Why 67% of Your Retirement Needs to Be in International Stocks

The New Approach to Retirement Investment Strategies

As investors inch closer to retirement, a common trend is to shift towards more conservative investment options. Financial advisors typically recommend gradually reducing equity exposure in favor of bonds and safer cash investments. This shift often reflects a strategy aimed at preserving capital as individuals prepare to enter retirement.

Many individuals adopt this mindset through lifecycle funds, which adjust asset allocations based on the investor's age, transitioning from a growth-oriented approach to a more conservative one. This might typically mean altering a portfolio from a 70/30 or 80/20 stock and bond ratio to something more balanced, such as 60/40 or 50/50 as retirement approaches.

However, recent research challenges this conventional wisdom. A team of scholars asserts that not only should investors maintain their portfolios predominantly in equities, but they should allocate a significant 67% of that equity to international stocks.

The paper titled “Beyond the Status Quo: A Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice” contends that those following traditional lifecycle investing strategies need to save an astounding 61% more pre-retirement funds to achieve the same retirement outcomes as those adhering to an all-equity strategy.

The researchers propose an optimal investment allocation comprising 33% domestic stocks and 67% international stocks, while eliminating bonds and cash completely. They argue this approach dramatically enhances wealth accumulation, promotes effective retirement spending, protects capital, and facilitates leaving a legacy.

The Benefits of an All-Equity Strategy

The researchers investigated investment returns across diverse asset classes drawn from various developed markets, examining domestic stocks, international stocks, government bonds, and bills sourced from 39 nations.

From their analysis, they pinpointed the ideal portfolio mix: 33% in domestic stocks and 67% in international stocks, without allocating any funds to bonds or low-yield investments. This allocation was benchmarked against a balanced strategy of 60% domestic stocks and 40% bonds, along with a typical target-date fund (TDF) that operates on age-based stock and bond strategies.

They discovered that a couple pursuing the balanced strategy would need to save around 19.3% of their income to achieve equivalent retirement utility as a couple following the optimal strategy with only a 10% savings rate from their income. For those utilizing a target-date fund, the required savings jumped to 16.1%, highlighting a 61% increase in necessary contributions for similar results.

Moreover, the researchers revealed that couples adopting the optimal investment tactic would enjoy 50% more retirement wealth than those using the traditional balanced strategy, and 39% more than those relying on TDFs, resulting in more robust income streams for retirees.

They also noted a significantly diminished risk of depleting retirement savings. Under the common 4% withdrawal rule, couples using a balanced strategy faced a 16.9% chance of running out of funds, which increased to 19.7% for TDFs, while the all-equity strategy's probability was only 7.0%.

The Importance of International Diversification

One of the more surprising recommendations is the emphasis on allocating two-thirds of the equity portfolio to international stocks rather than domestic ones. This recommendation stands in stark contrast to the typical lifecycle investing guidance, which does not often prioritize international diversification.

The researchers highlight the necessity of not just incorporating international stocks but giving them substantial weight within a portfolio. Their analysis posits that international stocks should effectively replace bonds, which they see as less appealing for long-term investors due to their modest returns.

The study points out that bonds yield average real returns of approximately 0.95% annually, compared to 7.03% from international equities. While bonds appear less volatile in the short term, their long-term returns diminish significantly.

As time progresses, bonds become more volatile, with their variance increasing substantially compared to the much steadier international stocks. Moreover, the correlation between domestic stocks and bonds rises over long periods, while international stocks maintain a more stable relationship, underscoring their suitability for long-haul investment strategies.

Ultimately, the authors indicate that bonds, while not entirely unsuitable for all investors, may not be the best option for those with a long-term investment horizon. The emphasis lies in the potential of international stocks to enhance diversification, improve long-term growth, and aid in capital preservation.

Conclusion

In light of the presented research, investors are encouraged to reassess their retirement strategies. Allocating 67% of their equity investments internationally could yield significant benefits in wealth generation and capital stability. This newly defined strategy encourages thinking beyond conventional boundaries and indicates that the world of investing is complex, especially when it comes to preparing for retirement.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the recommended allocation for retirement portfolios according to the study?

The study recommends an optimal allocation of 33% in domestic stocks and 67% in international stocks, with no bonds or cash investments.

Why is an all-equity strategy favored by researchers?

The all-equity strategy is favored because it leads to optimal wealth accumulation, better retirement income, and a lower risk of depleting savings compared to traditional strategies.

What are the drawbacks of bonds in retirement investing?

Bonds provide low returns and become more volatile over long periods, making them less attractive for long-term investors.

How does international stock allocation enhance retirement portfolios?

International stock allocation significantly improves long-term returns, capital preservation, and overall investment outcomes, compared to traditional bond investments.

What does the research suggest about lifecycle investment strategies?

The research argues that lifecycle strategies are less effective and that investors should consider a higher allocation to international equities.

About Investors Hangout

Investors Hangout is a leading online stock forum for financial discussion and learning, offering a wide range of free tools and resources. It draws in traders of all levels, who exchange market knowledge, investigate trading tactics, and keep an eye on industry developments in real time. Featuring financial articles, stock message boards, quotes, charts, company profiles, and live news updates. Through cooperative learning and a wealth of informational resources, it helps users from novices creating their first portfolios to experts honing their techniques. Join Investors Hangout today: https://investorshangout.com/

Disclaimer: The content of this article is solely for general informational purposes only; it does not represent legal, financial, or investment advice. Investors Hangout does not offer financial advice; the author is not a licensed financial advisor. Consult a qualified advisor before making any financial or investment decisions based on this article. The author's interpretation of publicly available data shapes the opinions presented here; as a result, they should not be taken as advice to purchase, sell, or hold any securities mentioned or any other investments. The author does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of any material, providing it "as is." Information and market conditions may change; past performance is not indicative of future outcomes. If any of the material offered here is inaccurate, please contact us for corrections.