Listen Now:
The Smart Take:
A solid retirement plan starts with making reasonable assumptions on myriad items — your retirement lifestyle and its associated spending and what you can reasonably expect from your investments to just name a few. Poor assumptions will get you off on the wrong foot and may force you to make severe and undesirable lifestyle reductions to get back on track.
Hear Tyler Emrick, CFA®, CFP® discuss common assumptions and where they go wrong. We’ve all heard the saying about when you ‘ass-u-me’ things. Don’t be a donkey. Rather, listen and learn, as you take a step on the right retirement foot.
Here are some of the assumptions we will discuss in this episode:
- The perception that the stock market is the biggest risk to retirement. (6:09)
- Families ignoring inflation in their retirement plan projections. (11:10)
- The spending assumptions that families typically make. (15:38)
- Not accounting for income changes in retirement. (18:06)
- Will you love not having a job in retirement? (21:42)
Hear our previous interview with retirement researcher Dr. David Blanchett.
Have questions?
Need help making sure your investments and retirement plan are on track? Click to schedule a free 15-minute call with one of True Wealth’s CFP® Professionals.
Subscribe:
Click the below links to subscribe to the podcast with your favorite service. If you don’t see your podcast listed with your favorite service, then let us know, and we’ll add it!
The Hosts:
Kevin Kroskey, CFP®, MBA – About – Contact
Tyler Emrick, CFA®, CFP® – About – Contact
Intro:
Hey, welcome to another edition of Retire Smarter. I’m Walter Storholt alongside Tyler Emrick today, wealth advisor, CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™ at True Wealth Design, serving you in Northeast Ohio, Southwest Florida, and the Greater Pittsburgh area, offices in all those locations, but of course, online from anywhere at truewealthdesign.com, and it is great to be with you this week, Tyler. How is your month going so far?
Tyler Emrick:
It’s going all right, Walt. Thank you for asking. I’m happy to be in the office. We had a windstorm come through over the weekend and knock out power, so I didn’t have power for 48 hours at my house.
Walter Storholt:
Oh, wow. So one of those pleasant times, you’re happy to leave the house and go to work because you just get that civilization again?
Tyler Emrick:
That’s right. Well, and we have well water where we’re at, so my pump wasn’t working, so we didn’t even have running water for a couple days. So, we had to go to a friend’s house and take showers and get cleaned up and ready for the work week here.
Walter Storholt:
Slightly problematic.
Tyler Emrick:
So sitting in the office, looking up at the lighting, going, “Wow, electricity’s pretty nice to have.”
Walter Storholt:
Yes, one of those things you take for granted until it’s taken away from you, then you realize just how great it is. Growing up in North Carolina, I had my share of ice storms where we’d have power knocked out for a whole week or two weeks, even at times, and it was always fun as a kid because it always meant the parents were scrambling to try and find a hotel that still had a vacancy and then we’d, “Oh, we get to go stay in a hotel. This is so fun.”
Tyler Emrick:
No school, right?
Walter Storholt:
No school
Tyler Emrick:
School’s canceled.
Walter Storholt:
It’s great. It’s always good stuff. Although, ice storms were never as fun to have school canceled as the snowstorms because you don’t really go out and do anything in an ice storm. It’s just sort of like, it knocks out power.
Tyler Emrick:
No, it’s true.
Walter Storholt:
But, then, you don’t have the lingering snow to go play in, really.
Tyler Emrick:
Fair enough. This weekend was pretty nice where we’re at here in Northeast Ohio. We’re finally getting the weather up into the 60s.
Walter Storholt:
Nice.
Tyler Emrick:
That was one thing we didn’t have to contend with and certainly got us out of the house over the weekend, which was good.
Walter Storholt:
Very good, well-
Tyler Emrick:
Flip it to a positive, right?
Walter Storholt:
I’m glad to hear that, yes. Definitely, when those taxes are getting filed and done with Tyler, it’s time to also get outside a little bit more.
Tyler Emrick:
That’s true.
Walter Storholt:
It’s a little bit of the silver lining of having to get through tax day for many of us, I would suppose. Well, hopefully, our listeners are getting out there and being a little bit more active if they’re listening to this shortly after release of the show, and we’re glad that you’re with us for today’s episode. We’re going to be talking about wrong assumptions people make when planning for retirement. And I’ll never forget, I had an assignment when I was younger, Tyler, where we had to do this experiment, and I wasn’t really good at the science part of school. It was always my weakest subject was science. I just wasn’t good at doing experiments and just following the scientific method and those kinds of things. I excelled in all the other areas of school, but science was always just one where I still got good grades but just definitely wasn’t my strongest. I’ll never forget I had this teacher who was Australian, and he’d given us this assignment, and my experiment had failed so badly.
So, then the next day, when he asked us what the takeaways from the experiment were, I gave an answer, and he said, “Why do you get say that?” And I was like, “Well, I just assumed that it was…” It was something to do with, I assume, that caffeine stunted the plant’s growth. I remember that being the crux of it, and then he just had this smirk on his face. He was like, “Come here and write up on the board, Walter.” I was like, “Okay.” So, I walk up there in front of the whole class. He says, “I want you to write the word assume,” and I write the word assume up on the board. And he’s like, “Do you know what happens when you assume things, Walter?” And again, in front of the whole class, I’m like, “Nope.” And he goes, “You make a…” And, then, he underlines the first three letters out of the next letter and you, and me, the last two letters. And so, I’m just mortified up there, and he was just like, “Go sit down. Wrong answer.”
Tyler Emrick:
Wow, talk about a tough class. Good teacher, though, right, tough class?
Walter Storholt:
He was tough. He once came back from doing our Scantron sheets, and right after a test, he walked back in the room, and he said, “Do you all know Mr…” I don’t know the guy’s name, “Mr. Bob,” or whatever, “He served in the war, and he just had flashbacks when I ran your Scantron machines. There were so many errors it sounded like machine gun fire in the office.”
Tyler Emrick:
Hey, at least you learned-
Walter Storholt:
He was great at putting us down, I’ll say that.
Tyler Emrick:
Oh, no. Great segue, I’ll tell you, it’s a pretty good story for what we’re heading into because, obviously, assumptions, and don’t want to be making them.
Walter Storholt:
They get us in trouble, is what I learned early in life, and so here it pops up again many years later as we talk about planning for retirement. So, I’m well-tuned into today’s show, Tyler.
Tyler Emrick:
Sure, definitely, and as you think about the listeners out there, and if they’re thinking, “Hey, I’m to that point. I’m ready to put pen to paper. I want to find out if I can retire and do I have enough?” Normally, what that next step is after you start thinking that way is, well, I’ve got to create some type of financial plan. And, of course, financial plans can be very complex, but if we peel back the onion a bit and really get down to its most basic form, well, financial planning, you’re taking your assets or an inventory of your assets, you’re going to plot that against your spending. You’re going to make some assumptions, and then you’re going to project it out over the next 25, 30 years and say, “Hey, do I have enough?”
And, one of the most important things is we go through an exercise that, are those actual assumptions that we’re making? And, when we start projecting out over a very long time horizon, those assumptions can really compound and have a dramatic effect inside of those plans. So, that’s what we’re going to focus on today, and we really want to just go through and highlight a few of the assumptions that I’ve heard over the years or as we’ve talked to families that come up most frequently and how we address them and handle them and maybe look at them through a different lens.
Walter Storholt:
Just music to my ears, I’m not the only one is what I’m hearing.
Tyler Emrick:
No, not at all, and the first one would be the perception that the stock market is the most significant risk to your retirement. And comments such as, “I’m getting close to retirement. I’m too close to retirement to invest in stocks. I don’t have enough time to recoup those losses.” Does that sound familiar, Walt?
Walter Storholt:
Yeah, just a little bit.
Tyler Emrick:
Absolutely, and you think about it, and I can see where they’re coming from. If you look back through historical market performance, let’s just say we used the S&P 500 as a proxy for the market in general, and we go back over, say, the last 50 years or so, so the worst rolling one-year return and the S&P 500 actually ended in March of 2009. Any idea on how much the market dropped over that one-year period?
Walter Storholt:
In 2009, we were close to 50%, right?
Tyler Emrick:
Pretty darn close, 43 is the number that we have, and you compare that to some alternatives like cash or maybe short-term T-bills, not looking at any negatives like that, of course, but when we start looking at it from the standpoint of one year, or excuse me like we just did, there’s a lot of volatility there, and rightfully so. The stock market is very volatile, but when we start expanding out our time period a little bit further and really match it up with maybe what retirement might look like, we’re hoping to have a long, healthy retirement, say 20, 30 years.
So, if we look at those same return numbers and, say, the S&P 500, and we look at the worst rolling 20-year time period going back over, say, 50 years, believe it or not, that actually was a time period that ended in March of 2020, and the average annual return on the S&P 500 was about 5% per year, so much, much lower than say the historical average return of the S&P 500, which is closer to say 10%, but nowhere near being negative on an annual basis. And in fact, while there’s been no 20-year period as we go back through historical stock market performance of the S&P 500 where we have negative returns over that long of a time period, we could actually shrink it down to say, 15 years, and the worst 15-year period is just over three and a half percent.
Walter Storholt:
Interesting, okay.
Tyler Emrick:
So a lot of-
Walter Storholt:
The stock market is a threat, but not necessarily the biggest threat, as is what the assumption usually is.
Tyler Emrick:
Sure. Well, and really framing it in the standpoint of not getting caught up in that short-term volatility and really matching up saying, “Hey, I’ve got a long-term problem here that I’ve got to solve,” and the idea of having enough to retire and really framing it that way and picking your investments in that manner. And to maybe drill down on it a little bit more, let’s compare that stock performance we talked about to some alternatives, say bonds, for example. And, if we look at the worst 20-year performance in the bond market, JP Morgan did a study on this, and it was right around 1% was the average annual return in the bond market over a 20-year time period. That was the worst 20-year time period going back over 50 years. So we compare the two, stocks were sitting at about 5%, and bonds were sitting at one.
So, that’s a 4% differential there, which might not seem like a lot, but when we actually get down into, well, how does that impact the numbers? If we took someone that had $100,000 and they wanted to invest, and we fast-forwarded 20 years, and they averaged 1% return per year, they’re looking at about $120,000 at the end of that 20-year time period. On the flip side, if we would’ve been invested all in stocks at 5% return per year, that time period, they would’ve had around $260,000. So, $260,000 stocks on average, worst 20-year time period, $120,000 all investing in bonds average in 1% per year in its worst 20-year time period. So, we’re looking at about $140,000 differential when we actually start expanding out those time horizons. The old adage is it’s time, not timing, that is what matters. So time in the market, not timing the market, and I think this goes without saying, but it is our podcast, right, Walt? So, I guess I can say whatever, but-
Walter Storholt:
Say whatever you want. Go for it.
Tyler Emrick:
You got it, but I don’t want-
Walter Storholt:
There’s no bleep button, Tyler.
Tyler Emrick:
There’s not. I don’t want individuals listening to say, “Hey, Tyler is saying we should 100% be invested in stocks.” That’s not the case. What I really would like you to gather from that data is saying, “Hey, stocks should be a piece of the pie, a part of a diversified portfolio,” because they do serve a purpose. In the short term, yes, you’re going to experience some volatility, but as we expand out our time horizon, you’re going to get much-needed diversification and return paid off if we look at historical market performance.
Walter Storholt:
Very good, so that’s our first assumption on the list. What else do we have?
Tyler Emrick:
So, moving on to number two, I think it goes hand in hand building off of what we talked about and having a diversified portfolio and having stocks be a piece of the pie is families ignoring inflation in their retirement plan projections. Now from an investment standpoint, how this shows up is when we look at, if we go on the flip side and we’re so afraid to invest in stocks and have a diversified portfolio when we put all our money in cash like interest-bearing type investments, what happens is it becomes an issue to try to keep pace with inflation.
To reiterate that a bit, if we go back, say all the way back to the 1980s and we break it down into decades, so we look at the ’80s, the ’90s, the 2000s, 2010s, and what we’re a few years here under the 2020s, and if we plot the average six-month CD return over those decades against CPI numbers, which I’m sure inflation has been in the news quite a bit over say the last couple years here, CPI is probably something many of the listeners have run into, that’s a proxy for inflation, there’s a few different components that go into CPI numbers of course, but if we plot those against what you can get in cash-like investments from a return standpoint, how many of the decades, going back to the ’80s, Walt, do you think that cash outperformed in CPI or basically you got more return on your cash than what the cost of living went up as?
Walter Storholt:
Ooh, I would say very few decades would-
Tyler Emrick:
One actually.
Walter Storholt:
Just one? Okay.
Tyler Emrick:
Which one? The 1980s.
Walter Storholt:
Oh, okay.
Tyler Emrick:
So, in the ’80s, when we look back through the data, you did get more interest on your cash than what CPI was at, but every other decade there was some component of CPI that was actually higher than what you could average on a six-month CD, or again, cash-like investments. And, we even see that today with interest rates going up and we’re getting a little bit higher return on our cash investments. We still compare that to the most recent CPI numbers, and very rarely do you find yourself in a situation where those investments are going to return more than how fast the cost of living is going up. So, I think looking at or ignoring inflation when you’re building your portfolio and doing those allocations is a big misstep.
But then there’s also, if we change their viewpoint a bit and look at it from an actual planning standpoint, and I go back to that example where, hey, in our most basic form in a financial plan, we’re just plotting out, say the next 30 years, well, what happens is we need to make sure that we’re accounting for inflation into those numbers. I’ve had over the years a number of individuals come to me and say, “Hey, Tyler, when I look at this projection on a year-by-year basis inside of our financial plan, and I go out into my 80s, why are my spending numbers so much higher than where they are today?” And, the simple answer for a lot of that is going to go back to, “Well, that’s the impact that inflation has on increasing your spending over the years, and it’s very, very pronounced when you start looking 20 and 30 years down the road.”
Walter Storholt:
Fascinating.
Tyler Emrick:
And even more so too, while when we look at it from the standpoint of yes, we want to make sure that we account for inflation when we look at our spending, but also the interplay between your income sources and your spending and what assumptions that you’re making there to account for inflation. That’s also going to have a major impact on your plan results and what the financial plan looks like. Do you have your income sources inflating at the same number as your expenses, or is there a lag there? And that will impact, again, and have a major, much more pronounced impact as you start looking further and further down the road.
One of the big ones to consider is social security, for example. It’s a very nice income source that many people have access to that is actually tied to cost of living. We’ve done a number of podcasts in the past on social security and talk about the cost of living adjustments. Obviously, a lot of the listeners seen the nice jump that we got this year in social security. That’s nice that it is tied to inflation, but are all of your income sources tied to inflation, your pensions, and how is those inflation numbers accounted for inside your plan is something I think that a lot of times can be misrepresented or forgotten about as we’re starting to do our projections and financial plans.
Walter Storholt:
Very good. So far, we’re covering stock market assumptions, then inflation and cash. Where else do you see assumptions popping up when people plan for retirement?
Tyler Emrick:
I think the next logical place to look is going to be spending, and when I have preliminary conversations, when families come in and meet with me, we spend a lot of time on spending and where their money is going, and how that spending might change. I think a lot of individuals, when we come in, and we start to have those conversations, their initial thoughts were, “Hey, this is how much I need to cover my lifestyle now.” And well, the simple assumption would be, “Well, I’m going to have to cover that all the way through my retirement.” And frankly, studies show that that’s just not the case.
You’ve heard myself talk about it in the past. I think Kevin has mentioned it quite a bit as well on previous podcasts where we talk about that retirement smile and spending of retirees and how when we look at that data, typically early in retirement, we see retirees spending slowly ratchet down as they progress throughout retirement, bottoming into their mid-80s, and then we see it start to ratchet up again, almost forming a smile. Kevin actually went and interviewed David Blanchett and went through it, and he was the individual that coined that phrase and did a lot of studies on retiree spending, and that’s where we got a lot of that from. So, go back and check out those episodes. I think it was 102 and 103, so we feel like-
Walter Storholt:
101 and 102.
Tyler Emrick:
101 and 102?
Walter Storholt:
You were almost there.
Tyler Emrick:
Thanks for the correction there. Almost.
Walter Storholt:
We’ll link to those in the description of the show, so it’s easy for people to find too, but 101 and 102. Great interviews. Those were cool.
Tyler Emrick:
Absolutely, you get some insight into there. Now, of course, you’ve got to take that information and apply it to your specific situation, but it’s really good to formulate your plans on some of that data and make sure that, “Hey, is your plan showing the same thing? And if not, why? And is it applicable in your situation, and how can we properly account for it?” Because I would say spending is one of the major areas that we focus on when we’re building the plan, and want to really make sure that we get right. Obviously, we want to check and verify some of those things because they have such a major impact on the results as we start doing these Monte Carlo simulations and start projecting out year by year what retirement looks like.
So, we talked about stocks and stock exposure. We talked a little bit about inflation, obviously had on spending. The fourth assumption that I wanted to spend a little bit of time touching on would be not accounting for income changes in retirement. So, what do I mean there? For example, I’ve sat down with a couple… Actually, I’ve known for a couple years now, they came back in just a few months ago, and they’re really looking to retire early, actually in their mid-50s. Not a bad gig if you can do it right, Walt?
Walter Storholt:
We’ll take it, yeah. I met a guy this last weekend who retired in his 30s, and then now he just does kayak guiding trips in “retirement”.
Tyler Emrick:
Doing what he enjoys and loves.
Walter Storholt:
That’s pretty awesome.
Tyler Emrick:
Oh no, absolutely, if you can do it. Get to the point where you can spend the time that you want. Not quite 30s, but like I said, they were looking at their mid-50s.
Walter Storholt:
Still pretty good.
Tyler Emrick:
Sure, and any time you want to retire that early, it does pose some challenges and some things that you need to plan for, and one of the major ones would be healthcare. Where are you going to get your healthcare from? You don’t get Medicare until 65, so you have this gap that you need to fill. Well, they are in a good situation where he’s been at a company for a number of years and actually has access to their retiree medical plan. So, their employer provides medical for an individual pre-65. So, that is a big expense that they do not have to necessarily account for inside of their base plan.
I think of it as income because they’re getting free income from their employer to cover their healthcare premiums. Now the question becomes, what would happen if something changes with that employer to where they are no longer offering those benefits, and what would happen if that literally happens within the next couple years and they have almost 10 years that they’re going to need to cover individual healthcare on their own? That’s a major expense that where if we don’t account for it properly, or excuse me, loss of income and the expense in turn that they’re going to have to cover that if we don’t run a test scenario, we call them actually what-if scenarios, and say, well, what does your plan look like under that circumstance, that’s impactful information for them to know to help them wrap their arms around like, hey, can we actually pull the trigger or not? And, as I think about that-
Walter Storholt:
Yes, it sounds like a big deal. Those two things, back-to-back spending and then income changes in retirement certainly go hand in hand when you need to know one to know the other’s impact on your life. And so if you’re making wrong assumptions in both categories, you’re in big trouble.
Tyler Emrick:
No, absolutely. Well, and you think about it from the standpoint of if you don’t have access to a retiree medical, which the vast majority of us probably won’t, well, anybody who’s married and has a spouse at some point in time, the likelihood is, well, you’re going to experience where your spouse passes, and you are going to lose likely a source of income the biggest one would be social security. You wouldn’t be able to draw two social security benefits if you lose your spouse. So, the question becomes, if something happens to your spouse early in retirement, and you lose that source of income from social security, well, that’s going to change your tax bracket potentially because you’re going to be going from married filing jointly down to single. You’re going to lose a social security payment.
If there’s pension plans, depending on how you made your pension plan election, that could be adjusted as well. So, just really thinking through and rerunning those scenarios or what ifs to really wrap your arms around, would I be okay, I think goes a long way and would really help prevent a bad situation should one of these things come up and you have a change that really impacts whether it be income or spending.
Walter Storholt:
So, we’ve got stock market, inflation, and cash spending, income changes, all these areas where we’re making wrong assumptions. That’s a lot of corners of the financial world. Where else do we need to go?
Tyler Emrick:
One more, and the last one, I’ve got to keep it pretty soft. So, no data on this one, no numbers or historical performance. It’s more so back to your story and the kayaker. Will you love not having a job? And, really, that’s the more personal side and where you’re going to spend your time. I think maybe more so than most, this is important to us and something that we spend time talking with all our families on and really just homing in and saying, “Hey, what do you want to do in retirement?” And, really checking in on a year-in and year-out basis and saying, “What’s changed? What are you enjoying? What are you not? And how can you get the most out of not only your money but just your life in general as you’re approaching and trying to tackle retirement?” Your story, albeit a little bit early, I think, hits it to a T as you start thinking about how you want to spend your time in retirement.
Walter Storholt:
Admittedly, he was also looking for jobs while we were chatting, so it was more of a temporary retirement, but nonetheless, still pretty cool to be able to have that flexibility and be thinking about those things and have just that lever of control of, “I want to work, I don’t want to work. This is what brings me joy and happiness, and I can manage and craft this in a way that I like to.” It doesn’t really matter at what age you’re talking about at that point. It’s all that same calculus that you’re doing.
Tyler Emrick:
It is, but very important, and I think it’s some of the more enjoyable conversations that I know that I have with the families that I work with.
Walter Storholt:
And is that where you’re uncovering these assumptions, Tyler, when you sit down with a client, is this in the first meeting with maybe a couple or an individual who comes in to meet with you, you’re starting to already uncover some of these wrong assumptions, or does this happen a little bit deeper in the planning process?
Tyler Emrick:
No, I think it does happen all throughout, but certainly, when we start first start working with an individual or a family, we definitely want to understand, well, what are their biases? What makes them tick? What are they trying to accomplish, and really what’s important to them? And, then spending a lot of time talking through them, and then in the back of my mind, I’m always using that information to plot and say, “Well, where are we going to have to spend maybe a little bit more time with the assumptions that we make in our plan and how it applies to their situation?” So, if we have an individual that’s very concerned about stark market risk and volatility, we want to make sure that we get a portfolio that not only meets what the plan needs but also meets what they’re looking for from an emotional standpoint and an expectation standpoint.
So, if I’m talking to someone and they’re bringing up some of those initial concerns around, “Hey, I’m entering retirement. I’m going to be retiring in the next year or so. I don’t want to take on stock market risk. I want to be much more conservative,” I think that’s very great, but then we need to necessarily unpack that a little bit more. So, that’ll be a note that either on that meeting or maybe future meetings, we make sure we spend plenty of time getting down to the root of what are we trying to accomplish, go through the pros and cons of each, and really make sure that the family has all the information that they need to help make the best decision for them, whatever that might be. But no, I think it’s all throughout, but certainly, at the beginning, it is pretty hot and heavy because there are a lot of assumptions that go into building out a plan, and some we spend more time on than others.
But, I think it’s important if you are working with a financial advisor and if you haven’t had a conversation with them on, “Hey, how are you accounting for inflation? What number are you using? What are you assuming my social security’s going to inflate at?” Questions like that are good ones to have to make you feel even that much more confident and comfortable with the projection because at the end of the day, if you sit down with a planner, Walt, you’re just trying to figure out, “Hey, can I retire?” There’s more that goes into it. We just need to give you enough information to get you to the point where you feel comfortable with it. And for some individuals, they really like getting down into the nitty-gritty, some maybe not so much, but I think there’s a baseline of understanding as you’re working with your financial advisor to understand, well, how are we doing it in this plan and, do I feel comfortable with it?
Walter Storholt:
Very good. I love it all. Tyler. Last question for you then. When you uncover these assumptions with your clients, do you make them come up to the board and write out “assume” and make them feel really bad, or do you handle it a little bit more tactfully?
Tyler Emrick:
No, hopefully a little bit more tactfully. I’ll have it in my back pocket, though, in case we got to whip it out.
Walter Storholt:
Just in case.
Tyler Emrick:
Boy, uh-
Walter Storholt:
There might be a client who you’re like, “I think they’d benefit from this lesson, boom.”
Tyler Emrick:
Or, at least get a chuckle.
Walter Storholt:
That’s right.
Tyler Emrick:
Let’s get a chuckle.
Walter Storholt:
Save it for the right person, I suppose. No, all kidding aside, that’s fantastic, and it’s so great too. Even though it was very harsh, it was nice to at least get that feedback from that teacher growing up and say, “All right, I better be careful assuming or else I’m going to get embarrassed in front of the whole classroom.” So, it’s a lesson that sticks with you for many, many years.
Tyler Emrick:
It is. If I went back and listed out my favorite teachers from the past, they’re probably the ones that were the hardest on me. There’s no doubt about it. I don’t know if people look at their financial advisors that way-
Walter Storholt:
He definitely might not be in my favorites list, but that’s not because of that particular incident, more just as a whole, but yes, I know what you’re saying. The ones who demand a lot of you for sure still stand out above the rest.
Tyler Emrick:
They do.
Walter Storholt:
That’s very cool. Another conversation and lessons for another day, but hey, if you want to find out if you are making any wrong assumptions when it comes to planning for retirement, you can do that by going through the planning process with the team at True Wealth Design. Not only will they uncover those wrong assumptions, but really put you through the entire planning process to make sure you’re ready to get to and through retirement all the way. And if you’d like to schedule an initial consultation and conversation just to see if you’re a good fit for the team, you can go to truewealthdesign.com and click on the Are We Right for You button to schedule a 15-minute call.
So again, just go to truewealthdesign.com or visit the link in the description of today’s show and click the Are We Right for You button. You can also call the number 855-TWD-PLAN. That’s 855-TWD-PLAN, and you can get in touch through the phone as well. Well, Tyler, thank you so much for all your help on the show today. I enjoyed this one, and thanks for not making me write up on the board about assumptions here, and we’ll look forward to chatting with you again next episode.
Tyler Emrick:
Always a pleasure, thanks.
Walter Storholt:
We’ll have a good topic cooked up next time, folks. So, come back and join us right here on Retire Smarter.
Disclaimer:
Information provided is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment, tax, or legal advice. Information is obtained from sources that are deemed to be reliable, but their accurateness and completeness cannot be guaranteed. All performance reference is historical and not an indication of future results. Benchmark indices are hypothetical and do not include any investment fees.
