IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crr/issbrf/ib2018-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

National Retirement Risk Index Shows Modest Improvement in 2016

Author

Listed:
  • Alicia H. Munnell
  • Wenliang Hou
  • Geoffrey T. Sanzenbacher

Abstract

The release of the Federal Reserve’s 2016 Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) is a great opportunity to reassess Americans’ retirement preparedness as measured by the National Retirement Risk Index (NRRI). The NRRI shows the share of working-age households who are “at risk” of being unable to maintain their pre-retirement standard of living in retirement. This Index is constructed using the SCF, a triennial nationally representative survey of household finances. Since the last SCF was conducted in 2013, the U.S. economy enjoyed a period of low unemployment, rising wages, strong stock market growth, and rising house prices. These factors should have improved households’ preparedness for retirement. At the same time, longer-term trends – such as the gradual rise in Social Security’s Full Retirement Age and low interest rates – served as headwinds that made it more difficult to achieve retirement readiness. The question is what is the net impact of these disparate factors. The discussion proceeds as follows. The first section describes the nuts and bolts of the NRRI. The second section updates the NRRI using 2016 SCF data and shows that the share of households at risk dropped from 52 percent to 50 percent, largely due to rising home values. The third section presents results by age, income, and pension coverage. The fourth section takes a step back and assesses the overall reasonableness of the NRRI’s findings. The fifth section concludes that retirement readiness remains a major challenge for many of today’s workers; they need to save more and/or work longer to improve their prospects for a secure retirement.

Suggested Citation

  • Alicia H. Munnell & Wenliang Hou & Geoffrey T. Sanzenbacher, 2018. "National Retirement Risk Index Shows Modest Improvement in 2016," Issues in Brief ib2018-1, Center for Retirement Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:crr:issbrf:ib2018-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://crr.bc.edu/briefs/national-retirement-risk-index-shows-modest-improvement-in-2016/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stanislav Treger, 2022. "Let’s Talk About it: Discussing Retirement with Multiple Sources is Associated with Retirement Preparation in Young Adults," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 621-636, September.
    2. Abraham, Katharine G. & Hershbein, Brad & Houseman, Susan N., 2021. "Contract work at older ages," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 426-447, July.
    3. Jia Qi & Swarn Chatterjee & Yingyi Liu, 2022. "Retirement Preparedness of Generation X Compared to Other Cohorts in the United States," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-14, June.
    4. Christian E. Weller & David Madland, 2022. "Unions, Race, Ethnicity, and Wealth: Is There a Union Wealth Premium for People of Color?," Journal of Economics, Race, and Policy, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 25-40, March.
    5. Gale, William & Gelfond, Hilary & Fichtner, Jason, 2018. "How Will Retirement Saving Change by 2050? Prospects for the Millennial Generation," MPRA Paper 99196, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Beshears, John & Kosowsky, Harry, 2020. "Nudging: Progress to date and future directions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(S), pages 3-19.
    7. Alice Henriques Volz & Lindsay Jacobs & Elizabeth Llanes & Kevin B. Moore & Jeffrey P. Thompson, 2020. "Wealth Distribution and Retirement Preparation among Early Savers," Working Papers 20-4, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    8. Wei Sun & Teresa Ghilarducci & Michael Papadopoulos & Anthony Webb, 2019. "The Impact of a Social Security Proposal for "Catch-Up" Contributions," SCEPA working paper series. 2019-03, Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis (SCEPA), The New School.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:crr:issbrf:ib2018-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Amy Grzybowski or Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crrbcus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.