Whether or not the individual needs to play catchup is, in my opinion, immaterial with regard to asset allocation. The considerations for asset allocation (specifically equity exposure) is time, willingness, and ability to take the risk, not whether they "really need to play catchup" because an aggressive portfolio does not guarantee oversized appreciation. Over enough time, it is likely, but still not guaranteed, to happen. When is this individual likely to start needing the money, and what are the consequences if things go completely south? If the market drops 30% or more, is there a backup plan? Will it ruin your relationship with this individual? Will you make up for any shortfall if it comes to that?Have a family member who made some questionable choices/decisions in life. Is somewhat clueless about financial matters. But over the last 5 years or so, I have been working with them to get things back on track. I am helping the person maintain/manage the investment portfolio. Given that this person is 60 yrs of age, want to run what I have setup by people at similar stage to see if there is room for any further optimization or risks to watch out for.
2. Is 65/35 AA overly aggressive for a 60 year old who needs to play catchup? Should I put this AA on a glide paths to increase Bonds 1% every year so by the time the person is 70 years, the AA is more like 55%/45%. At what point would it be reasonable to transition the bonds AA to TIPS/short-term T-bills
Thanks.
Statistics: Posted by Longdog — Wed Dec 24, 2025 6:50 am — Replies 10 — Views 824