The pros and cons of investing your retirement assets 100% in equity, including half in international stocks. Why the 4% spending rule is too aggressive.Why historical asset class return studies that use only U.S. data are biasedHow researchers build a broader database to study retirement outcomes and spending ratesHow a 100% stock portfolio performed compared to balanced portfolios and target date fundsWhy investors should have half their assets in international stocksWhy a 4% spending rule is too high, and what is the alternativeSponsorNetSuite – Get your free KPI checklistInsiders Guide Email NewsletterGet our free Investors' Checklist when you sign up for the free Money for the Rest of Us email newsletterOur Premium ProductsAsset CampMoney for the Rest of Us PlusShow NotesBeyond the Status Quo: A Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice by Aizhan Anarkulova, Scott Cederburg, and Michael S. O'Doherty—SSRNThe Safe Withdrawal Rate: Evidence from a Broad Sample of Developed Markets by Aizhan Anarkulova, Scott Cederburg, Michael S. O'Doherty, and Richard W. Sias—SSRNRelated Episodes421: Beware of Survivorship Bias When Investing326: The New Math of Retirement Spending and Investing254: Should You Be 100% Invested In Stocks?250: Investing Rule One: Avoid RuinSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.