcast. I discovered Larry Sweater, who has also taught me so much. talk with him on episode 30, as well as the community webinar. Have been great to listen to. Regarding me personally, I've just recently started investing the right way in a low-cost and globally diversified portfolio of index funds. I couldn't be more thankful for your sharing of investment knowledge. As you mentioned, financial literacy appears to be a distinct form of education that contributes to financial outcomes beyond academic education.
1:03:27I look forward to seeing what you're up to next. I've become a regular viewer of the show, tuning in whenever I can and following every new release. Lastly, below is a link of all the notes I have been taking over the past seven months since I started educating myself about investing. It contains pretty much everything I know to date. Most of it comes from you, Paul, Rob, Larry, and others. Just be warned, it's 45 pages long. It's a result of several months of hard work and in a way a tribute to your teaching. Please share with anyone who you believe could also benefit from the information all the best.
1:04:02I don't know if we're up to sharing that or not, Ben, but it was quite a document that they shared. For sure we should share it. We have it as a PDF, right? I have it as a PDF. We can probably get a link at the PWL domain to host that PDF. We can probably combine that. There's two, right? Yeah, there's two PDFs. Yeah, we can probably combine them into, oh, whatever, either way. We can create links and post them in the show notes. That's super cool. A lot of work. It was well done too. Next week, Dr. James Grubman is here. Fantastic episode. Three weeks, Scott Sederberg, which we talked about, is back.
1:04:34And then in four weeks, it's our year-end episode. Anything else on your mind? Good stuff coming up. James Grubman's a good episode. Oh, those books, Strangers in Paradise and Well 3.0, fantastic books. I knew that was going to be a good episode because I was familiar with his work. I remember both of us were kind of blown away at how good that conversation was. It's a pretty good end to the year with Shane last week and all this coming up. It's pretty cool. Not bad. That's it? That's it for me. All right. As always, thanks everybody for listening.
From the publisher
Today, we take a closer look at asset allocation through an empirical lens, by drawing on the work and data of Scott Cederburg and his new article 'Beyond the Status Quo: A Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice'. We unpack what the research tells us about how to establish the optimal mix of assets in a portfolio, the challenges of making the right decisions when you have volatile assets, and why it's critical that you understand your level of risk tolerance. Next, in our Mark to Market segment, we unpack different types of insurance — like life, disability, and critical illness — and when you should own them personally versus making them the property of your corporation. We then review Justin King's new book The Retirement Café Handbook: Nine Accelerators for a Successful Retirement before sitting down with the author himself to discuss the content of his latest work and his long-held interest in helping others optimize for retirement. Tuning in you'll hear Justin share his thoughts on the role of choice, vitality, and joy when it comes to having a successful retirement, the nine accelerators he lays out in his book, and how to become the hero of your retirement story. In our final section, we wrap things up with some wonderful reviews from listeners and our book recommendations. To hear all of the captivating takeaways from today's episode, be sure to tune in!
Key Points From This Episode:
- Breaking down asset allocation through an empirical lens; finding the right mix of assets in a portfolio, common challenges, and measuring risk. (0:02:12)
- The role of government pensions when considering asset allocation over one's life. (0:09:10)
- Investigating whether volatility is risk; modeling the lifecycle of an investor and determining if (and when) it makes sense to shift into bonds over time. (0:11:27)
- Analyzing the data, modelling, and findings from the paper, 'Beyond the Status Quo: A Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice'. (0:14:02)
- The challenges of behaving well with volatile assets; advice on how to assess your risk tolerance, your ability to endure short-term declines, and more. (0:23:10)
- Our Mark to Market segment: unpacking different types of insurance and when you should own them personally or inside your corporation. (0:29:50)
- A quick look back at our conversation with Dr. Anna Lembke on the subject of dopamine. (0:37:58)
- This week's book review: Justin King's The Retirement Café Handbook: Nine Accelerators for a Successful Retirement. (0:39:33)
- Our conversation with Justin King on how to retire successfully. (0:41:19)
- Unpacking the nine accelerators in Justin's book and where they come from. (0:45:44)
- How to get the most out of The Retirement Café Handbook. (0:55:47)
- Sharing some of the wonderful reviews we've gotten recently, plus our book recommendations. (0:59:28)
Links From Today's Episode:
'Beyond the Status Quo: A Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice' — https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4590406
Episode 224: Prof. Scott Cederburg — https://rationalreminder.ca/podcast/224
Episode 169: Prof. John Cochrane — https://rationalreminder.ca/podcast/169
Episode 250: Prof. John Y. Campbell — https://rationalreminder.ca/podcast/250
Episode 278: Juhani Linnainmaa: Financial Advisors, and the Cross Section of Returns — https://rationalreminder.ca/podcast/278
Episode 177: Dr. Anna Lembke — https://rationalreminder.ca/podcast/177
Anna Lembke — https://www.annalembke.com/
Dopamine Nation: Finding Balance in the Age of Indulgence — https://www.annalembke.com/dopamine-nation
Justin King on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/justinking-retirement-planner-ifa/
Justin King on X — https://twitter.com/JustinKingCFP
The Retirement Café — https://www.theretirementcafe.co.uk/
The Retirement Café Podcast — https://www.theretirementcafe.co.uk/podcast
The Retirement Café Handbook: Nine Accelerators for a Successful Retirement — https://www.amazon.co.uk/Retirement-Cafe-Handbook-Accelerators-Successful/dp/1739410300
Notes from Listener PDF —
Episode 30: Larry Swedroe — https://rationalreminder.ca/podcast/tag/Larry+Swedroe
Strangers in Paradise: How Families Adapt to Wealth Across Generations — https://www.amazon.com/Strangers-Paradise-Families-Wealth-Generations/dp/0615894356
Wealth 3.0: The Future of Family Wealth Advising — https://www.amazon.com/Wealth-3-0-Future-Family-Advising/dp/B0C9SHFSGM
Rational Reminder on iTunes — https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-rational-reminder-podcast/id1426530582.
Rational Reminder Website — https://rationalreminder.ca/
Rational Reminder on Instagram — https://www.instagram.com/rationalreminder/
Rational Reminder on X — https://twitter.com/RationalRemind
Rational Reminder on YouTube — https://www.youtube.com/channel/
Rational Reminder Email — info@rationalreminder.ca
Benjamin Felix — https://www.pwlcapital.com/author/benjamin-felix/
Benjamin on X — https://twitter.com/benjaminwfelix
Benjamin on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjaminwfelix/
Cameron Passmore — https://www.pwlcapital.com/profile/cameron-passmore/
Cameron on X — https://twitter.com/CameronPassmore
Cameron on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/cameronpassmore/
