Conventional wisdom of bonds dominating retirement portfolios outdated

To that point, 30 years ago the retirement and bond market landscape looked quite different from the one we’re currently experiencing. In 1988, the 10-year Treasury yielded between 8 percent and 9 percent, and the inflation rate was about 4 percent. Additionally, many people who retired in the 1980s had pensions that covered most of their living expenses so they could afford to take a conservative approach with their retirement portfolio. They could invest their portfolio in 10-year Treasurys, live on 4 percent of the bond income and still keep up with inflation, all while many had the security of multiple guaranteed income streams via Social Security and a pension.

High guaranteed incomes and a high-interest bond market are two comforts that today’s retirees do not have. Here in 2018, pensions are disappearing at an alarming rate, the 10-year Treasury is yielding around just 3 percent, and inflation is about 2 percent. Safe to say, it is a very different environment. Yet despite these low rates, the “conventional wisdom” of overweighting bonds in a retirement portfolio has not changed.

Sticking with this outdated retirement strategy in such a low-rate environment all but requires retirees to invest in lower-quality, longer-term bonds to have any chance of providing the income and inflation protection they’re seeking. I’ve observed this is increasingly the case.

More from Fixed Income Strategies:

Protecting your fixed income investments from inflation


Forgot to take your RMD? How to avoid a penalty


3 advisors on how to build a better portfolio

Unfortunately, this approach exposes their portfolio to additional credit and interest-rate risk while also increasing the correlation to their equity portfolio. The more your fixed income portfolio acts like equities, the more you are taking the exact risk (albeit a little less) that many retirees are trying to avoid without even realizing it.

As you’ve probably surmised, I believe many retirees are looking at bonds and their overall portfolios all wrong. I think bonds, especially in this interest rate environment, should be viewed solely as a safe harbor in the face of significant market declines rather than an income stream through all stock market environments. This being the case, I believe the use of high-quality, short-term bonds held in less quantity than conventionally discussed is a better overall approach to retirement income planning.

The goal of fixed income in a retirement portfolio shouldn’t be total return, but stability and this is where many retirees are missing the boat. In retirement, when the market goes south, there needs to be a dependable asset class to provide the income needed. And generally, short-term high-quality bonds are more likely to provide that stability.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*