Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 596

An alternative asset class for income-seeking retirees

Imagine conducting extensive pre-purchase due diligence on a local business that generated $1,500,000 in net profit last year. Now, imagine you acquire it for $10 million, concluding the purchase price is neither a bargain nor unreasonably high. Finally, you hire managers and staff to oversee its day-to-day operations, allowing you to collect distributions without actively running the enterprise.

Fast-forward one year: the company has delivered an outstanding performance, generating 33% growth in net profit to $2,000,000 – a yield of 20%. You take home the $2,000,000 as a dividend and anticipate further growth, thanks to a nearby competitor’s failure. You also test the market for a possible business sale and receive three offers. Despite the business’s improving profitability and growth, these are all below your original $10 million purchase price.

Naturally, you decline.

Another year passes, and the growth rate of the company’s profits accelerates to 50%, and profits rise to $3,000,000. The yield on your original purchase price is 30%, and a few prospective buyers have knocked on the door, offering to buy your business for less than the $10 million you originally paid.

How do you feel about the business’s market value being less than you paid? 

I imagine, as you read this, you are thinking the buyers are either idiots or ‘bottom feeders’ and that their proposed valuations are irrelevant. And you would be right to reach those conclusions. It should be abundantly clear that the external valuations are irrelevant when the business is healthy, growing, and delivering a substantial, increasing cash flow every year.

Why do our conclusions change with listed companies?

So why do our conclusions change when the business in question is listed on the stock market? Why is it that even if the business is growing its profits, we fret over every small daily move in the share price? Why do we fear a crash in the share price of these businesses?

The reason is complex. We might consider the collective wisdom of markets as superior to our own – the market may know something we don’t. However, we may also have retirement-related obligations to sell some of the securities each year, and if the share prices collapse, we will be forced to sell more securities than we would otherwise have to in meeting our pension payment obligations.

The aim of investing in equities

In equities, our aim should be to acquire a portfolio of outstanding businesses that continually increase their free cash flow and reliably pay - and grow - their dividends. Alternatively, we will do equally well, and perhaps even better, over the long term, buying businesses that have the capability of increasing their dividend payments, even if they retain their profits to reinvest at very high rates of return.

When you own such enterprises, day-to-day market fluctuations should be far less concerning. And while you can rely on the businesses’ dividend streams, rather than fretting over fluctuating share prices, the fluctuations can have adverse impacts.

Mitigating sequencing risk

Sequencing risk - the danger that poor returns early in retirement can rapidly deplete a portfolio when combined with withdrawals - can only partly be mitigated by owning high-quality stocks with predictable, growing dividends.

If the dividend income from a share portfolio is insufficient to meet retirement income stream obligations, you will be forced to sell shares. And if the portfolio has been impacted by a stock market correction caused by geopolitical or macroeconomic shifts (outside of your control) the result is fewer remaining shares to do the heavy lifting of recouping the losses.

From the age of 65 to 74, superannuation income stream beneficiaries must currently withdraw 5% of their retirement account balance (as at the 2023/24 financial year).

Minimum percentage factor for certain pensions and annuities (indicative only) for each age group

Age

Under 65

65-74

75-79

80-84

85-89

90-94

95 or more

2023-24 onwards

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

9.0%

11.0%

14.0%

Note: These withdrawal factors are indicative only. To determine the precise minimum annual payment (especially for market linked income streams), refer to the pro-rating, rounding and other rules in the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994. Source: www.ato.gov.au

If the yield on an equity portfolio is 3%, the difference – 2% – needs to be achieved by selling some of the shares. There is nothing to worry about if the stock market has risen by circa 10% as the S&P/ASX200 has done over the last 12 months. But if the market falls 20%, more shares need to be sold at lower prices to achieve the required payment.

This is why, occasionally, the Government reduces the minimum withdrawal amount required for account-based pensions and annuities to mitigate the adverse impact of lower prices, as it did between 2020 and 2023.

Is there an alternative to equities?

But what if there was an asset class that offered yields of 7-10% each year, paid cash income every month, had a long track record of never posting a negative month and exhibited very low volatility in its unit price?

By way of example, suppose your portfolio was hypothetically invested in a spread of private credit funds that eschewed lending to property developers altogether, yielded 7 or 8%, paid a mix of monthly and quarterly income and has historically offered substantially less volatility than public equity markets.

For retirees aged 65 to 74, they could withdraw their 5% super income stream and reinvest the remaining 2 or 3% into the private credit funds, diversify into equities or pass the funds to kids and grandkids for much needed school fees, for example.

From the age of 75 to 79, retirees are required to withdraw 6%, from 80 to 84, 7%, and from 85 to 89, 9% (refer to table above). Hypothetically, if invested in a diversified portfolio of private credit funds paying 8%, retirees would not need to draw down on their capital until they reached the age of 85 – a full 20 years after retirement.

Of course, there are risks with any asset class, and that’s where financial advisers are worth their weight in gold. They can help assess whether private credit aligns with your financial goals, risk tolerance, and income needs. The point, however, is that there are now alternatives to equities that may offer more desirable cash flow characteristics for retirees.

The bigger picture

While 2023 and 2024 provided the backdrop of rising equity markets – something we predicted and wrote about extensively - 2025 and 2026 may offer investors an opportunity to reflect on the virtues of diversifying into private credit. Especially if investing $10 million into an unlisted local business growing its net profit by 50% per year is not an option!

 

Roger Montgomery is the Chairman of Montgomery Investment Management and an author at www.RogerMontgomery.com. This article is for general information only and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

 

7 Comments
Dudley
January 30, 2025

Risk. Example:
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/aph-loses-control-over-1-billion-forest-hill-office-project-20240813-p5k220.html
'mortgagee Metrics Credit Partners'

Phil Pogson
January 30, 2025

This is pretty much what authors and investors Steven Bavaria and Steve Selengut have been teaching for several years.

Dan
January 31, 2025

The author talking his book, again.

Who is borrowing from the private credit providers? What risk are the lenders taking on? Dudley provides an example.

One has to ask why the big banks don't want to lend to those who are borrowing. Why are they seeking private (and more expensive ) credit. The answer is because it's risky business.

Mercifully the author notes inherent risk, albeit earlier inferring low risk ("long track record of never posting a negative month and exhibited very low volatility"). If it were low risk, it wouldn't offer returns of 7-10%.

Beware.

Steve
February 01, 2025

The logic of never losing money was the root cause of the GFC. As housing (as a total entity) never lost money in the US, all you had to do was generate more loans. Missing was the key historical role of a high deposit (used to be 20% min) to act as a buffer and the extremely shonky loans to people with little or no credit rating so the broker could pocket their commission. We saw how that ended.

SGN
February 01, 2025

I quote from the above article
"Of course, there are risks with any asset class, and that’s where financial advisers are worth their weight in gold. "
Really Weight in Gold ?

Brian
February 03, 2025

The median adviser weighs 82.5 kg.
(sorry, cannot reveal my 'sauce'!)
So 'worth' about A$ 12 million.
Some might say a bargain.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Retirement myths doing more harm than good

5 charts every retiree must see…

Protecting retirement income from inflation shocks

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are LICs licked?

LICs are continuing to struggle with large discounts and frustrated investors are wondering whether it’s worth holding onto them. This explains why the next 6-12 months will be make or break for many LICs.

Retirement income expectations hit new highs

Younger Australians think they’ll need $100k a year in retirement - nearly double what current retirees spend. Expectations are rising fast, but are they realistic or just another case of lifestyle inflation?

5 charts every retiree must see…

Retirement can be daunting for Australians facing financial uncertainty. Understand your goals, longevity challenges, inflation impacts, market risks, and components of retirement income with these crucial charts.

Why super returns may be heading lower

Five mega trends point to risks of a more inflation prone and lower growth environment. This, along with rich market valuations, should constrain medium term superannuation returns to around 5% per annum.

The hidden property empire of Australia’s politicians

With rising home prices and falling affordability, political leaders preach reform. But asset disclosures show many are heavily invested in property - raising doubts about whose interests housing policy really protects.

Preparing for aged care

Whether for yourself or a family member, it’s never too early to start thinking about aged care. This looks at the best ways to plan ahead, as well as the changes coming to aged care from November 1 this year.

Latest Updates

Shares

Four best-ever charts for every adviser and investor

In any year since 1875, if you'd invested in the ASX, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods. It's just one of the must-have stats that all investors should know.

Our experts on Jim Chalmers' super tax backdown

Labor has caved to pressure on key parts of the Division 296 tax, though also added some important nuances. Here are six experts’ views on the changes and what they mean for you.        

Superannuation

When you can withdraw your super

You can’t freely withdraw your super before 65. You need to meet certain legal conditions tied to your age, whether you’ve retired, or if you're using a transition to retirement option. 

Retirement

A national guide to concession entitlements

Navigating retirement concessions is unnecessarily complex. This outlines a new project to help older Australians find what they’re entitled to - quickly, clearly, and with less stress. 

Property

The psychology of REIT investing

Market shocks and rallies test every investor’s resolve. This explores practical strategies to stay grounded - resisting panic in downturns and FOMO in booms - while focusing on long-term returns. 

Fixed interest

Bonds are copping a bad rap

Bonds have had a tough few years and many investors are turning to other assets to diversify their portfolios. However, bonds can still play a valuable role as a source of income and risk mitigation.

Strategy

Is it time to fire the consultants?

The NSW government is cutting the use of consultants. Universities have also been criticized for relying on consultants as cover for restructuring plans. But are consultants really the problem they're made out to be?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.