Home > Personal Finance > How to Tell If You’ll Have Enough Money to Retire

Comments 0 Comments

We all hate something. Almost everybody hates taxes. My wife’s family hates the Red Sox. Me? I hate online calculators.

For a textbook example of why, here’s this week’s reader question:

I checked the calculators you provided in your recent article “8 Reasons Your Parents Had an Easier Retirement Than You Will.” AARP said that I was over target, Bloomberg had me right on, and the FINRA calculator said that I needed to save 50 percent of my income every year from now on to make my target.

How do we validate that the information we are getting is accurate? There is no lack of information … but when they do not agree, how do we find what is good information? — Kenneth

Now, on to Kenneth’s question.

I’m not surprised Kenneth can’t find an online calculator he can count on. Here are the reasons I’ve grown to hate many types of online calculators.

1. They Ask You to Know the Unknowable

In order to provide answers to money-related questions, many online calculators require that you first provide very specific predictions for future events. The problem with this is twofold. First, they often require predictions that even experts can’t possibly know. Second, because many of these calculations occur over decades, the slightest variations will produce radically different results.

One of the calculators we suggested in our recent article serves as the perfect example of this common weakness.

Kenneth said the first two calculators, the ones from Bloomberg and AARP, suggested he was in fine shape. The third one, however, the FINRA calculator, told him he was in dire straits.

When we compare these calculators, we see the first two are straightforward. You tell them how old you are, how much you intend to put aside annually and how much you expect to earn on those savings. The calculators then tell you how much you’ll have at retirement age. The FINRA calculator, on the other hand, requires that you answer additional questions. They include the inflation rate from now till you retire, the tax bracket you’ll be in when you retire, what annual income you’ll need in retirement, and at what age you’ll stop withdrawing from your savings, by which I assume they mean when you’ll be dead.

There’s not a person on this planet who can know any of these things, or even hazard a reasonable guess, especially if your retirement is decades away. And even the slightest variation in variables, such as how much you’ll earn on your savings or the rate of inflation, will yield radically different outcomes.

A few years ago I wrote an article called “Which Is Better — Renting or Owning a Home?” In that article, I discussed a calculator offered by The New York Times that asks you to provide the percentage that housing prices, rents and property taxes, among other things, will increase or decrease years into the future. If you know those things, you should be talking on CNBC, not filling out online calculators.

2. They’re the Wizard of Oz & You’re Dorothy

In a book I wrote 11 years ago called “Money Made Simple,” I suggested a simple way to figure out how to divvy up your long-term savings. Here’s the formula:

  • Step One. Subtract your age from 100 and put the resulting percentage into stocks.
  • Step Two. Divide what’s left equally between bonds and cash.

So if you’re 20, you’d have 80% in stocks, and 10% each in cash and bonds. If you’re 80, you’d have 20% in stocks, and 40% each in cash and bonds.

Simple, right?

I compared this basic technique with an asset-allocation calculator from a well-known financial website. Here’s what its calculator required as inputs:

  • How much money you have now in various types of investments.
  • Your tax bracket.
  • How much of your savings you intend to spend within two years.
  • How much you intend to spend within 10 years.
  • How much you intend to leave to your heirs.
  • Years to retirement.
  • How much of your savings is in tax-deferred accounts.
  • How much equity you have in your home.
  • How many dependents you have.
  • Your volatility tolerance.
  • Your economic outlook.
  • Your inflation forecast.

So how did the results of this super-sophisticated calculator differ from those of my super-simple method? To find out, I assumed a 35-year-old and tried to pick middle-of-the-road answers for the calculator. The results:

  • My take-your-age-from-100 method. Stocks, 65%; bonds, 17.5%; cash, 17.5%.
  • Wizard-of-Oz calculator. Stocks, 64%; bonds, 18%; cash, 18%.

Why would someone make a calculator so complex when something simple you can do in your head does the same thing? Because its creator wants you to think they’re smart and you’re not. Why? One reason might be …

3. They’re Often Used to Sell Stuff

One of the more notorious types of online calculator are those purporting to tell you how much life insurance you need. These calculators are often sponsored by sites that sell life insurance and, coincidentally, often suggest purchasing tons of it. As a result, they don’t include things like money your heirs might receive from Social Security survivor benefits. And they nearly always assume that you “need” to leave a nest egg large enough to support your spouse and kids indefinitely on the interest alone.

If you want to know how much life insurance to buy, don’t ask an insurance salesman, or a calculator from a site that benefits from the sale of insurance.

4. They Give You a False Sense of Security

Calculators are comforting because they provide simple answers to complex problems. When you’re using a real calculator, the kind that multiplies 165 times the square root of 37, you get the same answer every time, and it’s the correct answer.

When you use retirement-forecasting and other types of long-term-planning calculators, you’ll also get a specific answer. But any similarity between that answer and the truth will be purely coincidental.

What Should Kenneth Do?

I wouldn’t dissuade Kenneth or anyone else from using online calculators. Just keep in mind that there’s an inverse relationship between predictions about the future and usefulness. In other words, the more you have to guess, the less useful the answer. And if you even suspect that the site furnishing the calculator has a commercial ax to grind, don’t even bother.

At the end of the day, the amount we should all put aside for retirement is the most we can. You don’t need a calculator to tell you that.

Want to make yourself feel better, or worse, with affirmations from online calculators? Be my guest. Just don’t be surprised when the results differ or when they’re flat-out wrong.

This post originally appeared on Money Talks News.

More from Money Talks News:

Image: Fuse

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team