Nevin's Data "Points"

A recent headline  in  The Wall Street Journal  started off: “Forget the 401(k).” And then, unintentionally, proceeded to explain why that would be… nuts. Not that the author (Jason Zweig) didn’t throw in some digs at the subject, making a glancing reference to what he termed “the rigid and often paltry 401(k)s that workers have today” before going on to berate America’s retirement plan, dismissively claiming that “there’s little question that the 401(k) as we know it just isn’t getting the job done.” That, of course, depends on what one considers “the job” – though, to his credit - and I generally appreciate Jason's perspectives - he didn’t fall into the common journalistic device  of pining for the “good old days of the defined benefit plan.” Quite the contrary, he bluntly proclaims (in language that one rarely sees attributed to DB plans) that even in their heyday, “defined-benefit plans were, in fact, sporadic, arbitrary and unfair.” (This is a pervasive myth

Valentine's Day was this week, and you have perhaps seen those increasingly ubiquitous advertisements for a certain online florist. Now, I’ve used that particular service on many an occasion over the past several years; they are not only convenient, they deliver a quality product, and on time. In sum, I’ve used them before, have, in fact, used them this year, and will doubtless use them again. The ads tout the ability to get a dozen roses for $24.99. That’s in red only (but hey, it’s Valentine’s Day), and you do actually get a glass vase included in that price (with options to “upgrade,” of course). That said, “standard” delivery is another $12.99, and – at least at this (late) date, it’ll cost you $9.99 to guarantee Valentine’s Day delivery, another $14.99 if you want it there in the morning, and there’s a “care & handling charge” of $2.99, regardless of delivery date or time. In fact, by the time you add in taxes those $24.99 roses will run you… well,

It is customary when sharing (or reading) the portents of a survey to focus on the actions that respondents say they have, or will undertake. But what about the things they say they will not  do? Human beings gravitate toward “norms,” of course. Plan sponsors, certainly those conscious of the personal liability that accompanies those responsibilities, can hardly be blamed for seeking the behavioral norms of their profession, drawing comfort from the collective movement of the “pack,” particularly with new and/or controversial ideas. Large ‘Charge’ This past weekend I was reviewing Alight Solution’s 2019 Hot Topics in Retirement and Financial Wellbeing report . But, while the positive trendlines on things like financial wellness were interesting, what struck me in reviewing this particular survey were the (relatively) strong percentage weighing in on things they said they were not likely to do, including: evaluate phased retirement alternatives (66% not likely to

Will your portfolio rise with the Rams – or get pummeled by the Patriots? That’s what adherents of the so-called Super Bowl Theory would likely conclude. The Super Bowl Theory holds that when a team from the old National Football League wins the Super Bowl, the S&P 500 will rise, and when a team from the old American Football League prevails, stock prices will fall. It’s a “theory” that has been found to be correct nearly 80% of the time – for 40 of the 52 Super Bowls, in fact. Not that it hasn’t had its shortcomings. One need look back no further than last year’s win by the NFC champion Philadelphia Eagles against the AFC Champion Patriots (who once were the AFL’s Boston Patriots) to find an instance where it turned out to be a loser, market-wise, with the S&P 500 down more than 6% (though for most of the year it was quite a different story). Ditto the year before when the epic comeback by those same AFC Champion Patriots against the NFC champion Atlanta Fa