Jump to content

MNGopher

Members
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm about the same distance from retirement as you and I have the TR 2025 in my 403B. Vanguard recently reduced the expense ratios on these funds in their 403Bs. I think it's .09% instead of the .13% they have listed, but don't quote me on that number exactly.
  2. The main thing is put as much as you can afford in your tax advantaged accounts. It's always good to have a mix of tax deferred and Roth. Higher income years defer more. Lower income years do more Roth.
  3. https://www.investmentnews.com/article/20190304/FREE/190309976/vanguard-share-of-target-date-fund-market-becoming-obscene The drop to .09 expense ratio certainly doesn't hurt.
  4. Great news for you! The 403B(7) is non-annuitized and is a much better option for you for all the reason krow36 mentioned, plus I would assume, no surrender fee, and in general just easier to track your investments and performance. The "sub accounts" of traditional 403B annuities are very confusing and difficult to track what you are actually invested in.
  5. https://clark.com/insurance/variable-annuities-vs-life-annuities-by-the-number/ Not a new article, but pretty much straight to the point.
  6. When I switched my 403B to Vanguard the paperwork was called an exchange/transfer form. For mine it did require a signature of Third Party Administrator, so I had to mail it to them with a SASE and they forwarded it on to Vanguard. I'm not sure that every custodian has the same requirements though.
  7. True, but I have more in taxable then 403B (because of bad 403B choices most of my career), so I figure I might as well spend that first (pre 59.5).
  8. I read an interesting post on Bogleheads the other day. The poster was early 50's with a 50/50 allocation. He said that he only rebalanced one way, meaning that when stocks appreciated and hit his band, he would sell and buy bonds to get back to 50/50. But if stocks dropped, he wouldn't sell bonds to buy stocks. He just left it alone and continued to make his regular contributions as normal. I believe he had something like 20 years of minimal spending needs in fixed income, and wanted to keep it at that level.
  9. The woman in the example in this article (Susan) has about the same pension and social security payout that I am projecting for myself. I don't have anywhere near a million in tax deferred and I plan to retire at 57 or 58, with the help of taxable savings between age 57-59.5, 403 B between 59.5 and full retirement age (67), and Roth whenever extra is needed. I would question why she would work until 70 with that much deferred and a good pension only to start huge RMDs immediately. I would have retired sooner! I realize she is probably just a hypothetical example to make a point.
  10. ^ Agreed. I don't expect rebalancing to necessarily improve performance in the short term. I expect it to keep me at my desired risk tolerance which hopefully works out well long term.
  11. Thanks, I will check out that m* feature.
  12. Vanguard won't figure my 403B (now managed by Newport Group) in with my other Roth and taxable accounts. 403B is up 4.9% ytd thru 1/30/19 Roth and taxable are up 6.2% ytd thru today 1/31/19. I'm feeling good about maxing my Roth on Jan. 2 instead of DCA for the first time.
  13. Not a problem. I get suspicious of any investing product that is offered by an insurance company, especially one that has ripped me off in the past. In this case it appears the OP has good options in his plan.
  14. Yes, of course they are different. As you yourself noted though, he didn't specify that he was with a medical organization and not K-12 in his initial post to which I was responding. I don't know anything about medical employee plans, but I would assume it is still wise to investigate all fees.
×
×
  • Create New...