Skip to main content

Getting to Retirement With Minimal Financial Risk


By TARA SIEGEL Published: May 18, 2012JPMorgan Chase’s giant trading loss began as an effort to manage the bank’s risks — a move that turned into something that now looks more like a speculative bet. But don’t think this is solely a big-bank problem. Even small investors can run into trouble discerning the fine line between hedging and risk taking.
Robert Neubecker

Bucks
Managing the Risk in Your Investment Portfolio

What sort of approach do you take to limiting the risk in your investment portfolio? Have you ever tweaked your approach because you realized you were taking too much or too little risk?

Comment Post a Comment

Tara Siegel Bernard

is a personal finance reporter with The Times.

Latest Articles

Investors can try to limit their risks by holding down their stock exposure through diversified investments. But many people are still depending on the market’s engine — perhaps more than they might think — to maintain a comfortable lifestyle in retirement, say, or pay for their children’s college educations.

While this strategy has worked for many people and is considered prudent by financial advisers, it’s still a wager. Your portfolio can take a painful nose dive just before you retire, which means you may have to work longer (if you can) or cut spending. But somewhere along the way, as pensions vanished and 401(k)’s took hold, investing in stocks for retirement was viewed as a manageable risk. After all, even after the market collapse in 2008-9, what other choice is there?

There are other approaches to risk management, but all of them involve their own set of trade-offs, costs and risks. And, as in JPMorgan’s case, going too far can also create problems.

“The caveat to most risk management techniques is the simple acknowledgment that, taken to extremes, they are no longer risk management techniques but the introduction of new risks or bets themselves,” said Michael Kitces, director of research at the Pinnacle Advisory Group in Columbia, Md., who also blogs about financial planning at Nerd’s Eye View.

Whatever approach you take is going to cost you something, even if you avoid the stock market altogether. So how you deal with investment risk will ultimately depend on what you’re willing to give up. Here are some different approaches:

ELIMINATE MOST RISK Trying to squeeze out risk is still going to require some sacrifices. The idea is that you save enough money to meet your goal — say, covering your basic expenses in retirement — without investing in risky assets. The big caveat is that you’ll need to save aggressively, perhaps much more so than if you turned to the stock market for some assistance (assuming it provides a decent return during your time frame).

But some academics like Zvi Bodie, a finance professor at Boston University, say they believe it can be done by taking a “safety first” approach, where you start by figuring out what your bare essentials will cost in retirement. Then, you save aggressively to cover those expenses, and put the money into virtually risk-free investments, like Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS) or I-Bonds. (I-Bonds never decline in value, are issued by Treasury and pay a fixed interest rate, currently 0 percent, as well as a variable rate that keeps pace with inflation.)

The idea is to create a safety net once you stop working. So if you bought $10,000 of I-Bonds each year over a 40-year career — the maximum you can buy each year, though Professor Bodie expects the amount will be adjusted for inflation — you would leave the work force with $400,000. Today, a 65-year-old man could take that money and buy an annuity that would provide roughly $15,000 in inflation-adjusted income annually (with spousal survivor benefits). This could be used with Social Security income — for a retiree at full retirement age today, a maximum of about $30,000 annually — to cover the basics.

“That’s not too bad,” added Professor Bodie, co-author of “Risk Less and Prosper” (Wiley 2011).

He also suggested creating something that approximated a personal pension through a so-called TIPS ladder. Here, you would figure out your basic spending needs each year, and buy TIPS with varying terms so that the bonds mature over time, as you need the money. (Given the tax treatment of TIPS, he recommended doing this in a tax-deferred or tax-sheltered account. It also takes significant planning since TIPS are sold in five-year maturities.)

Mr. Bodie said he did not have a problem investing money in riskier assets for discretionary spending. He also said that younger people could handle somewhat more risk since they had the luxury of time to make adjustments.

Still, this approach isn’t foolproof either. You may be sacrificing more than you need to if the markets do well. You can also lose the ability to save aggressively if you are laid off, for example, or have an expensive medical issue. And then there are all of life’s other costs — college tuition, saving for a down payment on a home, health insurance.

“The trouble is, of course, that almost no one can accumulate that much money — in rough terms, about 25 years of living expenses after Social Security and pensions — just by investing in safe assets,” said William J. Bernstein, author of “The Investor’s Manifesto” (Wiley 2009) and other investing books. “You have to take some risk to get there, and because you’re taking that risk, you may not get there. But taking that risk is still your best shot.”

There are several different ways to figure out how much that kind of low-risk approach may cost you. But let’s say you decided that saving $1 million was enough (that is, $1 million in inflation-adjusted dollars, meaning it keeps pace with inflation over time). You may be able to get there after 30 years by saving $750 a month, or $9,000 annually, and investing that money in a portfolio evenly split between stock and bonds, which earned 4.7 percent after inflation. But to avoid the stock market altogether, you would have to increase your monthly savings to $1,250 a month, or $15,000 a year, and receive a 2.5 percent return after inflation in a diversified bond-only portfolio, according to calculations by Kent Smetters, a risk management professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School and founder of Veritat Advisors, which takes an approach similar to the one advocated by Professor Bodie.

REDUCE RISK, LIVE WITH SOME Investing in a diversified portfolio — split among different types of stocks and bonds, while gradually reducing your exposure to risky stocks — is the classic way to reduce your risk. But it doesn’t eliminate risk. “In a crunch, or even in a normal sharply down market, like we’ve had the past few weeks, there are only risky and riskless assets,” Mr. Bernstein said. “So in the short term, diversification among different stock asset classes is usually of no help. They all get taken out and get shot. But over a decade or longer, diversification among stock asset classes is nearly magic.”

And when you add a healthy helping of bonds, you further reduce that risk. The trick is finding a level of risk you’re comfortable with so that you don’t bail out at the worst possible time. This approach also requires you to consider what a worst case might feel like, and what sort of changes you need to make to adjust.

You can also reduce your risk through hedging techniques. One relatively straightforward strategy is buying “put” option contracts, which give you the right to sell a fixed number of shares (say, of an exchange-traded fund that tracks a stock index) at a certain price within a certain period of time. This essentially puts a floor on your losses. If the shares don’t drop, you lose only the cost of the option.

So while this allows you to hedge your risk, it can weigh on your total return because you are paying for the insurance the puts provide. The downside, of course, are the costs and the hassles of such a strategy. “You can approximate any hedging strategy you might want far more cheaply simply by selling some risky assets,” Mr. Bernstein said. “There is no risk fairy who will write you a cheap option that will take stock risk off your hands.”

TRANSFER OR SHARE RISK This approach to risk management typically involves buying insurance. If you’re about to retire, you could buy a single-premium immediate annuity, where you pay an insurance company a pile of cash and, in return, the company pays you a stream of income for the rest of your life. The downside is that you just surrendered a pile of cash, which means you will not be able to use that money in an emergency. And if you die prematurely, your heirs won’t receive it either. There’s the risk, too, that the insurance company could run into financial trouble.

Annuities can also feel expensive. They may pay out approximately 4 or 5 percent of your investment, according to Professor Bodie, depending on the options you choose. An investment of $500,000 will buy slightly less than $2,400 in monthly income for a 65-year old man and his 62-year-old wife, according to a rough estimate from ImmediateAnnuities.com. But inflation-adjusted payments will cost more.

“Any insurance is going to cost you,” said Professor Bodie, who says he believes annuities may make sense for some retirees. “There is no free lunch.”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

土耳其11省的規模7.8強震

  土耳其震後13天…3獲救1不治 逾百萬災民住帳篷 2023-02-19 19:23   世界日報/  土耳其 土耳其強震遇難人數已超過4萬,有超過100萬人被迫住在臨時搭建的帳篷中。美聯社 BBC報導,截至18日, 土耳其 和 敘利亞 因 強震 遇難人數超過4.6萬,且可能還會增加,土耳其有超過100萬人被迫住在臨時搭建的帳篷中。土耳其強震後第13天,當地媒體報導,搜救隊今天從瓦礫堆中救出3名生還者,其中一名是孩童。不過,當中一人送醫後不治。 土耳其災難管理機構稱,土耳其的遇難人數已超過4萬,還有許多人仍埋在廢墟中,生還希望渺茫。土環境部長庫魯姆表示,相關部門已派出超過7000人到震區,排查超過48萬棟建築物,其中6萬多座損毀嚴重,需緊急拆除,另有近2萬座建築物中度受損。司法部稱,至今有300多人涉嫌應對在地震中倒塌的劣質建築負責,其中超過80人已經被捕。 這起土耳其現代空前災難使得國內約有26萬4000棟公寓被毀,還有許多人失蹤。目前土耳其的死亡人數計有4萬642名,鄰國敘利亞通報的罹難數則超過5800人,但敘國已經多日沒有更新數據。許多國際救難隊已離開廣大的地震災區,但土、敘國內救難隊仍持續在已被夷為平地的建築廢墟中搜尋生還者。 世界各地清真寺18日為土、敘兩國罹難者舉行非現場殯禮,由於災難規模龐大,許多罹難者都無法接受完整的葬禮。 此外,20年來,基礎建設一向是土耳其執政黨「正義發展黨」(AKP)的主打賣點,但此次地震造成嚴重死傷, 厄多安 政府在5月的大選恐面臨苦戰。 土耳其廣播電視公司分析師艾利姆稱,這場地震使之前所有的 民調 結果變得無關緊要。受地震影響的10省中,阿德亞曼等6省是執政黨的傳統票倉。考慮到許多災民因房屋倒塌沒有地址、通訊中斷,選舉可能延後。但是根據土耳其憲法,除非戰爭爆發,否則選舉不能延後超過1個月。 土耳其 敘利亞 強震 民調 厄多安

台灣建築獎 PRIZE OF ARCHITECTURE

  土建築師打敗普立茲克獎大師 橫山書法館奪台灣建築獎 2022-11-03 01:22   聯合報 坐落於桃園大園、由新世代建築師潘天壹設計的橫山書法藝術館,奪得2022台灣建築獎首獎。圖/潘天壹建築師事務所提供 2022台灣 建築 獎昨公布得主。新世代建築師潘天壹設計的橫山書法藝術館奪得首獎。普立茲克獎得主庫哈斯與姚仁喜合作的北藝中心、普立茲克獎得主坂茂與石昭永合作的南美館,則與德光教會、巨大集團全球營運總部並列佳作。本土建築師打敗兩位普立茲克獎得主,評審形容,台灣建築獎得主潘天壹年紀雖輕,作品卻能同時展現「隽永中有淡淡驚喜」的兩種張力,為喧囂的時代帶來安定的力量,奪得今年建築獎首獎。 橫山書法館與埤塘為鄰,潘天壹以篆刻硯石為意象,將五個硯石內斂而分散地放置於埤塘旁,形成流動的書寫地景。評審認為本案利用東方的合院概念,塑造現代園林遊園式觀瞻,將書法的意境用建築表現。整體呈現安靜、平和、穩健,有驚奇但不吵雜,節奏疏密拿捏得宜。 評審團召集人劉培森指出,潘天壹將建築物拆散成尺度小的院落式組織,空間處理切合主題。他把內部空間的氛圍處理得非常好,讓人感到心靈的沉澱,節奏上又出現不同的層次。當訪客從外界進入內部,層次的處理非常精彩,感受水平空間的寧靜之時,看到天花板的結構,又能感受到趣味性。潘天壹年紀輕、卻有相當成熟的表現,「30年前覺得台灣建築水準差國際一大截,30年後覺得有許多年輕建築師慢慢冒出、令人欣喜。」 橫山書法藝術館從設計到完成花費四年。潘天壹透露,四年過程中「經歷很大的逆轉過程」,到現在都還覺得有一些「未完成」,希望透過獎項啟動學習和陪伴。他認為,建築作品並非完工之後便停止,「每個案子都是孩子、屬於這個地方、擁有自己的生命力」。迄今他每個月都會去看橫山書法館,「看地景如何陪伴民眾、繼續它的旅程」,也希望在建築的發展過程中,學習如何回應社會責任。 潘天壹是新世代建築師中,罕見從未出國留學的「土建築師」。問他心中的「台灣建築」是什麼?他形容是「只有在台灣才看得到的台灣建築」,從中可以找到社會、文化與產業脈動的浮現。他認為,台灣的大環境比較少談書法、台灣文化,因為資訊都是「和洋混合」的強勢文化衝擊,在這種衝擊之下,大家習慣浸泡在張力之中,失去對自己文化內在的表述。他認為,如果將台灣建築獎歷屆的建築師連起來,他們都在串連台灣的DNA,「只要串得下去...

業界對抑制房價手段 的 反映

  不動產聯盟總會林正雄:高房價政府也是推手 應停止重稅 2023-01-16 22:02   經濟日報/  中華民國不動產聯盟總會理事長林正雄今(16)日指出,這波房價高漲主因惡性通膨所致,尤其政府重稅也是推手之一。他呼籲,政府要「解決缺工」、「停止重稅」等,才能促進房市發展健康化。中華民國不動產聯盟總會提供。 中華民國不動產聯盟總會理事長林正雄今(16)日指出,這波 房價 高漲主因惡性 通膨 所致,尤其政府重稅也是推手之一,政府接連打房只會讓台灣經濟出現破口。他呼籲,政府要「解決缺工」、「停止重稅」等才能促進房市發展健康化。 他指出,近年房價高漲係因通貨膨脹,使各項原物料大幅上漲,全國缺工已經不只是民間 營建業 的大問題,連政府的公共工程都面臨人力短缺的難解課題,尤其營建署在2020年發布的營造業經濟調查報告顯示,全國營建業已缺工近12萬人,2022年以來,營建業的缺工的數字更是呈倍數成長。 他表示,營建業缺工問題亦使工資不斷墊高,在工料雙漲情況下,業者只能反映成本,這也是目前房價居高不下的原因;然而營造物價高漲是國際貿易問題,不易緩解,但「缺工」問題,政府可以透過制度適度鬆綁,修正外籍移工引進規定來解決,如此才能根本解決高房價問題,才是各黨能否獲得「執政」的關鍵! 另外,林正雄強調,政府歷次打房政策與金融限縮,以及大環境通膨,使得業者經營成本增加,諸多限制與稅制閉鎖期違反市場自然運作,連帶使消費者選擇減少。經過兩年多來的強力打房,民眾們應該要清醒了,政府以加徵重稅來打房,其實無助平抑房價,反而重重傷害了眾多相關從業人員的生計。 林正雄呼籲,政府要「解決缺工」、「停止重稅」,不要再以重稅打房,尊重市場機制,才是房市健康化的開始。