Track the companies that matter to you. It's FREE! Click one of these fan favorites to get started: Apple; Google; Ford.

Recs

18

Do You Have Too Much Money in Stocks?

Watch stocks you care about

The single, easiest way to keep track of all the stocks that matter...

Your own personalized stock watchlist!

It's a 100% FREE Motley Fool service...

Click Here Now

Taking some risks with your investing is smart. But where's the line between too little and too much of a good thing?

Many investors dial up their risk tolerance to the max during their working years. As aging baby-boomers approach retirement, the big question they must face is whether they are putting too much of their money at risk by keeping their stock allocations high.

Making a change
Figuring out what changes you need to make to your portfolio when you retire isn't as simple as you might think. Obviously, without job earnings, retirees are much more dependent on their investments for regular income.

But given that many retirees can look forward to living 30 years or more after they quit their jobs, giving up on stocks entirely could prove to be far more dangerous than the risk of a stock market downturn. Facing that dilemma and finding a workable answer is essential for any baby-boomer who wants a secure retirement.

Tackling the tough issues
That's why Fool retirement expert Robert Brokamp decided to address stock allocations as part of his latest update to subscribers of his Rule Your Retirement newsletter. Because investors' comfort level with stocks changes dramatically depending on recent market conditions, tying people down to a fixed stock allocation that they can feel comfortable following through thick and thin can be a difficult task.

When stocks were doing well, many investors flocked to the strong returns that stocks offered. Yet as often happens during bear markets, investors who thought they understood the risks involved with owning stocks got a rude awakening when the strong performance in previous years abruptly came to an end in 2008. Take a look at the hits some widely held stocks took when the stock market turned sour:

Stock

Total Return 8/21/2002 to 8/21/2007

Total Return 8/21/2007 to 8/20/2009

AT&T (NYSE: T  )

76.5%

(26.9%)

Caterpillar (NYSE: CAT  )

269.5%

(34.5%)

Dow Chemical (NYSE: DOW  )

68.9%

(42.9%)

Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG  )

56.6%

(13.4%)

General Electric (NYSE: GE  )

36.1%

(60%)

Starbucks (Nasdaq: SBUX  )

162%

(29.7%)

Boeing (NYSE: BA  )

181%

(51.2%)

Source: Yahoo Finance.

Moreover, note that the most recent returns from the past two years include the huge rally we've seen since March. For a long time, investors had to face the prospect of even sharper declines. Because they're still shellshocked from their losses, many investors -- especially those in or approaching retirement -- feel less confident about their stocks than ever.

Finding a solution
To dig for the best answer, Robert consulted with certified financial planner and author Bill Bengen. Before 2008, Bengen had advised his retired clients to keep roughly half their assets in stocks, as a hedge against rising living expenses and long life expectancies.

Once the bear market began in earnest, though, Bengen made some important changes to his target stock allocations. The reason he did so has to do with the nearly unprecedented difficulties our economy faces today.

As Rule Your Retirement subscribers know from his past interview in early 2007, Bengen is among the pioneers of research about safe withdrawal rates. The general idea behind the concept is that if you look at past historical returns, you can determine how much you could have safely withdrawn from your portfolio each year during retirement and still had enough money to last throughout your lifetime. The number most often mentioned is 4% of your initial retirement portfolio, with withdrawals adjusted upward for inflation each year.

As Bengen points out, though, the current economic situation isn't one that we've regularly faced in the past. The dramatic events we've seen over the past two years resemble only one previous episode in the past 80 years: the Great Depression. And although you can draw some conclusions based on the assumption that things will work out roughly the same way they did in the 1930s, you can't have much confidence in conclusions based on a single time period.

Learn more
Robert ends his asset allocation discussion by revealing some adjustments he plans to make to the model portfolios he provides for his readers. To find out more about those changes, as well as how Bill Bengen has positioned his retired clients to deal with the financial crisis, you'll want to check out the latest Rule Your Retirement update.

Even if you're not already a subscriber, you can still read everything these experts have to say -- just click here to start a 30-day trial. It's absolutely free, and in addition to this update, you'll find a treasure trove of other valuable information. Check it out today.

The Steve Jobs Betrayal
You may already know that in the final year of his life, Jobs revealed a stunning betrayal — and told his biographer, "I will spend my last dying breath... and every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank to right this wrong." What was it that made Jobs so irate — and why could it make a few in-the-know investors some major profits over the coming months and years?

Enter your email address below to find out what made Jobs so enraged!

Fool contributor Dan Caplinger took a big risk yesterday: he went with the Purple Cow ice cream instead of chocolate chocolate chip. It paid off though. He owns shares of General Electric and Starbucks. Starbucks is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor recommendation and an  Inside Value selection. Procter & Gamble is an  Income Investor recommendation. The Fool also owns shares of Procter & Gamble and Starbucks. Try any of our Foolish newsletters today, free for 30 days. The Fool's disclosure policy gets it just right every time.


Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On August 23, 2009, at 11:17 PM, jimmytom2003 wrote:

    I don't think I can take another blatant advertisement disguised as an article.

    I am now cancelling any subscriptions I have with the Motley Fool and placing all emails from them in my spam folder. It is way too time consumming to keep wading through all the junk to find an article that may have worthwhile information.

  • Report this Comment On August 29, 2009, at 3:24 PM, NJKen wrote:

    I agree. I perhaps "foolishly" subscribed to a $99 newsletter and it seems we are getting a ton of adverts for new/different newsletters.

    I can see the value of keeping us informed of trends and tips for undervalued stocks but I get a bit overwhelmed and ticked off with an interesting article turning out to be a plug for another newsletter.

    Can't we just have some good and timely advice for our $99?

  • Report this Comment On August 29, 2009, at 4:51 PM, gdm1932 wrote:

    I am sorry to say that I too agree with the comments above. For the moment I'll stick with you and repeat the last request: Can't we just have some good and timely advice. Furthermore, PLEASE send us an alert the moment you post a recommendation.

  • Report this Comment On August 29, 2009, at 5:41 PM, wuff3t wrote:

    Guys,

    Why don't you just ignore the e-mails and plugs for paid services? It's not that difficult, just come to the website and select what you want to read.

    You get plenty of good and timely advice for your $99. Heck, they're actually offering you ALL their advice for free for 30 days - for every paid service they offer. What more do you want?

    Not sure what services you all subscribe to, but with Stock Advisor you get an alert every time a recommendation is made or update provided.

    I guess some people just want more, however much you give them...

  • Report this Comment On August 31, 2009, at 4:51 PM, sridhar1998 wrote:

    Fools, I do believe that for $99 we do get a good service. However, it should be noted that the website is getting repeatedly bad publicity for its marketing tactics.

    It would be nice if Motley Fools invites all its members to list out the advertisements and news they would like to receive and if some of them do not like to receive any such marketing information, there is no point in bombarding them with invitation and 30 days free services.

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 969255, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 5/28/2012 2:04:04 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Today's Market

updated 2 days ago Sponsored by:
DOW 12,454.83 -74.92 -0.60%
S&P 500 1,317.82 -2.86 -0.22%
NASD 2,837.53 -1.85 -0.07%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

5/25/2012 4:05 PM
PG $62.49 Down -0.08 -0.13%
The Procter & Gamb… CAPS Rating: *****
SBUX $54.56 Down -0.20 -0.37%
Starbucks CAPS Rating: ***
T $33.69 Up +0.05 +0.15%
AT&T CAPS Rating: ***
GE $19.20 Down -0.05 -0.26%
General Electric C… CAPS Rating: ****
BA $70.00 Down -1.39 -1.95%
The Boeing Company CAPS Rating: ****
CAT $89.94 Down -1.48 -1.62%
Caterpillar, Inc. CAPS Rating: ****
DOW $31.30 Down -0.25 -0.79%
The Dow Chemical C… CAPS Rating: ****

Advertisement