7 ms·
Wow, that's pretty crazy - ~5% bonds for conservative and ~7-8% for aggressive would have been more appropriate in my opinion. And I feel even those numbers may
by piracykills 9y ago
Wow, that's pretty crazy - ~5% bonds for conservative and ~7-8% for aggressive would have been more appropriate in my opinion. And I feel even those numbers may be a little optimistic.
Currently it's more like "what if you have a great market year every year until you retire" or "what if you can reliably beat the market" - neither of which is likely to happen.
- jonknee 9y agoTo be fair the total annualized return of the S&P 500 over long periods is roughly 10%. You don't have to reliably beat the market to reach those numbers. It's interesting to play around with: https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/ https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/
- teej 9y agoI think you forgot to click the “inflation adjusted” checkbox. The real rate of return is closer to ~7%. Also caveat emptor - past performance is no guarantee of future results.
- jonknee 9y agoBut the calculator you're criticizing does not adjust for inflation...
- stochastastic 9y agoI think that’s the point. A projected savings balance is misleading without considering inflation, so if the calculator doesn’t make an explicit adjustment for it then there ought to be an implicit adjustment in the rate of return assumption.
- Spooky23 9y agoSays who? Projecting historically low inflation is no less reckless than ignoring it. Imo, you're better off looking at absolute returns and tweaking your expectations based in inflation as itnhaopens.
- soVeryTired 9y agoOn the other hand, the Nikkei's still underwater from its peak almost 30 years ago, and has been more or less flat since 1995.