Episode 46 - The Magic Number
29:18
Todd Pisarczyk & Nik Miner
Recently the Wall Journal published an article saying the new “magic number” one most have saved in order to retire is $1.46 million. In this episode Nik and Todd attempt to dissect the reasoning behind the number, how applicable numbers like this are, and how to determine what your “magic number” might be in order to retire.
https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/beyond-4-rule-how-much-can-you-spend-retirement
Don’t miss an episode. Subscribe today.
TRANSCRIPT
Welcome everybody to the Momentous Wealth Podcast, where we discuss current issues in the world of finance and break them down into understandable terms to further your education. Momentous Wealth Management is a financial planning and investment management firm based in Washington. We've been serving clients for more than 20 years, and on this show, we take that experience and put it to the microphone in an effort to educate investors in the complex world of finance and financial markets. Hey everyone. Welcome back to another episode of our podcast. Today's episode is number 46, and it is hosted today with myself, Nik Miner and Todd Pisarczyk. Hello everyone. Today we're talking about Magic. Yes. Yeah, Harry Potter. So the Wall Street Journal just published an article recently saying the new magic number for retirement is 1.46 million. So if you hit that number, all your dreams come true. Yeah. Wow. Yeah. Which, you know, today we're gonna talk about is that enough or is that Nikeven a good number? Because this is a question we get a lot. So I have clients all the time that ask how much do I need to retire? Yeah. You know, like, they're like, and I, I think that people do think there is kind of a number out there, like, what's it take? I, I often have clients even, you know, they understand that maybe there's not necessarily a number, but they'll say like, Hey, how much do I need every month to retire? Yeah.
You know, and obviously it's different for everyone, which we're gonna talk about today, but I think it is interesting that, interesting timing. 'cause again, this, this article just came out April 2nd, 2024. And again, the Wall Street Journal says the new magic number for retirement is 1.46 million, up from 1.27 million a year ago due to inflation and information inflation back editing. Yeah. Yeah. So how, how did, how did they come up with that number? They surveyed around like, I don't know, 5,000 some people 4,588. Yeah. Adults. Yeah. Yeah. So pretty, a pretty good size. I'd be curious of the demographics that are getting that poll, you know? Yeah. 'cause you gotta be subscribed to the Wall Street Journal. You gotta care about the journal, you gotta care about giving your input. But yeah, so of these, this large pool of people, they felt like that was their magic number. And probably some people were higher, some people were lower. And I don't know how they get to that, but they're like, oh, this is the average, or so Yeah. Whatever they figure out. So it, it's more of a consensus figure than Wall Street Journal putting their stamp of approval. 'cause you know, they're a financial advising firm and being like, this is it. Yeah. It's more just like, yeah. People think it is, but yeah. Nobody knows. Yeah.
So then the question we will answer today or attempt to answer, which I can promise you that actually at the end of the day, we will give you, not an answer, but more questions, but a framework. Sure. But, yeah, so this, this kind of prompted us to do some, to, to do some work on, you know, 'cause this is what we do. We do a lot of retirement planning for people. Yeah. And so, Nik, how much do you need to retire? What, what are some things people can think about? 4%. Just kidding. Yeah. No, it's kind of a segue into kind of this next magic number, if you will, or today's a magical number kind of day. Yeah. Yeah. You probably have heard, I know you have Todd Yeah. Of this 4% rule. Yes. That I think a lot of people have heard of this. Do you wanna give a crack at explaining what it is? The 4% rule, which from what I understand was orig, I don't even know who came up with it originally, but there's a common phrase, a common rule, the 4% rule. And the idea behind that rule is that, that you can take 4% of the starting amount of your portfolio. So I'm just, it's easier for me to explain with an example, let's save a million dollars. Yep. So on the day you retire, you have a million dollars, 4% of a million dollars is $40,000. Yep.
So the 4% rule would suggest that you can take $40,000 a year after tax and give yourself an adjustment for inflation every year. Nice. Yep. That's right. Throughout the course of your retirement. And that you have a very high likelihood that that would last for at least 30 years. 30 years. That's right. Yeah. And it changes depending on your timeframe too. Yeah. But yeah, that's, that's, you pretty much nailed it. Yeah. Right on the head. And I think, I mean, you and I both have heard in kinda the same vein as that magic number that Wall Street Journal put out this number is also that number that's like, oh, you just have to have a portfolio that can sustain 4% and you're good. So if my income needs are 80,000, then I just need $2 million. Right? Right. No, it's a little bit, a little bit more complex than that. And, and that's kind of, but I think the 4% is a good starting point, at least for the conversation Earth. One way of thinking about it, there's, there's a lot of different ways that you can come to that, what's the right portfolio need. But at, at least what I like about this approach is that at least we're, we're trying to get somewhere that has a level of sustainability based off of your income. Yeah. Because if we just start with an arbitrary number Yeah.
Then we're just backing into some amount and we just figure out does that work? Does that work? Does that work? Yeah. So one thing I did, I, I looked at our planning software and we use Monte Carlo simulations to figure out what's the likelihood of success given somebody's portfolio savings and their income. Yeah. From Social security. Does a Monte Carlo simulation mean that you just take your nest egg to Monte Carlo and you do gamble it? No, you actually, well, yeah, but you have to buy a Monte Carlo car first. Oh. And then, I don't know, I'm pretty sure it's a sandwich too. I always, I, I, you know, Monte Carlo simulations are a thing, but I just think that word is so hilarious. Yeah. Yeah. We should change it to the Monte Cristo. Yeah. Which, by the way, I wanted to throw this out there. I did some quick math. Yeah. So, you know, this is very much an estimate, but yeah, he's doing it on his phone. Recently. Someone won a billion dollars in the lottery. Wow. And they were what, from Portland? Oh, I don't, I just heard Oregon. I don't know city. Oh, okay. You're right. Oregon maybe been Portland. Yeah. And so if you took, so the billion dollars Yeah.
You know, you, you, you can take a 20 year annuity or you can take half front if you take half upfront and then you, you know, I just estimated a tax amount. Yeah. So say you're in the highest income tax bracket, let's say that person used the 4% rule Yeah. To figure out how much money they could spend. Wow. It's a little over a million dollars per month. Oh my gosh. Yeah. Yeah. Of income using the 4% rule. What's wild to me. So that's net after tax adjust for inflation. That's a good amount of money to live on a million dollars a month. Yeah. And it's crazy that there are people that win the lottery and then go bankrupt. Yeah. Oh, do you do that? Well, I don't know that there's been, well, I don't know that people that win the $1 billion lottery go back. True. I feel like that's like every lottery now though. Yeah, I know. Anyway, if you, I've had this crazy idea that we should just market to billionaires, or not billionaires, but lottery winners. So if any lottery winner out there is hearing this, we'd love to help you. Just kidding. I imagine that that planning would be a can of, I'm not kidding. We would love to help you to not go bankrupt. True. Anyway, sorry, I got a off track. You did. But it was fun. So this, if we run that portfolio number that, who was it?
Wall Street Journal said 1.4 million through the Monte Carlo, where we run a thousand outcomes of what could happen in the market. Just to see like, okay, how many of those thousand trials would things work out in good markets and bad markets? The income on that would come out to being like, if a, if we also incorporate healthcare costs, we could reasonably take a distribution of 60,000 per year. Which is like prob, I mean, that was kinda shocking to me. That was a lot lower. But also, I mean, if I was to try and find somebody, Hey, 60,000 work for you, does 60,000 work for you? You'd be searching all day. I mean, it's just, yeah. It's, it's the wrong way to approach this thing. Yeah. So I think having an idea of what your expenses are first, because then it's easier to then use this rule like this 4% and, and kind of gives a little bit more meaning to finding what that portfolio size is. Right. But even still, let's say we've, you know, you've calculated you need X amount and you work backwards with this 4%, there's still issues that this 4% has that make this idea of finding the right portfolio amount really complex.
And I thought I was just kinda walk through some of those, because again, what the, hopefully the point of this is to show is that like these magic numbers are things that, you know, click beatty or catchy titles you might hear out in the news or from your friends or family of like, oh, you just need X, you just need this. It's like, well, it's always a little bit more complex than that and it's so individualized. Yeah. On there too, one of the first things that I think is important about like this 4% rule is that one of the main assumptions is that you, you can increase your spending with inflation every year, which is great. It's like, okay, I know every month I spend X amount. So if we use Todd's example with a $1 million portfolio, and you're taking out 40,000, you're like, that's perfect for me. And I get inflation. Well, but what happens with life expenses that come up? Let's say you need to repair a roof, or you need to get a new car, then basically you've kind of thrown everything into a tizzy because now you're increasing your expenses. And, and things don't always work out that well on a, on a yearly basis. I mean, you might hit that 40, you know, a couple times consistently, but things are gonna, are gonna always come up and change.
So there's, there's a lot more that happens in life that really having a rigid rule, like 4% doesn't, isn't gonna work out once you're actually hitting the road on Yeah. Your plan. Yeah. Another thing we should note to kind of talk about that uncertainty is the, when, again, when, when people throw out this notion of the 4% rule, it does make a really big assumption as well. And that's that you invest the money. Yep. That's my next point. So, oh, okay. Wow. No, this is great. No, I love it. So I'll ask you the question then, Nik. What, what does that assume you invest in though? A 50 50 portfolio? Ah, see, I, I was gonna say, I don't even know. I just know that it assumes some sort of kind of roughly balanced portfolio. Yeah, yeah. But that's, that's a pretty moderate portfolio that Yeah. I mean, when we run analysis for a lot of our clients, again, we work with a broad range of people at 65. Yeah. Some of six, or a moderate portfolio of 50 50 makes sense. Sometimes it's 60 40, sometimes it's 70 30. Yeah. Yeah. There's like, again, it's, everybody's different. Everyone's different. Yeah. Yeah. And it's hard to, to pin these rules on a Yeah. On a single person. Yeah. And it uses historical market returns. So that's another piece Yeah. That we could say like, oh yeah, the 4% has worked really well up to this point.
Yeah. But we also don't know what the next Yeah. Decade's gonna hold. And I think about that all the time because when I think about like the long term of the stock market, right? Like, you know, there's this long term and depending upon what timeframe you look at, you know, it's like 10%, 11%, something in there. Depends again what, but you know, generally speaking, long term returns of the s and p 500, if you go back to, you know, when it started, is pretty good. Right. But look at the history of the us right? We went through this massive industrial revolution and all these things that have happened where, you know, if you go back to when the stock market was invented Yeah. You know, there were not that many things you can invest in and not that many people even could invest in it. Yeah. And nobody really could have imagined the growth of, you know, again, I think about, like, we were talking about horses and buggies, right? Yeah. And we invented cars and, and then, you know, cell phones and computers and now ai and I just look at the amount of innovation and, you know, just the way things have gone. And it's like, is that going to continue? And so I think that that's, that is, that's definitely now, you know, we believe that Yeah.
In, you know, the market long term, obviously we're gonna continue to grow and innovate and, you know, but, but again, just the pace of growth. So I I, I don't say that to, to bring up concerns about will we grow, but what I, what I'm saying is, you know, can we expect the same rate Yeah. Of just growth as a country. Yeah. You know? Yeah. And I think either direction that pace changes is gonna affect that 4%. Yeah. Yeah. If our growth increases, the rate of growth increases due to AI or whatever's around the corner. Yeah. Yeah. We could be like, well actually, you know, maybe a five or 6% makes sense because the, the growth rate is so high. Yeah. That, you know, it can maintain it. We don't know. Yeah. Or if it slows down be like eh four way too aggressive. Yeah. Yeah. And one thing that's interesting, Charles Schwab, an analysis by Charles Schwab Investment Advisory group projects that market returns for stocks and bonds over the next decade are likely to be lower than long term averages are. So again, wow. So did they copy my research? Is that what you're saying? They did. I think they, I think they went to our website and copied you. Also, another big one is that it assumes a 30 year time horizon. This 4% rule does.
So if you're 65 and you knew you're gonna die on when your 95th birthday, you'd be like, perfect. Yeah. You know, we could, we might be able to use some merit of this 4%, but it changes pretty drastically as somebody, as somebody's timeframe is getting Oh, getting shorter. Yeah. Right. Yeah. 'cause like if you have a million dollar portfolio and you're gonna live for one year, you know, we don't need to worry about 40,000. We can spend a million, this is really interesting to me. So the time, the timeframe makes a a huge difference, doesn't it? Yeah. If you're retiring at 65 versus 75, or, you know, sometimes they'll have clients retire early in their forties, fifties, whatever. That makes a big difference. Totally. And it, the, not only the timeframe, but your allocation, they've got kind of an interesting chart. I mean, to show here on, you can't see it, but on the very far end of like the short timeframe with conservative portfolio, it's saying you could take out a 10% withdrawal rate. So, so you're saying if you had a, a portfolio that what, what's conservative? Moderate is 50 50. Okay. So you're something less than 50 50. Yeah. And you only need the money for 10 years, then an appropriate withdrawal rate is 10%. If you want to be at the 90% confidence level. Yeah. 75 to 90% confidence. Okay.
And if that, and if you go, so you keep that same rationale, that same portfolio, conservative portfolio, and you go 30 years, it's 4%. Yeah. Okay. So there's a lot of assumptions on these, on these numbers that we hear. Yeah. That the moment you tweak one variable, like Oh, the portfolio Yeah. Or the timeframe. Yeah. We're looking at drastically different numbers. Right. Right. And, and one of the things I think is interesting on this chart too, is it shows that if you wanna be in the 75% confidence level and you're willing to be moderately invested, again, that 30 year retirement, you could take 4.4%. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. So significantly higher. And another element to consider too is like, what do you care about leaving to your beneficiaries, your heirs? Yeah. Right. Yeah. One of the things that they're looking at is the final balance of a portfolio I think they're using here that Yeah. That million dollars I for a conservative portfolio over that 30 year timeframe, with a 4.3% withdrawal rate, you're gonna end your, that 30 year timeframe with a balance of 862,000. Yeah. So less than what you started. Yeah. But you are able to maintain. Yeah. Whereas if you had a moderately aggressive portfolio, again, we're not saying that this is what you should do. Yeah. But they're just saying the portfolio with a 4.4% just is 0.1. Higher withdrawal rate would end at that 30 years with $6.3 million. Wow. Wow.
So pretty substantial. Yeah. Difference. Yeah. I mean that's like almost, yeah. 10 times as, yeah. As much, some advice that I give to a lot of our clients that are thinking about saving is just this idea of kind of dynamic spending. Right. So I think another thing that matters is if, if you're somebody who, and again, this is, we don't know what's gonna happen, but if you, I, I do believe that 4% rule, you know, this is my opinion. 'cause we, nobody knows what's gonna happen for sure. But I do think the 4% rule is a good starting point, right? Yeah. And I think it's a good way to think about it. So if you're looking at your retirement, you know, and you say, okay, I want to have $80,000 a year, so I'm gonna save up $2 million in my portfolio, that's gonna get me my $80,000 a year plus social security on top of that, you know, maybe have a pension. Right? Again, when you get, when you get serious about retirement savings, you really want to put together a plan. Yeah. Which is what we do a lot for clients. And, and obviously update that plan constantly. Because one example is this, like, we usually tell clients like, it's not quite that simple because in general, for example, social security, you know, we find that social security, it does inflate, but it doesn't tend to inflate fully with the real cost of inflation. Yeah.
And so, at the beginning of your retirement, it might be as easy as saying, oh, I'm gonna get X for my portfolio X for my social security. But in reality, over time, you're probably gonna find that you're putting more and more stress and reliance on your portfolio if social security's not fully keeping pace of inflation. The other thing is, if part of your income is a pension, a lot of pensions have a cost of living adjustment, but a lot of 'em don't. Yeah. So if you have a pension with a cost of living, or that does not have a cost of living adjustment, that's another consideration you're gonna wanna make that you're probably not gonna wanna spend all 4% from your portfolio in the beginning because you're gonna put more reliance on that. But, so those are all the things that go into it and why, you know, ultimately at the end of the day, putting together a good financial plan, this is why it's vital. But one concept that, that I think is another thing to consider is this 4% rule. Again, I do believe my, my personal opinion is it's a really good starting point. You know, if you, if you look at that, that 4% rule has tended to hold up over 30 year periods, you know, a high probability of the time, you know, according to research from Morningstar, it's about a 96% probability of success over 30 year periods.
That's why it's kind of a good rule. There's some people that argue that it's actually too conservative. Our industry has actually been criticized for the fact that maybe we're, you know, we're, we're telling people that they can spend less than they actually can because, you know, we're like greedy or something. Yeah. And we want, you know, that's obviously like, you know, well not true for us, but, but I think that it, it's really a matter of being safe. That's a number that you tend to be able to count on at all times, right? Yeah. So here's the thing, if you're willing to be a little bit more dynamic with your spending, okay. What I've found is that clients can get closer to that 5% withdrawal rate if they're willing to make adjustments, right? Yeah. So, you know, for example, if we look at the chart that Charles Schwab put together that we've been referencing, if you're somebody who, you know, again, you're okay being in that 75% confidence level, and, and again, you want to be, you want to have that 30 year timeframe. Timeframe. If you're, you know, if you're invested, you know, moderately that 50 50 portfolio Yeah. That they would, they would say you can actually get closer to 4.5%. Actually it's four point half percent over a 30 year time period. If you're okay with being 75% confident level. Yeah. Well, here's the thing about that.
If you told me that I had a 75% chance of not crashing, would you get on an airplane with a 75% confidence level? No. No. I mean, honestly, I probably wouldn't even get on one with a 90% confidence level. What do you think Boeing's at right now? We won't get into that. Yeah, let's, let's not go there. But this doesn't necessarily mean that you're gonna, 75% of the time have a happy retirement and 25% of the time you're just gonna run outta money. Right. The way I tell people to think about it is, again, using the plane example, there's not a 25% chance the plane's gonna crash. There's a 25% chance that you're gonna have to make an adjustment. Right? Yeah. The 75% confidence level, the 75% of times that it's good, assumes that again, you have a million dollars, you know, 4%, you just spend 40 grand a year, adjust it for inflation. You never think about it. Right? Well, if you're willing to make adjustments and monitor it, what this is suggesting is that I believe that you're okay having a portfolio more in that 75% confidence level if you're just willing to make that adjustment. Yeah. Right. 'cause there's a 75% chance that you won't have to adjust. There's a 25% chance that you'll have to make an adjustment along the way. Now if you don't make that adjustment, then yes, it could end in disaster and you could run outta money.
That's what is what, what it's telling us. But if you catch it early, which is again, the importance of, you know, setting this plan based on your goals and all that, but reviewing it. Because if you catch it early, the adjustments are usually pretty minor. Hmm. Right. So it's like, you know, if there's a plane and you're on the plane ride and it's like, oh, there's a thunderstorm or a thunder, I don't even know how planes work. So maybe if flying through thunder and legs is not a big deal, but I'm assuming it is. Yeah. And you just say, nah, we're not gonna do anything different. Whereas if you say, look, I'm willing to add a few minutes to my flight 'cause I'm gonna spend some time flying around this thing. Yeah. Then it's like, okay, fine. No big deal. We just took a detour, we flew around the storm. Now in retirement planning, that doesn't, we're not suggesting you're gonna be able to dodge market storms 'cause that's market timing. And we went, but what it's saying is, when you get into a storm, if you're willing to say, all right, things are really rough here, I'm okay spending a little less this year. So maybe that 4.5% if, if you want to approach that four point half percent number, just think about it like that needs to be kind of an average, right? Yeah.
So when things are good, maybe you're spending five, but when things are bad, you gotta back it down to four. Yeah. And, and you have to be willing to time that around when things are going well in financial markets with inflation and returns and all that kind of stuff. Right? Yeah. So if you're willing to be flexible, that is another way that you can kind of bump that number up from 4% to something higher. Yeah. And I think that's like where the power of the 4% comes in, in the sense that it, if you stick to it rigidly, you're gonna have a lot of problems over time. But if you use it as a baseline and then you start to throw all these things on top of it, it's a really great starting point Yeah. For, for your plan. Yeah. Because then we can talk about adding, you know, potential changes that you know of Yeah. Or having that flexibility that Todd's talking about Yeah. Of like, there's a lot of value in it. Yeah. But we don't wanna look at these magic numbers. Right. Whether it's 1.46 million or 4% and being like, all right, I guess that's what I'm stuck with. I gotta just shoot for that. Yeah. I, I think that's a great point, Nik. I think it's like, hey, it, they are valuable kind of starting points and kind of figures. Yeah.
When I think about that 1.46 million, you know, I think a lot of people look at that and they're like, no way. That's so much. And a lot of people are like, oh, that's not nearly enough. Right? Yeah. So I think that, you know, numbers like that, I don't put stock in. It's like, oh, I need a million a half. That's like, oh my goodness, how much money do you need? Right? Yeah. Yeah. I have clients, my, my generic answer. So if I have a client come to me at any age with any amount of money and they're like, can I afford to retire today? I'm like, well, depends how much income you need. Yeah. I mean, yeah. I mean if you think about it, there's a lot of retired people Yeah. Living on just social security. If, if you got a hundred thousand dollars and you can live on, you know, whatever, not much. 500 or five grand a year, four grand a year. Yeah. Okay. Then yeah. You can afford to retire. Yeah, totally. That's why that hashtag van life is so popular. Yeah. Yeah. People realize like, oh, I, if I lower my expenses Yeah. Then I don't need a huge nest. Yeah. So numbers like this, I need extra retire probably aren't really valuable. But I do think like things like the 4% rule, that's a value, that's a very valuable kinda starting point way for you to be thinking about, you know?
Yeah. Like what, what's it gonna take? Yeah, I do, I do put value in that. So definitely the last thing I'll throw out is, the other side to this coin is expenses. Yeah. Because I do think in retirement, that's a good point. You know, we, the other thing that allows you to retire successfully is, you know, decreasing that amount of money that you need to spend every month. So another big factor oftentimes to think about, you know, most people, one of their largest expenses might be the mortgage they're paying on their home. So the other question we get quite often is, you know, 'cause I, I, I think like most of, most of our clients, or at least most of the questions I get, clients aren't necessarily asking like, what's the amount of money they need in their portfolio to retire? They're like, how much income do I need annually to retire? And it's like, well obviously that depends on what do you want to do, right? Do you wanna travel around the world? What do you wanna do? Yeah. But that expense side, I think people oftentimes under look and they don't realize like, well if in leading up to your retirement you need to control your expenses because the normal pattern, you know, again, it's not for everyone, but the normal pattern is the older you are, the more money you make. Right.
You get raises at your job, you know, if you own a business, whatever, your business has become more successful. And kind of the normal trajectory for most people in their careers is as they get older, they make more. And what I find happen is somebody, they set a savings goal based on when they were making whatever, let's just call it a hundred thousand dollars. But then by the end of their career they're making 200,000, 300,000, something like that. Well, if, if they never adjusted their savings goal, then it's like, okay, well I'm used to, so if you continue to increase your expenses and your lifestyle as your income goes up, if you don't also increase the amount you're savings, that can make it really hard. And I see people get handcuffed. Yeah. Because it's like, oh well, you know, I don't, you know, I'm used to making whatever you gotta downgrade from a $300,000 life to the 100,000 life you've saved for Yeah. Yeah. So you gotta control the expenses on the way up. 'cause it's like, it's the amount of income that you have, but people often forget about, well also what are your expenses? Because you gotta, you gotta keep that in line too in order to retire. And, you know, far too often it's like, again, people start, they make a lot of money and it's like, oh, maybe it's later in life. They get that second home.
And, and so really like they're adding expenses and commitments maybe at a time where they should be capping those so that they can have an enjoyable retirement. Yeah. And to allow them the freedom and flexibility to do the things they wanna do. I mean, financial freedom is not just about having a bunch of money. It, you know, it's like, it's also not having, being tied down to a bunch of expenses. Yeah, totally. I thought when you said expenses, you were gonna go a different route, which I think makes more sense where you did go, but my mind, I went to taxes and income or investment expenses. Yeah. And that's one thing they talk about in this Schwab article. Article. Yeah. I won't get into too much of the details, but they're basically saying like, if you're not minding your taxes, then that 4% is gonna change drastically. Yeah. Because you could just be throwing money out the window if your investments are, are a huge drag on your portfolio returns. That could create problems. Yeah. Yeah. So that's, I mean, we could do a whole, yeah, we should do a podcast on that. Great idea. Maybe that'll be the next one. Yeah. Alright, well thanks for tuning in guys. Hope this was helpful, useful.
Leave a comment if there's, if you have thoughts, if you're like, no way those guys are wrong, or if there's something you wanna hear about, we read those comments, leave a comment and let us know if you think Nik's right or if the Wall Street journal's right. I didn't know we were competing, but I'll just tell you right now about to find out. Yeah. It's me and yeah. Talk to you guys next time. The opinions expressed in this podcast are for general informational purposes only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual or specific security. It is only intended to provide education about the financial industry to determine which investments may be appropriate for you. Consult your financial advisor prior to investing. Any past performance discussed during this program is no guarantee of future results. Any indices reference for comparison are unmanaged and cannot be invested into directly. As always, please remember, investing involves risk and possible loss of principal capital. Please seek advice from a licensed professional. Momentous Wealth Management, Inc. Is a registered investment advisor. Advisory services are only offered to clients or prospective clients where Momentous Wealth Management, Inc. And its representatives are properly licensed or exempt from licensure. No advice may be rendered by Momentous Wealth Management, Inc. Unless a client service agreement is in place.