Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 672

Why I object to ‘hitting a number’ for retirement

This article originally appeared on the Morningstar US website. It has been amended for an Australian audience.

‘Did you hear that [mutual university friend] is retiring? He says he hit his number in the stock market.’

One of my friends shared that news with me the other day via text. And I’ll confess, all of my alarm bells went off. In fact, my alarm bells always go off when I hear about someone “hitting their number.” No, it’s not envy. Rather, I think it’s often a signal that the retirement plan isn’t as holistic or risk-conscious as it should be.

Here are my major objections.

Back-of-the-envelope planning

Too often, when I hear people discussing ‘a number,’ they’re using a simple heuristic like the 4% guideline to determine their portfolios’ viability. Or worse, they’re using their gut reaction to the number to determine if it’s enough. A $1 million portfolio seems like it should be plenty for many retirees, but it might not be if their tax-adjusted, inflation-adjusted spending is too high.

Dividing your number by your planned withdrawal amount is a good starting point if you’ve just begun thinking about retirement and evaluating whether your plan is on track—for example, if you’re 10 or so years from retirement. But if you’re getting closer, it’s worthwhile to create a more encompassing plan. That starts with thinking about how your spending might change in retirement; quantifying any non-portfolio income sources you’ll be able to rely on, like the age pension or working income; considering planned spending rate and portfolio positioning; and factoring in taxes, inflation, and investment costs. If your assertion that you have enough to retire rests on a single variable—your portfolio’s value—that’s your cue to develop a comprehensive plan.

Market highs invite risk

Risk also factors into my reflexive aversion to ‘hitting a number.’ Not only did my friend hit his number, but he hit his number in the stock market. Of course, people retire all the time when stocks are nearing new highs. Stocks go up more than they go down, and it simply feels better to switch from savings to spending mode when your portfolio is looking robust. Counterintuitively, if you plan to retire with a heavy complement of stocks, it’s actually better to retire after the market has been pummeled than to go out on a high note.

Valuations are the main reason. Even as your portfolio has gotten plumper, it’s also more susceptible to sequence risk, the possibility of big portfolio losses at the beginning of retirement. In our research on safe spending rates, we found in our Monte Carlo trials that nearly two-thirds of all-equity portfolios that experienced losses within the first five years of retirement ran out of money before year 30.

Our research on historical safe withdrawal rates also points to the value of retiring when conditions look crummy rather than retiring when your portfolio is riding high. In the mid-1980s, for example, most investors probably weren’t excited about the prospects for the major asset classes. Not only had stocks endured a punishing rout in 1973-74, but they also posted losses in 1977 and 1981. Bonds performed abysmally, too, thanks to the Federal Reserve’s successful campaign to tamp down inflation. But the mid-1980s were actually one of the best periods in modern history to have retired into. An all-equity portfolio would have supported a starting withdrawal rate of nearly 13%! That’s right, a $1 million portfolio would have supported a $130,000 withdrawal in year one of retirement, with annual inflation adjustments thereafter, for 30 years. Those rich withdrawal rates were owed to low equity valuations coming into the period, supporting strong stock market gains over the ensuing 30 years. Bond yields were high and trended lower, boosting bond prices, and inflation was generally quite mild. In other words, the mid-1980s retiree enjoyed a trifecta of good fortune in terms of starting withdrawals.

That’s not to suggest that new retirees and would-be retirees should assume that their prospects are dire today simply because equity valuations are high. As Amy Arnott noted in this article, ‘lost decades’ for stocks, like the one that prevailed in the 2000s, have been quite rare. Moreover, investors can make their plans more resilient by building in a complement of safe assets (cash and bonds) and spending less if their portfolios experience losses. In fact, the best thing that prospective retirees can do if they think they’ve hit their number is to lock down a portion of their gains in safer assets for protection. Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities, which deliver a boost to your principal in line with the Consumer Price Index, look particularly attractive today because they help defend against still-high inflation.

Lifestyle considerations

Finally, my most significant objection to ‘hitting a number’ is that it suggests that deciding when to retire revolves around money and numbers. Of course, financial wherewithal is inextricably linked to whether you can reasonably retire. And if your job is a miserable slog or you’re just plain exhausted, by all means concentrate on making the numbers work as soon as possible. Life is short, and staying put in a job you’re not enjoying could hurt your physical and mental health.

But in my experience, the best retirement plans don’t begin and end with the numbers. As Maria Bruno, head of US wealth planning research for Vanguard, shares in my book How to Retire, you need to be able to answer ‘the three haves.’ Do you have enough? (That’s the money piece.) Have you had enough? (Are you done with work, either because you’re exasperated or, better yet, because you’ve achieved everything you hoped to?)

The final ‘have’ is the most important: Will you have enough? That means, do you know what you are retiring ‘to’ and will it fulfill you? How will you spend your days, and what will give you purpose, identity, structure, and contact with other people? The most successful retirees put even more weight on those questions than they do on money matters.

 

Christine Benz is director of personal finance and retirement planning for Morningstar. She is also the author of How to Retire: 20 Lessons for a Happy, Successful, and Wealthy Retirement. This article does not consider the circumstances of any investor. Minor changes have been made to the original US version for an Australian audience.

 

  •   22 July 2026
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

The case for gearing beyond property

Are these assets the missing piece in Australian portfolios?

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Are you making these SMSF mistakes?

After four decades advising investors, there are a few common mistakes I've seen SMSF investors make. From holding too much cash and chasing yield to overtrading and trusting tips. Are these errors costing you?

Why have Australian living standards 'fallen' and how do we fix it?

For the last few years there has been much talk of a 'cost-of-living' crisis in Australia and of 'falling living standards'. Lately this has flared up again with the pickup in inflation resulting in a renewed fall in real wages.

Will you run out of money in retirement?

Fear of running out has become a defining retirement anxiety. Why do some retirees die with substantial wealth while others deplete their nest egg? Evidence suggests the answer is more complicated than we think. 

Four options for an income investor’s next dollar

What if Australia’s golden age of dividends is ending? Rather than overhaul your portfolio, it may be worth considering where new capital can work harder. I discuss four income strategies and the trade-offs behind each.

Retirement spending is not one-size-fits-all

New data challenges the idea that Australians are underspending their super. The bigger issue may be helping retirees navigate complexity, make confident decisions and use their savings to support security, wellbeing and choice.

The missing link in the CGT debate

A little-noticed consequence of Labor’s tax changes could have implications well beyond investors’ tax bills. The issue raises bigger questions about incentives, capital allocation and the drivers of long-term economic growth.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

The ageing ‘crisis’ has not and will not happen

Rising age dependency is frequently treated as a warning sign for economies. But when actual workforce participation is examined, a strikingly different picture emerges about ageing, productivity and economic sustainability.

Retirement

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

Shares

Four charts that expose market concentration risk

Investors have recently been rewarded for backing market leaders, but history suggests this eventually comes at a cost. Now may be the time to review whether your portfolio is carrying unintended risks beneath the surface.

Investment strategies

The case for gearing beyond property

Most Australians gear into property but ignore shares. That may be a mistake. Used carefully, geared equity strategies can enhance long-term returns, reduce cash tied up in growth assets and support retirement income goals.

Economy

Australia's $1 trillion debt pile

The headlines exclaiming that Australian government debt has hit A$1 trillion and US government debt has hit $40 trillion has turned heads, but how serious are they really? Will Australia's mix of debt create challenges?

Economy

Has 100 years of growth made us any happier?

For decades, GDP has been the benchmark for economic success, but has it made us materially happier? If happiness does not rise in lockstep with prosperity, are we overlooking what constitutes a successful society?

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 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.