Important information - the value of investments and the income from them can go down as well as up, so you may get back less than you invest.

One of the biggest questions we face as we head towards retirement is: ‘how much is enough?’

It is a surprisingly difficult question to answer.

Unfortunately, for many of us, who will not enjoy an inflation-linked final salary pension, it is a question that we can’t avoid.

Going forward, most people are likely to end their working lives with a pot of money and a daunting task - working out how to make it last.

To do that we have to take stock of where we stand financially, and to make a few assumptions. Some of the things we have to take a view on simply don’t have an answer - like how long we are going to live or how much the value of our money will be eroded over the years by inflation. But we can’t ignore these questions just because they are difficult.

One of the big unknowns is how hard we will have to make our savings work for us in order to achieve our financial goals.

To put it another way: what is our required rate of return?

We need this figure in order to decide where and how to invest our money. It could determine whether we need to chase the stock market’s historically higher returns or can sit back and relax with our money safe and sound in a deposit account - or somewhere in between.

We may need to take a few calculated risks along the way to get where we’d like to go. But, equally, we may be in the fortunate position of being able to follow a less risky path than we thought. Either way, it’s good to know where we stand.

Meet Peter

To illustrate this retirement challenge, we have mapped the pre- and post-retirement plans of a group of imaginary but realistic personas, and we plan to tell their stories over the next few weeks.

Our first case study is a 52-year-old man, Peter. He has enjoyed a generous company pension over his 30-year career with a financial services company. Over that time, he has built up a useful pension pot, worth £500,000. He earns £4,000 a month after tax, but he has probably peaked in terms of promotions. Nevertheless, he expects his salary to rise in line with inflation for the eight years that he wants to continue working full time.

From the age of 60, Peter anticipates adjusting his work/life balance significantly. He enjoys his job but knows he will have no problem filling his time with charity work and hobbies when he cuts down from five days a week to two and a half. He plans to work part-time until his state pension kicks in at the age of 67.

Peter is in good health and is planning on the assumption that he will live until the age of 90. But he recognises that he may have a longer life, so he wants to ensure that at this age he still has sufficient funds for an even longer retirement - his target is somewhere around £600,000 at this age.

Peter’s assumptions:

  • He starts with a pension pot worth £500,000 at the age of 52.
  • His starting salary of £4,000 a month, after tax, will rise in line with inflation throughout the remainder of his working life.
  • Peter’s salary will halve at the age of 60 and then stop completely at the age of 67.
  • He assumes that the Bank of England will achieve its target of 2% inflation over the whole period. Just as his salary rises by this figure while he is working, he plans to increase the amount of income he takes from his pension pot by the same percentage amount once he starts to draw down his savings.
  • He will start to receive the state pension at 67. It will have risen in value by then in line with the 2.5% minimum growth rate stipulated in the government’s ‘triple lock’ guarantee. This means that by the time he starts to receive the state pension it will have risen from £800 a month (after a notional 20% tax charge) today to about £1,150 and it will continue to rise by 2.5% annually for the rest of his life.
  • While he is still working full time, he will pay 12.5% of his net salary into his pension pot. His contributions are paid out of gross income so they are increased by 25% in our model. He stops contributions at the age of 60.
  • He plans to draw down just enough money from his pension pot from the date of his semi-retirement until full retirement to maintain the income he enjoyed while working full time, after adjusting for the amount he was paying into his pension.
  • Because the income he takes from his pension is taxable, he takes out 25% more from his pot than he needs, in order to be able to meet his tax liability each year. This is a simplification - it takes no account of tax-free allowances.
  • At full retirement, Peter is prepared to reduce his take-home pay by another 20%.

What is Peter’s required rate of return?

Peter is pleasantly surprised to learn that, on the basis of these assumptions, his required rate of return is a manageable 5% a year for the next 15 years until he starts to receive his state pension. Thereafter, he only has to earn 4% a year in order to receive the income he requires and to still end up with a pot worth £580,000 at the age of 90.

There are a few reasons for this surprisingly good outcome:

  • Peter started saving early and had built up a significant pension pot by his early 50s. Building capital as early as possible is an essential ingredient of planning for a comfortable retirement.
  • He avoids being wholly reliant on drawing an income from his pension pot by staying in part time work until his state pension kicks in. Extending the period in which he earns at least part of his required income makes a big difference to the rate at which he needs to deplete his pension pot.
  • He continues to contribute to his pension while he still can. Keeping his pension topped up ensures that when he starts to draw money down from his pot, it is in a healthy state.
  • He is realistic about the income he can afford to pay himself once he stops earning. Peter knows that he needs to cut his cloth to match his reduced means once he reaches retirement.
  • Inflation is benign.

Peter’s reasonable required rate of return means he is able to rethink his investment strategy. Having spent many years chasing the best returns he can and accepting the volatility this entails, he moves some of his pension pot into a low-risk cash fund. His reward for saving hard through his working life and living within his means is being able to get on with his life and worry less about what’s happening in the financial markets.

Future-proofing Peter’s retirement

The scenario outlined above is a good base case - it is shown by the dark blue line in the chart. But Peter understands that small changes - both positive and negative - to a range of variables can make a big difference over a period of nearly 40 years.

So Peter models a few other scenarios to see what the impact of minor adjustments will be on how much he ends up with at the age of 90 and how this will change his required rate of return.

Scenario B: Base Case +

In this scenario, Peter assumes that he can realistically earn a slightly higher return on his investments than the 5% while working and 4% in retirement outlined in Scenario A: Base Case.

Assumptions:

  • All assumptions are the same as the Base Case, except:
    • Peter earns 6% on his investments while working instead of 5% but still only earns 4% on his investments in retirement.
    • He reduces his income in retirement by 10% rather than 20% in the Base Case.

Outcome: This is a better outcome than the Base Case. Peter still gets to ease into retirement with part-time working during his 60s. He maintains his income while in semi-retirement (after adjusting for the fact that he is no longer contributing to his pension). Despite taking a smaller cut in post-retirement income, he ends up with a bigger cushion at age 90 of £680,000.

Scenario C: Higher inflation

Given how difficult it has been for the Bank of England to bring inflation back to its 2% target, Peter assumes that inflation may be permanently higher. This scenario models a 3% inflation rate throughout the period instead of the 2% assumed in scenarios A and B.

Assumptions:

  • Peter’s income and the money he draws down from his pot in retirement grow at 3% a year instead of 2% in the previous scenarios.
  • The state pension also rises at 3% a year.
  • Peter assumes that his required rate of return can still be 6% while working and 4% in retirement.

Outcome: Unfortunately, the increase in the inflation rate has a bigger impact than Peter expected. Most importantly, it increases the amount that Peter has to take out of his pension pot each year in order to maintain his desired standard of living. By the time he reaches the age of 88, his pot has run out. This makes this scenario unviable.

Scenario D: Managing higher inflation

Planning for a higher rate of inflation requires Peter to push for a slightly higher return on his investments in retirement and to accept a bigger drop in income.

Assumptions:

  • Peter adjusts the required rate of return in retirement from 4% in the previous scenarios to 5%. The rate of return while working remains at 6%.
  • He reverts to a 20% drop in income at age 67, matching the reduction assumed in the Base Case scenario.

Outcome: Making these relatively small adjustments rescues his retirement outcome compared to the higher inflation Scenario C. By the age of 90, Peter has £740,000, the safest outcome so far but requiring a higher investment return throughout his life and sacrificing some retirement income.

Scenario E: CHILL - working for longer

Neither the inflation rate nor the rate of return Peter can achieve on his investments are really in his gift. What he can control, however, is when he chooses to stop full-time working, so this scenario assumes a three-year delay to the move from full-time to part-time working.

Assumptions:

  • The only change compared with Scenario D is that the move to part-time working happens at 63. Everything else remains the same.
  • Peter’s required rate of return is still 6% while working and 5% in retirement.

Outcome: By adopting the CHILL mantra - career happiness inspires longer lives - Peter transforms his retirement outcome. By working for three more years, continuing to contribute to his pension and deferring the point at which he starts to draw down from his pension pot, he ends up with £1.25m at the age of 90.

Scenario F: CHILLER - working for longer, higher income

Peter decides that he does not need to end up with this much at the age of 90 and so he chooses to take a smaller reduction in income - 10% from full retirement at 67 rather than 20% in the previous scenario.

Assumptions:

  • The only change compared with Scenario E is that the drop in income is reduced from 20% to 10%.
  • His required rate of return remains at 6% while working and 5% in retirement.

Outcome: Taking more income in retirement reduces the amount left in the pension pot at the age of 90 from £1,250,000 to £770,000. This is still a very comfortable cushion, that ensures Peter has no money worries at the end of his life.

Small changes, big impact

By modelling small adjustments in the variables that impact his retirement planning, Peter is able to see the big impact they might have on his financial position in retirement.

In particular, it is clear what a significant impact the rate of inflation has on this kind of long-term planning. Even a small increase in the rate can require meaningful adjustments to the income we take, the return we have to achieve on our investments or the point at which we can safely retire.

There are a number of different levers that Peter can pull in order to end up in a sweet spot at age 90, balancing his desire to minimise financial worries in his old age but at the same time to enjoy as high a standard of living as he can afford. But the sooner he understands the impact of the changes he can control, and the ones he cannot, the better.

In future articles we will examine the different challenges faced by investors at different stages of their lives and in different financial situations.

More on planning for retirement

Important information - investors should note that the views expressed may no longer be current and may have already been acted upon. Before investing into a fund, please read the relevant key information document which contains important information about the fund. Eligibility to invest in a SIPP and tax treatment depends on personal circumstances and all tax rules may change in the future. Withdrawals from a SIPP will not normally be possible until you reach age 55 (57 from 2028). An investment in a money market fund is different from an investment in deposits, as the principal invested in a money market fund is capable of fluctuation. Fidelity’s money market funds do not rely on external support for guaranteeing the liquidity of the money market funds or stabilising the NAV per unit or share. An investment in a money market fund is not guaranteed. This information is not a personal recommendation for any particular investment. If you are unsure about the suitability of an investment you should speak to one of Fidelity’s advisers or an authorised financial adviser of your choice.

Share this article

Latest articles

Where to find the best dividends

Reinvested income still drives the lion’s share of long-term returns


Jemma Slingo

Jemma Slingo

Fidelity International


Richard Evans

Richard Evans

Fidelity International

Taxes: jargon buster

Understanding the taxes you may need to pay in the UK


Oliver Griffin

Oliver Griffin

Fidelity International