Compare retirement allocations and transition schedules

Allocation Analysis asks how much early-retirement protection a different mix may provide

Retirement Allocation Analysis compares the classified stock and fixed-income portion of the current portfolio with alternative static mixes and transition schedules. Its central question is not “Which allocation earns the most?” It is whether a different balance of growth and defense improves resilience around retirement without giving up more long-term wealth than the household is willing to trade.

Each candidate is applied to the same generated economic path. That paired design makes differences more informative than unrelated simulations because the market sample is held constant while the allocation changes.

Do not change allocation merely because the comparison is available

Use the analysis when retirement is approaching, withdrawals are beginning, the current portfolio is concentrated, or the plan appears sensitive to early losses. If the current mix is intentional and the alternatives do not improve a measure that matters, no change is required.

Begin by checking classified and excluded assets. Cash, real estate, commodities, fixed contractual returns, and unclassified holdings remain outside the adjustable stock-and-fixed-income sleeve. A target applies to the virtual pooled exposure; it is not an instruction to make every account individually match the percentage.

Markov is unavailable because the current Markov model does not produce distinct stock and fixed-income returns. Choose a supported return model and compare schedules under the same plan, seed, and run count.

Compare static mixes, transitions, and bond tents on equal terms

Enable the comparison and keep a small set of meaningful candidates. A static mix holds one target. A gradual or custom transition changes exposure over specified years. A bond tent becomes more defensive near retirement and later reverses. Candidate schedules replace the saved fixed-income glide-path rule for this analysis so the two rules do not stack.

Review the multiplied workload before running. Then compare success, five-, ten-, and fifteen-year retirement survival, P10 and median ending assets, maximum drawdown, depletion timing, and paired differences.

The safety-reserve reference totals projected spending and modeled taxes less Social Security, defined-benefit, and property income for the first retirement years. It is not one current spending number multiplied by five, ten, or fifteen, and it does not guarantee that a bond allocation can meet every liability.

Read resilience and opportunity cost together

A more defensive candidate may reduce drawdown or improve early survival while lowering median or upside wealth. A more aggressive candidate may do the reverse. Read the size and timing of both effects rather than treating one success percentage as the entire decision.

Confirm that the requested retirement horizon exists; YARCalc labels an incomplete reserve instead of extrapolating missing years. Check that current holdings were classified as intended and that the comparison used the same saved model, seed, run count, and schedule.

Interpretation statements use documented materiality thresholds to describe evidence and tradeoffs. They do not issue a universal allocation recommendation.

The comparison does not locate assets or execute a transition

This analysis does not choose tax wrappers, tax lots, individual bonds, funds, or trades. Dividend and tax metadata remain based on saved holdings even while the portfolio exposure is tested virtually.

Net unrealized appreciation (NUA) treatment for employer stock is not modeled. A virtual allocation change does not identify qualifying shares, calculate basis and appreciation components, distribute stock in kind, or compare the specialized tax treatment with a rollover.

Current Market can test a user-entered defensive target against Treasury and TIPS curves. Executable ladders, security availability, transaction cost, tax treatment, and the household’s actual risk tolerance require separate implementation work.