But it’s not just for the sake of being controversial. He thinks deeply about ways people can live their best lives when they retire. And he says the current system, not to mention conventional wisdom, actually makes it more difficult than it has to be to reach that goal… and he says the problem is getting worse.
We talk about…
- Why the age on your birth certificate is just a number
- The dangers of correlated investments
- Social Security and why it shouldn’t start at 62
- What should be the real determining factor in whether you buy an annuity
- And much more
John Curry: Hey, folks. John Curry here. Welcome to another episode of The Secure Retirement Podcast. I have the pleasure of sitting next to a gentleman that I have been reading his material forever. I have every book he's written except his newest one, and I will have it within a couple of days. I'm sitting here with Moshe Milevsky, PhD. This guy is a brilliant man when it comes to understanding longevity issues and how to plan for retirement. Moshe, it's a pleasure sitting here with you.
Moshe Milevsky: Thank you very much. It's a huge pleasure to be here.
John Curry: Today, you gave a presentation. We're sitting in Chicago and at The Park Avenue Securities Retirement and Masters Summit. Yesterday, we were over at the University of Chicago. The School of Business was awesome. I wanted you to share with our listeners, Moshe, some of what you were sharing with our group today. Full disclosure, folks, we're sitting here with a bourbon in our hands. We've had a couple of them already and I've grabbed this guy at eight o'clock in the evening and he is willing to share his time with us. So please, Moshe, tell us who you are and what you specialize in and share with my audience some things they can use to help improve their retirement.
Moshe Milevsky: Well, John, first of all, thank you for the opportunity to appear on your podcast. It's a great honor and I'm humbled by this request that you asked me to chat with you. My day job, as I explained to the audience today, is I am a professor. I am a teacher at a school at York University in Toronto, Canada. I teach undergraduates, graduates, and executives in the Business School courses on finance, insurance, investing, retirement planning, pensions, and our graduates go out and work in the financial services industry. Many of them end up being financial planners and advisors like yourself. Those are the people that I teach and that's my day job. The university allows me one day a week to go off-campus, and only one day a week, to speak to the broader world, to do consulting work, to give lectures, to write articles. Here we are today at Park Avenue and I've been spending some time with your audience here.
John Curry: You did a fantastic job. I want to share this. You were talking this afternoon. I was thinking you're teaching these folks. I've been doing this for 45 years. I'm 66. 45 years, I'm thinking, "Oh my god. He's teaching people that are 18, 19, 20 years old, and I've been doing this twice their age."
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah, and to be honest, I'm kind of jealous of you because my audience of 20 year olds and 25 year olds don't have the same amount of respect and the same amount of admiration for retirement planning as someone like yourself or I would have because it just seems so distant for them. When you talk to someone who's in their 40s or 50s or 60s and you talk about retirement and retirement planning and how much you need and how much you should spend, it's real for them. This is something meaningful. They see it in the horizon. But when you talk to a 20 year old about retirement planning, they don't know what they want to do with their life. They don't know what job they're going to have. So it's a much harder struggle to get them to take it seriously, which is why, to be honest, I enjoy speaking to older audiences because this is something that's a lot more realistic for them.
John Curry: No doubt. No doubt. What I love about what you do, Moshe, is you're not selling financial products. See, what I love about what you do and other people in the world of academia, you have no ax to grind. So if someone listening to this, "Okay, I know John. He's a good guy." Might even be a client of mine, but they still might have that doubt. Are the products he's recommending really what I need? That's human nature. We're all going to do that. But what I love about your books and your presentations, you do it in a manner that you're not promoting any particular product. It could be life insurance. It could be annuities. It could be mutual funds, whatever. And one of your best books ever, in my opinion, is Are You A Stock Or A Bond?
Moshe Milevsky: Well, thank you.
John Curry: I think that's the best book you've written so far.
Moshe Milevsky: I appreciate that. I'm proud of that work. So well, first to your first point, because of the fact that my day job, my employer is a university, I am not beholden to the financial industry. I really speak my mind, and sometimes the financial or the insurance industry agrees with what I have to say and sometimes they disagree with what I have to say, and that's life nowadays.
John Curry: Well, that is true. I can you tell you for a fact I've witnessed people saying, "I don't like what he has to say." I say, "Yeah, but is it true?" "Well, yes." "Okay. It's true."
Moshe Milevsky: For many years, the insurance industry did not like what I had to say about guaranteed death benefits on annuities. I felt that in certain circumstances, they didn't make a lot of sense, and the insurance industry disagreed with me. Now I think annuities are a great ideas, longevity insurance is a great idea, and the insurance industry likes the message. So I really don't wake up in the morning and say, "Okay. What can I say today that will antagonize a particular industry or could we favor with them?" I just go where the research seems to be pointing, and at this particular case, it's that longevity insurance is important.
So to get back to the issue at hand, I find that when you're talking to someone from an academic or scholarly background, they tend to have a perspective that's much more detached, arm's length, and they are going to tell the good with the bad. And I like that. To me that's refreshing. A lot of people criticize the idea that economists can't come to an opinion. On the one hand, and on the other hand. The joke is that when FDR was asked who he wanted to nominate to run the Federal Reserve, FDR's response was, "I want a one handed economist. I want an economist with one hand." When they asked him, "Why, President?" He said, "Well, because I don't want to hear this on the one hand and on the other hand."
John Curry: I remember reading that quote. I love that. But it's funny that you say that because in the world I live in, people are trained to present their best possible position. I come from a military background of being in the Air Force in the '70s. We were taught you do everything you can. You show the good and the bad of everything. So when someone asks me a question, I give them the good and the bad. I tell them the good, the bad, and the ugly because I think you as a consumer deserve to know all the facts so you can make an educated decision. What's your response to that?
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah. I agree with that. In fact, you say the good, the bad, and the ugly, and I would reverse that and say the ugly, the bad, and then the good.
John Curry: Oh, tell me why.
Moshe Milevsky: I think you really have to be very, very realistic about what can go wrong with any strategy that you're recommending.
John Curry: You did that today in your presentation.
Moshe Milevsky: I think it's very important to start with the negative. Look, here is what can go wrong. Here are the things that may not work out, and once people understand that, then say, "But, here's the good side. Here's the upside. Here are the things that might work out in your benefit." One of the things that concern me is the rosy pictures that are painted about financial products. The headline number. You may earn up to 12% on this thing.
John Curry: But, in fact, the odds are you may lose 20%.
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah, you may lose... Exactly. The odds of earning 12% are very, very slim, and more likely you're going to lose 20%. So I really like to set the ground work by saying all the things that could go wrong, and once I've calibrated that, then you talk about all the upside.
John Curry: You know it's funny you say that because when I'm sitting here listening to that, I always point out the negatives first. So I guess I am doing the ugly first, aren't I?
Moshe Milevsky: I think so. I think that by telling people the negative first, you're preparing them for the fact that this isn't a sales pitch. This is an awareness story. These are all the things that can happen, and once you've covered all the bases about the negatives, then you can talk about, "Well, we're hoping for better."
John Curry: You know that's interesting because I retired on paper January of this year. I'm 66. I was 66 December 9. So I retired, took my pension, an unqualified pension and social security. But I love what I do. I'm like I want to be like George Burns. I hope I am 100 years old, then I die, and they have to cancel the show because I couldn't make it because I died. I love what I do so much. But I do it on my terms.
Today, you were talking about, speaking of age, biological versus chronological. Would you talk about that some?
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah, I would. So in a nutshell, there's a growing awareness amongst people in the industry that we all have two ages, which is a weird thing to say. I mean, my age is my age.
John Curry: But it's true.
Moshe Milevsky: But the truth is-
John Curry: By the way, you don't know this. Let me jump in.
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah.
John Curry: I had open heart surgery, triple bypass in 2008. So I learned something about myself. I started changing things. I went from 284 pounds down to 220.
Moshe Milevsky: Oh wow. Okay.
John Curry: So I'm fairly fit now. Trim, doing exercise again. So I understand this concept of biological versus chronological age more than most people in that room.
Moshe Milevsky: You've lived it.
John Curry: I've lived it. I am living it now. So please, continue.
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah. So people's chronological age is the number of times that they've circled the sun. It's what's written on their birth certificate. It's what's on their driver’s license. Their biological age, which is a much more important number, is how old their body really is. The cellular age of your body, and if you're 55 years old chronologically, your cellular, your biological age could be as young as 40 or it could be as old as 70. Now this isn't some great revelation. It's no different than telling someone, "You look great for your age," or, "You don't look very good." But scientists have now reached a point where they can actually measure you're biological or cellular age and compare it to your chronological age. And a large part of the population's biological age is actually lower than the chronological age, which is great news. They're younger than their age. There's an equal fraction that's higher than their chronological age. By symmetry, if half our under, half have to be above that.
And my point or at least the point I was trying to make in the presentation is that retirement planning, your retirement plan should depend on your biological age more so than your chronological age. Your withdraw rates, the amount of money that you're allocating to your pension, how you're allocating your assets, your investments. Your insurance policy should be based more on your biological age than your chronological age. And in the future, there's going to be a growing awareness on the part of people on what their true biological age is, and I think the industry's going to have to adapt to the fact that we're going to start thinking in terms of two ages as opposed to one age.
John Curry: Don't you think it's already happen though in the sense that consumers... I'm thinking of a couple that I love dearly. I won't use names, but he's 80, soon to be 81. She's 78. Both had some hip replacement surgeries. They retired in their 50s. In their 50s. So here they are in their soon to be... She'll be in her 80s, and they're realizing they have to slow down some. They traveled and did so many things. But if you looked at this couple, there's no way you'd think that they were 80 and 78 respectfully. A guy today said to me, he said, "John, I've known you for 30 years, you look 20 years younger because of what you're doing." That was before you took the stage. So I think the people of today, we hear that 70 is the new 60, et cetera. I think we as consumers already feel that way. But I think that the financial services industry has not caught up yet.
Moshe Milevsky: No, no. And the attorneys and the compliance officers and the entire infrastructure of financial services hasn't picked up on that yet. I also think it's important to understand that our entire legal system, pension system, regulatory system is geared to chronological age when in fact it should be geared to biological age. So I envision a day, as controversial as this might be, where your retirement age for social security should be based on your biological age. If you're in perfectly good healthy and your parents lived to 100 and there isn't anything wrong with you, I don't think you should be entitled to walk into the social security office at the age of 62 and say, "I want my social security benefits." You're 50 biologically. Vice versa, if you are someone who is 50 chronologically but you're in poor health, you aren't doing very well, and your biological age is in the mid-60s, maybe you should be entitled to start your pension. I think that there's got to be a growing awareness of biological age, not just when it comes to your own investment portfolio but in terms of retirement policy as well. Let's be fair.
John Curry: You live in Canada.
Moshe Milevsky: I do.
John Curry: I love Toronto. Every time I'm in Toronto, I walk past your school there, university. Here's what I look at, I have always said all of my working career that social security never should've been allowed to be turned on at 62. Franklin Roosevelt said that social security was not perfect, but it was designed to make sure that the people didn't retire poor. You got to put it in context. This is Great Depression. Our system has changed to where people think, "I'm going to take it as soon as possible." I took my at 66. Didn't wait until 70 because time, value of money. I want the money now. But I don't think that social security should ever had been allowed at 62. 65, 66, maybe even 70, I don't know. But I'm not a policymaker. Thank god. I'm just a guy on the street helping my clients, and have had the pleasure of doing it for 45 years.
Moshe Milevsky: And I don't want to get too close to the third rail of politics. Should we modify it?
John Curry: I agree.
Moshe Milevsky: Is it sustainable? Should we change the current rule? I don't want to get too far into that. All I'm trying to say is your age isn't the thing on your driver’s license. That's the only point I'm trying to make. Your age is not the number of times you circle the sun. Your age isn't the current year minus the year that you were born. Your age is something much more important and deeper and fundamental in your biology, and that's the number that you've used for retirement planning.
John Curry: We've only got a couple minutes left. Would you please share your story personally about your birthday, when you turned 50, and you did the test that you did. Would you share that?
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah. Sure. I'd be delighted to. So as I had mentioned in the presentation today, when I turned 50, my wife's birthday present, god bless her, to me was a mail order kit that measures my biological age or cellular age.
John Curry: You know why she did that?
Moshe Milevsky: Why did she do that?
John Curry: She wanted to make sure that you're going to be around for a while.
Moshe Milevsky: Probably. Probably. Yeah.
John Curry: Go ahead. I'm sorry. I couldn't resist.
Moshe Milevsky: No, no. You're absolutely right, John. The way this thing works is that they ask you to puncture yourself and put a little blood in a vial and you mail it away. Six weeks later, they send you an email. And this email, I turned 50, and this email that they sent to me said that my chronological age was 50, obviously. That's written on my birth certificate. But that my biological age was about eight years younger. It was closer to 42, which intrigued me very much, and is what got me interested in this whole topic of biological age. So I spoke to the chief scientist at this company, and he said to me that there is something that we all have in our bodies called telemirrors, which is a fancy name for the end of your chromosomes. And if those telemirrors are getting shorter and shorter and shorter quickly, that's not good. You're aging fast. And if those telemirrors are relatively long, then you're aging slowly. And that's good. Based on the length of the telemirrors, they can determine how old your biology or your cellular age really is. And at the time, it struck me as, "Oh, that's interesting. That's a novelty."
But as time went on, I realized that this has enormous implications to financial planning, most importantly if you have a biological age that's much younger than your chronological age. You're probably a very good candidate for buying something called an annuity or an indexed annuity or single premium annuity because when you buy one of these annuities, you're betting that you're going to live a long time. If you're biological age happens to be five, 10, 15 years younger than your chronological age, that's probably a good bed to make. You're actually going to live longer than the averages. So that's sort of what got me interested in this whole thing.
John Curry: And if you live longer, then those type products are more important because it gives you a guarantee lifetime income. The purpose of this is not to promote a product, but let me ask you this, from the standpoint of what you've learned about the two ages, I took four pages of notes, by the way. What would you say is a takeaway for the person listening to this who is not a professor like you? I have a master's degree in financial services myself. They're not a financial advisor. What's the takeaway for the average American listening to this?
Moshe Milevsky: So here's the way I like to think about it, as I get older, I want to make sure that my financial portfolio doesn't require decisions from me. I want to minimize the decisions that I have to make as I get older. I want my money to be on autopilot.
John Curry: Me too, buddy.
Moshe Milevsky: I do not enjoy making financial decisions as I get older. So let me be very clear. I am currently in my 50s. I love asset allocation. Every month at the end of the month, I look at my portfolio and I wonder, "Should I have more investments in value or growth? Should I have more small cap or large cap? Should I have more international? Where's the U.S. dollar going? Maybe merging market." I enjoy it. I love it at the age of 55.
At the age of 65, will I still be doing asset allocation? I hope so. I think so. I'll still be working. I still will be managing my portfolio. I love making financial decisions. How about when I'm 75? When I'm 75, am I going to really want to be sitting there and figuring out whether I should be taking 3% or 4% or dividends or bonds at 75? I'm going to want to play with my grandkids. What about at 85? If I make it to 85, do I want to sit at the end of the month with a spreadsheet and try to figure out what I'm selling from or what account to us? 85, I don't think so. What about 95? If I get to 95, if god blesses me and I'm 95 years old, do you think I really want to sit at the end of every month and figure out what the right asset... I'll be glad with a decent bowel movement at 95.
John Curry: I'm 66. I would tell you I like the fact that every month, like a mushroom, it just pops up. Money just appears.
Moshe Milevsky: Automatic.
John Curry: Automatic.
Moshe Milevsky: I think that's the most important lesson in financial planning to put your investment portfolio on autopilot.
John Curry: Absolutely. Would you do this, we're over time, would you please take just a moment and share your concept in your book that I loved the best of all your stuff Are You A Stock Or A Bond. Would you please explain that concept?
Moshe Milevsky: Well, John, you're really taking me back now.
John Curry: That's a great book, though. I think it's your best book. I mean, I know you're writing new stuff and your world. If what your latest piece of work, but to me, that's the best one.
Moshe Milevsky: Thank you. That's very kind of you. So it's almost like we have to start a new podcast because a new show-
John Curry: Just keep it brief.
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah.
John Curry: We'll do another podcast later.
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah. So here's the story. So one of the things that I've realized is that people when their young, I'm not talking about retiree. You're 30 years old, and you're starting your career. You have a job. You're moving up the career chain, and what I've noticed is that people's biggest investment when they're in their 30s isn't their house, isn't their portfolio, isn't their 401K. Their biggest investment is their job.
John Curry: Absolutely. Their career.
Moshe Milevsky: Their career.
John Curry: Their career.
Moshe Milevsky: And some people have invested 10 or 15 years to become doctors and lawyers and surgeons and accountants. Their biggest investment is their career and their job. And the point that I try to make in that book is that your career has risk characteristics similar to a portfolio. And what I mean by that is some people by their nature are bonds. For example, if you're a teacher or a fireman or a police officer or a federal or state employee, it may sound like you have a pretty risky job. You're running into fires to put them out. But you got job security, unions. Very difficult to fire people in those positions. Your career is essentially a bond. Other people have careers that are more stock like. You're working in a financial services industry. You're an investment banker. You're a financial advisor. You sell insurance. Whatever it is, your career is more stock like.
The point that I try to make in that book is that your financial portfolio should balance out what your human capital or your job is like. So I'll give you an example. It sounds abstract. If what you do for a living is you sell real estate, you're a real estate agent, please make sure that your financial portfolio, your 401K, your IRA has no real estate in it. No REITs, not real estate investment. Why? Because you're human capital is a REITs. Human capital is real estate. Your human capital is a real estate portfolio. If you work in the financial industry, make sure that your financial capital does not have any financial stocks in it. If you work for Coca Cola, make sure your 401K doesn't have any discretionary consumer goods. If you work for oil and gas industry in the Gulf of Mexico, make sure your 401K doesn't have any of that.
What I'm trying to say is that your financial capital and your human capital have to zig and zag at different times. And the message there is make sure that you diversify outside of what you do for a living.
John Curry: But here's the point you're making that's unusual. When I read that book, I said, "Oh, I love this guy." That was my first introduction to you years ago. I forget what year you published... Do you recall what year?
Moshe Milevsky: 10 years ago.
John Curry: 10 years ago. It was like an ah-ha moment because in my world, I tell people if you have a risky job, don't let your money be risky. Don't let your money be risky because your money has got to take care of your for the rest of your life, whatever that is. Whatever that is.
Moshe Milevsky: It's the hardest message I've had to sell. Usually when I get up and I talk, I don't get a lot of resistance. That message Are You A Stock Or A Bond was the most difficult one because it's very difficult to argue with success.
John Curry: Wait a minute. Whoa. Whoa. I'm shocked. I don't understand that. Why was that hard?
Moshe Milevsky: It was hard because it only works after it's too late, and then it doesn't help them anymore. I'll give you an example.
John Curry: So does that mean I'm weird because I got it before?
Moshe Milevsky: No, no. Not at all.
John Curry: I don't understand.
Moshe Milevsky: I'll give you an example. We had a very large company in Canada, the largest company in Canada on the Toronto stock exchange, was called NorTel, Northern Telecom. At one point, Northern Telecom was 30% of the Toronto stock exchange.
John Curry: Wow.
Moshe Milevsky: People that worked for Northern Telecom, it was a big successful company.
John Curry: They had a bunch of money there.
Moshe Milevsky: They had a bunch of money there because the stock was going up.
John Curry: Big time mistake.
Moshe Milevsky: They had money invested there. They lived in neighborhoods where all their neighbors worked for Northern Telecom. And for your U.S. audience, I'll tell you the end of the story. Northern Telecom, NorTel went bankrupt in 1999, 2000. Bankrupt. The stock went to zero. So think about what happened. You worked for NorTel, your job is gone. Your stock portfolio, your executive compensation plan, gone. The real estate where you live, declined because everybody's selling.
John Curry: 401K, gone.
Moshe Milevsky: Triple whammy, quadruple whammy. When you talk to them after the fact, they say, "Oh. Moshe, where were you 10 years ago? Why didn't you tell me this when the stock was high?" It's because you're not going to listen to me when everything's doing well.
John Curry: Well, all you had to say was read my damn book.
Moshe Milevsky: Yeah. I'll give you another example in the U.S. PG&E, Pacific Gas and Electric, a utility in California. The stock, they've declared bankruptcy. Stock price declined. Bond price declined. If you work for the company, your job is at risk. If you live in area where other employees work, for god sake, do not invest your money in the same industry where you work. There's a great money manager in the 1990s at Fidelity called Peter Lynch.
John Curry: Oh yes.
Moshe Milevsky: Most of your listeners... He used to say invest in what you know. Invest in what you know, and my reaction is I'm not sure that's the best advice because investing in what you know means you work there. You know the industry. You're involved in it. Maybe the advice is invest in things that you know very little about because you don't work there. For example, I work in the financial services industry. I work as a consultant. I'm a teacher. I give lectures. I like to invest in oil and gas. Why? Because my human capital has very, very little to do with oil and gas. I don't consult with the oil and gas industry. I don't work for the oil industry. I'm not in the petroleum industry. So it's a good investment for me because it's uncorrelated. It's not dependent on my human capital. I do not hold many insurance companies in mutual funds and asset managers. Why? Because I do consulting work for them. Why would I want to put the two of them together?
John Curry: Would you please explain that one word you just said? Uncorrelated asset, most people have never heard that. Would you please explain that?
Moshe Milevsky: Uncorrelated is just another way of saying when something zigs, the other thing zags.
John Curry: I love that.
Moshe Milevsky: Correlated is when they both go up and down together. Uncorrelated is one goes up, the other one might go down, might go up.
John Curry: I'm going to tell you what I say, and if you don't agree, just tell me because we believe in being fair and truthful here. I tell people it means that they're non-related. Is that a fair word?
Moshe Milevsky: That's a good way of saying it, or another way of saying it is just coin tosses. Just because you got head's once doesn't mean you're going to get head's a second time in a row. And I think it's like a roulette wheel. You spend the roulette wheel, the roulette wheel has no memory. Those are uncorrelated events. I like to invest in uncorrelated things, not things that are correlated, which is why I tell people we have in Toronto a large industry in the real estate business. A lot of real estate agents, a lot of real estate. I say do not invest your retirement money in real estate. But very few of them listen. They say, "No, no, no. It's worked out for me. I work in the... I know the industry." When you talk to a biotechnology analyst, "I know the industry. I'm going to invest in biotech." You talk to small guy... I just don't think it's prudent. I don't think it's prudent, and unfortunately the only way I'll be proven right is when things go wrong. And I hate to be proven right only when your situations going wrong. I like to be proven right in good scenarios.
John Curry: Let's be honest. In 2000, 2001, 2002, then we jump in 2008, people lost a lot of money.
Moshe Milevsky: Oh yeah.
John Curry: The people who stayed the course came back. But people made some bad decisions. Let's be honest. Every person listening to this podcast, you have a choice to make. Your decisions that you make today, you have to live with through the rest of your life.
Moshe Milevsky: Yup.
John Curry: And what you're saying is such great advice. We need to wind up here. I would simply say, folks, I would encourage you to search the name... I'm going to spell it for you. Moshe, M-O-S-H-E, Milevsky, M-I-L-E-V-S-K-Y. I rarely do this, as you know, but you need to read everything this man's written. It's unbelievable, good stuff. It's mostly something where you think, "Oh my god. That's over my head." Stick with it. Stick with it.
Moshe, thank you so much for taking time today.
Moshe Milevsky: My pleasure, John.
John Curry: Would you please join us again for another podcast?
Moshe Milevsky: I absolutely will. Next time I'm in Tallahassee, I'll definitely look you up.
John Curry: Oh my god. Thank you so much. Folks, I hope you've enjoyed this. We've gone over time. But we're doing great. Thank you so much and Moshe for joining us.
Moshe Milevsky: Thank you.
Speaker 3: If you would like to know more about John Curry services, you can request a complimentary information package by visiting JohnHCurry.com/podcast. Again, that is JohnHCurry.com/podcast. Or you can call his office at 850-562-3000. Again that is 850-562-3000. John H. Curry, Chartered life Underwriter, Charter Financial Consultant, accredited estate planner, masters in science and financial services, certified in long term care. Registered representative and financial advisor of Park Avenue Securities LLC. Securities products and services and advisory services are offered through Park Avenue Securities, a registered broker deal and investment advisor. Financial representative of the Guardian Life Insurance Company of America and New York, New York.
Park Avenue Securities is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Guardian. No Florida financial corporation is not an affiliate or subsidiary of Park Avenue Securities. Park Avenue Securities is a member of FINRA and SIPC. This material is intended for general public use. By providing this material we are not undertaking to provide investment advice for any special individual or situation, or to otherwise act in a fiduciary capacity. Please contact one of our financial professionals for guidance and information specific to your individual situation. All investments contain risk and may lose value. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
Guardian, its subsidiaries, agents, or employees do not provide legal, tax, or accounting advice. Please consult with your attorney, accountant, and or tax advisor for advice concerning your particular circumstances. Not affiliated with the Florida retirement system. The Living Balance Sheet and the Living Balance Sheet logo are registered service marks of the Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, New York, New York. Copyright 2005-2018. This podcast is for informational purposes only. Guest speakers and their firms are not affiliated with, or endorsed by Park Avenue Securities or Guardian, and opinions stated are their own.
2019-82980 Exp 7/21