What Makes an Average Retiree Feel Confident?

New data published by the Employee Benefit Research Institute offers a few answers.

During a recent webinar, Zahra Ebrahimi, a research associate at the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), took a deep dive into her organization’s latest white paper, “Retirees in Profile: Evaluating Five Distinct Lifestyles in Retirement.”

As the title suggests, the analysis offers a close look at the spending patterns and financial behaviors of retirees living in the U.S., grouping them according to the level of financial stability and confidence each feels. The white paper placed retirees into five categories: average retirees, affluent retirees, comfortable retirees, struggling retirees, and just-getting-by retirees.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANSPONSOR newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan benefits news.

Importantly, Ebrahimi pointed out, the data underpinning the analysis is based on a survey of retirees between the ages of 62 and 75, all with less than $1 million in available assets. She said other analyses conducted in this area are often done using a given provider or adviser’s book of business, where there might be major outliers on the upper sides of the wealth and age spectrums, which can in turn affect the final conclusions.

The broad strokes of the analysis might not be surprising to retirement industry practitioners. For example, the findings show that those with higher levels of credit card debt are more likely to be in a group that is outright struggling or just getting by in terms of funding their retirement. Those who are struggling are also much more likely to have significant medical debt—a type of debt that is not at all prevalent among the most financially confident and stable retirees. Ebrahimi noted there is also a clear trend that those who have had a divorce are more likely to be in the struggling or just-getting-by groups, a phenomenon that has been explored in other research.  

“There is little homogeneity when it comes to the path retirees navigate,” Ebrahimi explained. “Factors such as available assets and income in retirement, debt, health status, marital status and even gender impact retirement needs and outcomes.”

The EBRI paper says the “average retiree” group is more likely to report low levels of financial assets ($99,000 or less) and intermediate levels of income (between $40,000 and $100,000 annually), at 58% and 74%, respectively. They were more likely to be married than not, and they reported good health status on average. As Ebrahimi highlighted, just over half of average retirees thought they’d saved enough or more than enough for retirement, and six in 10 average retirees are seeking to maintain or grow their financial assets in retirement.

“When it comes to sources of income, defined benefit [DB] plans play a major role for average retirees, along with Social Security,” Ebrahimi said. ‘Nearly half had credit card debt, and almost as many also had a car loan.”

The majority of average retirees report their standard of living in retirement is unchanged from what it was during their working years, while the average retiree rates their level of satisfaction as 7.8 on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest score.

“This is the largest group in the sample,” Ebrahimi said. “Their characteristics were close to the overall average person in the sample.”

Unsurprisingly, the groups identified as “affluent” and “comfortable” retirees were more likely to have higher levels of financial assets and incomes, and the majority of both groups were mortgage-free homeowners. Across both groups, but even more so among the affluent, these retirees had the highest likelihood of being married. The retirees in these group also have access to more types of retirement income than the retirees in the other groups, with DB pension plans and personal savings being the most commonly cited. 

Among the comfortable retiree group, more cited workplace retirement savings plans such as 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts (IRAs) as important income sources, in addition to Social Security. Credit card and auto loan debt were the most common forms of debt, though only one in three reported having at least one of these debts.

As Ebrahimi explained, “struggling” and “just-getting-by” retirees also have their commonalities—namely lower assets and incomes, and higher amounts of debt of all types.

In the struggling group, only half were homeowners and only a quarter of those did not have a mortgage on their house. One in five report having no debt, while 45% have manageable debt and 20% have unmanageable debt. Female respondents made up the majority of respondents in this group, and the majority were from non-coupled households.

Unlike the affluent, confident, and average retirees, Social Security provides the bulk of retirement income for the retirees in the struggling group, while only one in three cited a pension plan as a major or minor source of income. The majority of struggling retirees believe they have a reduced standard of living compared with when they were working, and retirement life satisfaction rates were the lowest in this group, with an average score of 5.8 on the 1-to-10 scale.

The “just-getting-by” retirees also mostly consist of the retirees with low levels of financial assets and income, but, in contrast to struggling retirees, half own their houses free and clear, while 30% rented and only 17% had mortgages. Also, half of these respondents reported no debt, while the majority of those who did report debt called it easily manageable. Like the struggling group, most of the retirees in this group relied on Social Security as a major source of income, and over half cited personal savings as a major or minor source of income. These retirees scored better than struggling retirees on the retirement life satisfaction scale, averaging 7.2 out of 10.

Ebrahimi said there are clear takeaways that can be parsed from the data. For example, the highest level of educational attainment is a clear distinguishing factor among retiree groups. Most affluent retiree respondents (61%) held a college degree or higher, and more than a quarter (26%) were graduate-degree holders—the highest percentage of any group. In contrast, most of the struggling retirees and just-getting-by retirees had only a high school diploma or some college education.

Also, a person’s employment level prior to retirement is another important factor. Affluent retirees reported predominantly white-collar pre-retirement employment, defined in the survey as “executive, senior manager, mid-level or lower-level manager, professional or technical, administrative, and other white-collar employment.” Roughly three-quarters of average retirees and comfortable retirees reported have been employed in a professional capacity as well. In contrast, the two less confident groups were more likely to report blue-collar employment as their pre-retirement employment status.

The data shows health and wealth status are closely linked, too. Asked to rate their health status on a scale of 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent), struggling retirees scored the lowest (an average of 6) in terms of self-reported health status, followed by those who are just getting by, at 6.8. In comparison, average retirees, affluent retirees and comfortable retirees reported better health status, with average scores of 7 to 7.4.

Technology and Personalization Play a Part in Next Gen Retirement Income

Helping DC plan participants create retirement income starts with the savings experience and includes using technology to offer customization opportunities, as well as non-guaranteed and guaranteed investments.

One of the greatest financial challenges facing individuals is generating an adequate amount of income in retirement, PGIM, the global asset management business of Prudential Financial Inc., notes in its survey report, “The Holy Grail of DC: Income in Retirement.” The report is the third in the firm’s “The Evolving Defined Contribution Landscape” research series.

PGIM finds that while defined contribution (DC) retirement plans have undergone significant evolutions over the past four decades, they still fall short in providing workers with lifetime retirement security. Retirement income solutions are increasingly becoming more relevant and necessary.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANSPONSOR NEWSDash daily newsletter.

“We believe there isn’t going to be a one-size-fits-all approach, but there are many steps plan sponsors can take to support their employees’ retirement-income objectives—evaluating plan design enhancements, educational tools and resources, investment and distribution advice, enhanced administrative functionalities, and investment solutions designed to provide income throughout retirement,” PGIM says.

“In addition to investment options, plan design and communications play a critical role in helping workers solve for lifetime income,” says Josh Cohen, PGIM head of institutional defined contribution.

“When we think about income in retirement, it goes far beyond offering in-plan income solutions,” says Renee Schaaf, president, retirement and income solutions, at Principal Financial Group. “It starts with the participant experience and education: getting started saving for retirement and getting educated about financial wellness. It all points to getting participants ready for retirement and includes a safety net of income that manages longevity and inflation risk.”

To begin, it’s critical that participants start saving, because if they are not doing so, they won’t have any assets to use for income in retirement, Schaaf says. Using digital tools and techniques to create incredible experiences for participants will help, she adds.

“We’ve made a lot of investment in Principal Real Start,” she says, referring to the firm’s participant onboarding platform. “It is engaging and intuitive and we’ve found participants defer about 60% more [with Principal Real Start] than when they join the plan through normal enrollment channels.”

Once participants are contributing to employer-sponsored DC plans, plan sponsors should educate them about financial wellness overall, Schaaf says. Embedding digital tools into the participant experience helps them understand that what they do today will have a profound impact on their future, she adds.

Plan sponsors surveyed by PGIM indicate stable value funds are the most common retirement income solution, with 54% offering them in their 401(k) plan, followed closely by income funds in a target-date fund (TDF) series (50%). Other investment solutions offered include long-duration fixed-income funds, managed accounts, in-plan and out-of-plan annuity products, and managed payout funds. However, 23% of plan sponsors indicate they do not offer any retirement income solutions as part of their investment menu.

Schaaf says traditional TDFs and asset allocation tools made available to participants might not go far enough in helping create retirement income.

“There’s a need to really personalize the participant experience based on individual risk profiles, time horizons and other assets they may have,” she says. “There are now managed accounts that provide advice and take what the participant is willing to input to continue to manage investments on an ongoing basis. Participants can get help with what investments to choose, how much to save, when to retire and when to take Social Security.”

Schaaf says some TDFs allow participants to specify their risk tolerance, but she thinks the next generation of asset allocation funds will be more personalized. “I think the quickest way to get there is through managed accounts,” she says.

When thinking about the need for retirement income guarantees, annuities can play an important role, depending on a person’s specific circumstances, Schaaf says. Principal has offered its Pension Builder retirement income solution for at least two years, she says. It embeds deferred income annuity sleeves into participants’ investments. Principal is exploring incorporating that option inside TDFs.

Pension Builder includes an institutionally priced annuity. If a plan sponsor chooses to make income guarantees available to participants, they have the opportunity to contribute a portion of their deferrals into the annuity.

“The SECURE [Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement] Act went a long way to adding certainty to this product,” Schaaf says. “The law provided fiduciary relief to plan sponsors when making products like this available.”

The PGIM research shows that the No. 1 step plan sponsors have taken to increase employee understanding of retirement readiness continues to be offering tools and advice on how to spend down in retirement, with 89% of total respondents saying that was their primary mechanism to prepare participants. The next-highest-ranked response was communicating account balances to participants in terms of projected retirement income, with 66% of overall respondents choosing this option.

The research also suggests there is an opportunity for sponsors to review their plan’s available distribution types. Providing systematic withdrawals, as opposed to a single lump-sum distribution, is a great step to provide more distribution flexibility to retirees and may allow them to set up an automated retirement paycheck, according to PGIM. Less than 50% of plans with assets between $100 million and $1 billion allow systematic withdrawals, while about one-third of plans greater than $1 billion still don’t allow systematic withdrawals, the survey found.

“Communicating lifetime income projections, which will be required for DC plans subject to ERISA [the Employee Retirement Income Security Act] thanks to the SECURE Act, and allowing systematic withdrawals are relatively simple enhancements plan sponsors can make to have a positive impact on employees’ retirement income streams,” Cohen says.

According to PGIM, the next generation of retirement income solutions should deliver both guaranteed lifetime income as well as non-guaranteed components that leverage asset allocation and asset-structure best practices, liability-driven investing (LDI) concepts and institutional investments.

The survey found that many plan sponsors recognize there is a need to offer retirement income solutions through a technology-enabled customized solution for pre-retirees and retirees: 72% of respondents said they strongly agree or somewhat agree that there will be a need for such solutions.

“Plan sponsors need to evolve their defined contribution plans to focus not only on retirement savings, but also achieving adequate retirement outcomes,” Cohen says. “By embracing new technologies, robust income communications, customization opportunities, and risk mitigation solutions with both non-guaranteed and guaranteed investments, DC plans have the potential to help workers meet their retirement income challenges.”

«