Missing the Target? Retirement Expectations and Target Date Funds
SSRN Electronic Journal
2021
- 1Citations
- 2,376Usage
- 1Captures
- 5Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Most Recent News
Fake Crypto Threats, Medicare Price Wars: News for Financial Advisers
A roundup of the latest of interest to financial advisers includes research on the Great American Retirement Fraud, fearless forecasts, and the problem with Roth
Article Description
Do households make errors when forming retirement expectations, and if so, are they economically important? Leveraging nearly three decades of panel data, we reveal that individuals consistently underestimate their long-term labor participation. This paper introduces a novel model of endogenous retirement choice, integrating biases in life expectancy to quantify the welfare costs. While sub-optimal risk allocation has a marginal impact, inconsistent choices over time lower overall welfare. Errors cost the median respondent over $22,216 in retirement wealth or 12% of certainty equivalent wealth. Cross-sectional analysis suggests that a combination of behavioral biases, risk-aversion, and socioeconomic factors relate to expectation errors.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know