We spend a lot of time talking (and writing) about the process of saving for retirement. It's a confusing, challenging endeavor for many -- if you're new to investing, or don't have a lot of exposure to the basic concepts, picking your way through a 401(k) plan's options or setting up an IRA can be daunting. For some, it's so daunting that they don't do it, or put it off indefinitely, and they let years slip by before they start saving.
But happily, plenty of people do get it. They've put in the time to learn how to invest well, and they've found ways to save more of what they earn. Combined with their discipline to contribute to their retirement plans and IRAs year after year, they end up with a nice nest egg as they approach retirement.
Great! Now what?
Shifting from saving to spending
Obviously, drawing down that nest egg requires a different mind-set than the one you had while you built it up. While you're building your nest egg, the ups and downs of volatile stocks like Potash Corp.
But when you're planning on spending that money, suddenly that drop becomes a major problem. Suddenly the ups and downs of your nest egg's overall value seem to mean the difference between a secure retirement and going broke early. The temptation is strong to shift the whole thing into a money market fund -- or just buy an annuity. Sure, a money market's yield is low, but at least your nest egg will still be there when you need it. And the fees on an annuity can be outrageous -- but at least you're guaranteed an income stream. Right?
You know what I'm going to say: There's a better way.
The better way
You may know that most experts recommend that you limit your withdrawals to about 4% of your retirement fund's total value every year. That's good advice. You may also know that some of us recommend that you keep a sizable portion of it invested in stocks -- all the money you won't need for at least five years should be in stocks, in part to help you keep up with inflation.
But managing that stock portfolio will require -- again -- a different mind-set than the one you had while you were building it in the first place. In our Rule Your Retirement newsletter, advisor Robert Brokamp examined this question in detail way back in January -- when few could've imagined how bad things would get.
Despite the recent drop, you'll still be invested in stocks. Since you could easily live 30 years or more, it's too long a timeframe to rely entirely on bonds and other low-risk investments. But there are some big differences in how you set up a stock portfolio.
If you were still working and saving back in the late 1990s, you could afford to take some big risks on companies like Amazon.com
Does that mean you have to dump all your stocks and hunker down with traditional defensive plays like bonds? Not at all. Among other things, it means spending some time looking at blue chips like Genentech
Times are hard now. But you can still fund your retirement -- just don't give up on your investment plan.
To read Robert's full article from the January 2008 issue of Rule Your Retirement, help yourself to a complimentary guest pass. The pass will give you full access to all issues, our special members-only discussion board for your questions and ideas, and a unique set of planning tools to help you create your own plan for retirement. It's yours for 30 days free, with absolutely no obligation to subscribe.
This article, written by John Rosevear, was originally published on Dec. 6, 2007. It has been updated by Dan Caplinger, who doesn't own shares of the companies mentioned. Amazon and NVIDIA are Stock Advisor picks. Johnson & Johnson is an Income Investor recommendation. The Motley Fool's disclosure policy is a firm believer in balancing risk with reward.