根據(jù)經(jīng)驗法則，每兩個退休計劃中，必然有一個會有缺陷或不足而不合格。這是為什么呢？我們又該如何避免？

即使腰纏萬貫，富人也害怕人活著，錢沒了。盡管有諸多技術(shù)助力，以及一系列退休規(guī)劃，但仍不能絕對地肯定我們的計算和退休計劃最終會如我們所愿。原因是多方面的：人為因素和技術(shù)因素導(dǎo)致每兩個退休計劃中就有一個計劃不能實現(xiàn)目標(biāo)。如果已知到達理想目的地的概率只有50%，您還會登機嗎？

人為因素包括金融心理試探，如主觀估值錯誤以及選擇性感知、非理性決策和實施不一致。人喜歡與自己和平相處，與世界和平相處，在后半生更是如此。所謂的“認知失調(diào)”即經(jīng)濟學(xué)家馬克斯﹒呂舍爾·馬蒂（Max Lüscher Marty）所稱的思想與行為矛盾：“說‘我吸煙，吸煙有害健康’的人都出現(xiàn)了認知失調(diào)。說‘我吸煙，吸煙讓我平靜’的人都表現(xiàn)出了認知恒定?！毙袨榻鹑趯W(xué)仍然只關(guān)注投資過程，尋求解釋為什么投資者高買低賣，或者為什么我們貪婪地搞加密貨幣投機生意。關(guān)鍵是延伸行為心理學(xué)洞察，深入了解退休規(guī)劃過程。

此外還有技術(shù)因素，包括導(dǎo)致“偽知識”或“偽可靠性”的假設(shè)。具體包括對通貨膨脹、利率和預(yù)期壽命的假設(shè)，以及忽視我們無法量化或衡量但仍然存在或發(fā)生的風(fēng)險，但這仍然可能發(fā)生：我們稱之為不確定性。經(jīng)濟、監(jiān)管或政治環(huán)境中可能存在不確定性，不確定性與自然、氣候或我們的健康有關(guān)。雖然我們無法利用數(shù)學(xué)模型來預(yù)測它們發(fā)生的概率，但僅憑這一點并不意味著可以否定不確定性。

實際上，人們消耗資產(chǎn)時通常遵循4%法則。許多財富管理者、退休規(guī)劃者和金融影響者仍然推崇“Bengen法則”，即假設(shè)每年消耗4%的資產(chǎn)，這樣做很安全，可以保住投資。但是，在科學(xué)上早已證明這一規(guī)則是錯誤的（例如，W.Pfau在2017年推翻了這項規(guī)則）。

按照4%法則，源源不斷地從資產(chǎn)中抽取資金。然而，開始退出時遭遇強烈的市場負面波動嚴重不利于長期財富前景?？上?，許多退休規(guī)劃者忽視了這種被稱為回報序列風(fēng)險的影響，導(dǎo)致退休人員在享受良好健康和長壽的同時也可能會耗盡資金。

如果在退休規(guī)劃一開始就盡早解決錯誤，那么在很大程度上可以避免此類錯誤。因此，退休顧問應(yīng)具備實踐經(jīng)驗，掌握最新知識和豐富的實操技能。

風(fēng)險是無法完全避免的，通常，最大的風(fēng)險就是不再冒險。不做決定也是一種決定，不過這是個糟糕的決定。沒有絕對的確定性，但確定在人力所及的范圍已盡人事是非常有益。在您能平靜而滿足地回顧往昔，享受退休生活而不必擔(dān)心經(jīng)濟問題時，就已經(jīng)實現(xiàn)了自己的目標(biāo)。

以下為Reto Spring老師的原稿

Why retirement plans go wrong – and how to get them right

As a rule of thumb, one in two retirement plans must be disqualified as flawed and inadequate. What are the reasons and how can mistakes be avoided?

Even wealthy people are afraid of having life left at the end of their money. And despite many technical aids and a great deal of retirement planning, there is no absolute certainty that our calculations and retirement plans will work out as we wish. Reasons are manyfold: human as well as technical factors make about every second retirement plan missing its targets. Would you board a plane if you knew that the probability of reaching your desired destination would be only 50%?

Human factors include financial psychological heuristics such as subjective valuation errors as well as selective perception, irrational decisions and inconsistent implementations. People like to be at peace with themselves and the world, and more so in the second half of their life. There is a bon mot about "cognitive dissonance," as contradictions in thinking and acting are called, by the economist Max Lüscher-Marty: "Whoever states, I smoke, and smoking is harmful to health, experiences cognitive dissonance. Whoever states, I smoke, and smoking calms me down, experiences cognitive constancy." Behavioral finance still focuses exclusively on the investment process, seeking explanations for why investors buy at highs and exit at lows, or why we greedily speculate in cryptocurrencies. The key here is to extend behavioral psychology insights to the retirement planning process.

More technical factors include assumptions leading to "fake knowledge" or "pseudo reliability." These include assumptions about inflation, interest rates and life expectancy, as well as the neglect of risks that we cannot quantify or measure, but that nevertheless exist or may occur: Let's call them uncertainties. These can occur in the economic, regulatory, or political environment, have to do with nature, the climate or our health. Just because we can't cast the probability of occurrence in a mathematical model, doesn't mean we can negate it.

In practice, people when depleting their assets, often adhere to the 4% rule. Many wealth managers, retirement planners, and financial influencers still advocate the "Bengen Rule", which postulates that if you consume 4% of your assets each year, you are on the safe side and will preserve your investment. Though, the rule has been scientifically disproved for long (e.g., W. Pfau in 2017).

According to the 4 % rule, money is continuously withdrawn from the assets. However, strong negative market fluctuations at the beginning of the withdrawal process will be seriously detrimental for the long-term wealth perspective. Unfortunately, this effect, known as sequence of return risk, is disregarded by many retirement planners, with the effect that retirees, while enjoying good health and a long life, may run out of money.

Mistakes of such kind can be avoided to a large extent, if they are early addressed at the beginning of retirement planning. To this end, retirement advisors should have practical experience, up-to-date knowledge as well as implementation skills.

Risks cannot be completely avoided. Often, the biggest risk is to take no more risk. And not making a decision is also a decision, though a bad one. There is no absolute certainty. But the certainty of having done everything humanly possible is highly beneficial enough. You reach your goal when you can look back on your life calmly and contentedly and enjoy your retirement with no financial worries.

Reto Spring is a Swiss financial planner. He holds a Swiss Postgraduate Diploma of Higher Education in Financial Planning (Financial Planning Expert) and a Certified Financial Planner (CFP) license. He is the Chairman of the Swiss Financial Planners Association FPVS. Reto has been working as an independent fee-based advisor for physicians and entrepreneurs with a focus on retirement planning. Today, he lectures financial planning at Swiss educational institutions and publishes regularly. Reto Spring is also a regular lecturer and columnist for the IfFP Swiss Wealth Management Professional Training Center Shanghai.

Reto Spring

雷托·斯普林

瑞士金融理財規(guī)劃師

??IfFP財富管理專業(yè)培訓(xùn)中心（上海）的常駐講師和專欄作家瑞士金融理財規(guī)劃師

??擁有瑞士理財規(guī)劃高等教育研究生文憑（理財規(guī)劃專家）和注冊理財規(guī)劃師（CFP）執(zhí)照

??現(xiàn)任瑞士財務(wù)規(guī)劃師協(xié)會FPVS主席

??一直為醫(yī)生和企業(yè)家提供獨立的收費咨詢服務(wù)，重點專注于退休規(guī)劃方面。

??在瑞士教育機構(gòu)教授金融理財規(guī)劃課程，并定期出版作品

| 免責(zé)聲明 |

1. 本文所有觀點不構(gòu)成任何投資建議，您仍需根據(jù)您的獨立判斷做出您的投資決策，本嗶哩嗶哩號不對投資后果承擔(dān)任何法律責(zé)任。

2. 本文轉(zhuǎn)載的所有文章、圖片等資料的版權(quán)歸版權(quán)所有人所有，本文采用的非原創(chuàng)文章及圖片等內(nèi)容無法一一和版權(quán)者聯(lián)系，如果本文所選內(nèi)容的文章作者及編輯認為其作品不宜供大家瀏覽，請及時與我們聯(lián)系，以迅速采取適當(dāng)措施，避免給雙方造成不必要的損失。

?

- The End -

?

來源：IfFP瑞士財富管理專業(yè)培訓(xùn)中心

ID：IfFP瑞士財富管理專業(yè)培訓(xùn)中心 非授權(quán)不得轉(zhuǎn)載，侵權(quán)必究