Are you on track to have X in your 401K/403B/TSP by X age?

[niq]

I put SS.

We're not on track in *retirement* accounts, but we have a lot of money in taxable investments because of stock-based compensation, so in terms of overall savings we're fine.

College does throw a wrench in this...

[scm1011]

No. I'm at ~2x at 42.

[RockNVoll]

Just to clarify a small point, the Fidelity guidelines don't specify that you should have those amounts saved specifically in retirement vehicles, just that you those amounts saved at all.

[wildrice]

I don't think so. I am 41 and have about 2.5x my salary saved, which is not super far off from target but I can't see that turning into 6x in the next 8 years and 4 months.

My H has half-ish his annual salary saved due to a late start to his career (finishing a PhD in his late 30s) so for HHI we are much further behind than I am personally.

Our HHI changed significantly since we turned 38 so I guess we are more or less on target for what that was, though...

[Alex]

SS
I have a pretty modest salary but have been contributing 10% of my salary to a defined benefit pension plan for the last 23 years. I can retire at 55 with access to extended medical and dental insurance. Canada also has their own version of SS and then an old age pension at 65.
It has definitely felt like golden handcuffs at some points but I'm glad I stayed.

[underwaterrhymes]

Currently, no.

I am 49 and until I started at my current job five years ago, I had nothing saved in retirement.

However, my org has the best match I have ever seen in a nonprofit. I’m contributing 10% and I get between 8% and 11% from them (3% of what they contribute is a quarterly discretionary match that you start to earn after one year and it vests after five).

In a few months, I will have accumulated 1x my salary and if I stay with this job (which, honestly is unlikely) I could retire at 67 with 10x my current salary.

H has a pension and it would not be sufficient for us if he retired today at 47, but if he retires at 65, we will make about 80% of his current salary annually.

So, if everything goes as they are today for the next 17 years (obviously not a sure thing), we should be in better shape than the vast majority of Americans due largely to sheer luck.

[gretchenindisguise]

Nope. We both have PhDs (mine with student loans) so had very delayed starts in retirement savings. And then we went had kids and live in a hcol. We are doing better now but aren’t anywhere near caught up.

[dr.girlfriend]

On the bright side for those with PhDs, I don't see many people with PhDs wanting to retire right at 60 or whatever, and I don't think it's because of necessity. Grad school is a terrible grind of many years with no money, but in a lot of cases the payoff seems to be a job you actually enjoy.

[mlkgls]

Almost. I hit 4x at 45, but it looks like I’ll probably be a little short of 6x at 50. The goal post keeps moving! I’m not complaining though. 

I could save more this year, but I’m not sure that I want to…I flip flop between wanting to spend a little more to enjoy life and omg, I’m so burnt out and want to retire as soon as humanly possible. 

[midwestmama]

I'm 41 and I have about 1.5 times my current salary saved. If I averaged my salaries over the almost 20 years I've been working professionally and contributing to a 401k, then I think I'd be closer to the 3x my salary target. Also, I lost half of my balance in the 2008 crash, and it took a while for that to build back up.

DH (43) is probably closer to 3x his salary. He has always earned more than me, plus he worked for a company for 13 years that had a base 401k contribution, plus company match, plus profit sharing 401k contribution (max annual contribution of 12% of base salary). (He left that company about 5 years ago. I now have worked for that company for 4 years, and I'm just waiting for my 9% base contribution + profit sharing contribution to be deposited in the next few weeks. My 401k balance has almost doubled since I started working at this company.)

If I could have some financial do-overs, one thing I would do is max out our 401k contributions before we had kids, and then step it down if needed once we had kids.

[simpsongal]

Me yes - even w/the loan I took out.
DH no

[cherry1111]

Just me - I have saved 5x in my accounts at 41. I started saving early and sadly while my salary has more than doubled but not grown as quickly as it probably would have if I job hopped.

On his own H is only at 1.4x (he is 42) when considering his old salary. He was laid off in Dec and still looking. He started saving later and his salary grew much fast than mine.

Combined we are at 3x if I include his old salary. I guess where we end up depends on what kind of salary he receives from his future job. I don’t feel too bad about that. Our house is almost paid off and his salary grew quickly in the last few years. Hopefully he’ll get an equal or better new job and we can resume saving at a good rate.

[hbomdiggity]

I would say we are on track for retirement, but not according to that particular metric.

1. We have a good amount of non 401k retirement savings, like stock options and company equity.
2. We contribute the annual pretax max, but with high incomes the percentages skew. Hence number 1 for alternate savings.

[glitzy07]

Me, yes. H, no.

I have 3.2x my current income at the age of 38.
H has 2.9x his current income at the age of 45.

But the thing that I have to consider in that is that the first 15ish years of H's career he qualified for a union pension instead of a 401k, so he started actively contributing to his own retirement vehicles much later in his life than I did. I just hate that we don't have visibility to what those amounts will be when the time comes.

[heygrey]

No, but I don't subscribe to those calculators because they are such a "one size fits all" approach.

Our income has increased drastically in the last 15 years. Combined with years of paying off student loans, years of paying for daycare, we had no way of saving according to those metrics. We may catch up as our income increases and expenses decrease, but our main goal is to reduce our living expenses as much as possible before retirement.

[beachdweller]

Feb 13, 2024 1:04:31 GMT -5 heygrey said:

No, but I don't subscribe to those calculators because they are such a "one size fits all" approach.

Our income has increased drastically in the last 15 years. Combined with years of paying off student loans, years of paying for daycare, we had no way of saving according to those metrics. We may catch up as our income increases and expenses decrease, but our main goal is to reduce our living expenses as much as possible before retirement.

So much this.  I've been lucky enough to earn enough income to max to the federal limit since I got out of grad school at 25 and, 21 years later, I'm markedly behind per the calculators.  While my income has gone up significantly, to earn that income and still have some sense of a (sort of) reasonable work life balance, we spend SO MUCH MONEY we won't spend in retirement.  I have a full time nanny, which is an expense in excess of my not modest mortgage.  Between that expense, retirement savings, college savings and all the kids travels sports $$$$, so many of my expenses now won't be there in retirement.  I figure with a paid off house, I can (more than) easily live on what I should have saved if I just keep plugging along at the same rate until retirement.  

[mae0111]

Feb 13, 2024 11:49:44 GMT -5 beachdweller said:

Feb 13, 2024 1:04:31 GMT -5 heygrey said:

No, but I don't subscribe to those calculators because they are such a "one size fits all" approach.

Our income has increased drastically in the last 15 years. Combined with years of paying off student loans, years of paying for daycare, we had no way of saving according to those metrics. We may catch up as our income increases and expenses decrease, but our main goal is to reduce our living expenses as much as possible before retirement.

So much this.  I've been lucky enough to earn enough income to max to the federal limit since I got out of grad school at 25 and, 21 years later, I'm markedly behind per the calculators.  While my income has gone up significantly, to earn that income and still have some sense of a (sort of) reasonable work life balance, we spend SO MUCH MONEY we won't spend in retirement.  I have a full time nanny, which is an expense in excess of my not modest mortgage.  Between that expense, retirement savings, college savings and all the kids travels sports $$$$, so many of my expenses now won't be there in retirement.  I figure with a paid off house, I can (more than) easily live on what I should have saved if I just keep plugging along at the same rate until retirement.  

I agree with this - we have so many expenses that we simply won’t have in retirement, so I figured out what we’d need to have a nice life with the expenses we will have. I was… not conservative - I’m using a number that is likely well beyond what we’ll need.

Also, I didn’t use my current income as a benchmark because I took a step way back and am only working part time. I couldn’t survive on what I make now. Using the salary multiplier, I probably have 20 times my income saved… because I went from a high income position to a much lower one to improve the quality of our lives. But I couldn’t even eat on what I make, so… not realistic.