May 2026
Most people approaching 50 ask themselves whether they should be taking less investment risk. It feels like the right question. But according to Chief Investment Officer Meghan Pinchuk, it may be the wrong one entirely.
In this episode of Financial Commute, Meghan and host Chris Galeski unpack what actually drives the right level of investment risk at any age, from longevity and sequence of returns risk to the emotional factors that quietly derail even well-built plans. Age, it turns out, is further down the list than most people think.
Watch previous episodes:
What Nobody Tells You Before You Sell Your Business
How to Pay Yourself in Retirement: Strategies to Help Make Your Money Last
TIMESTAMP
1:31 What is the biggest risk of abandoning your investment strategy?
2:19 Why do retail investors earn less than the market?
3:06 How long does a retirement portfolio actually need to last?
5:01 How do advisors decide how much risk to put in a portfolio?
6:08 What is the bucket approach to investing?
7:38 What is sequence of returns risk and why does it matter?
9:57 When is the right time to buy more stocks?
11:45 What happens emotionally if I take less risk and markets keep rising?
13:01 What should I actually ask my financial planner about risk?
14:58 What are the two questions that matter more than age?
These are the questions investors in their 50s are genuinely asking. We've addressed them directly below, and the full conversation is available as a transcript further down the page.
Should I take less investment risk now that I'm 50?
Not necessarily, and maybe not at all. Age by itself is not the right variable. The more useful question is how close you are to the spending phase of your life, and how long your portfolio needs to last. Someone retiring at 65 with a life expectancy well into their 80s or 90s has a 25 to 30 year window their money needs to cover. A portfolio that is too conservative early in that window may not grow fast enough to last the distance. The old model of shifting heavily into bonds at retirement was designed for a world where retirement lasted 10 or 15 years. That world is largely gone.
What is the biggest investment risk people over 50 actually face?
Two things come up repeatedly in this conversation. The first is behavioral risk: abandoning a sound investment strategy during a market downturn. Meghan and Chris point to 2008, 2020, and 2022 as examples where investors who panicked and sold missed the recovery entirely, permanently reducing their long-term returns. Research consistently shows that retail investors earn significantly less than the indices they invest in, largely because of this pattern. The second is sequence of returns risk, meaning being forced to sell assets early in retirement, when prices are depressed, in order to cover living expenses. That combination of selling low and losing compounding time is what genuinely harms long-term plans.
What is sequence of returns risk, and why does it matter so much at retirement?
Sequence of returns risk is the danger of experiencing a major market decline right when you transition from accumulating assets to spending them. If your portfolio drops significantly in the first years of retirement and you are selling shares to cover expenses, you lock in those losses and shrink the base that would otherwise recover and compound. The timing matters as much as the magnitude. A large decline early in retirement is far more damaging than the same decline ten years in, when you have already drawn down a portion of your portfolio and have fewer assets exposed.
How does longevity change the risk equation for people over 50?
Significantly. Earlier generations could plan for a retirement of 10 to 15 years. Today, a 65-year-old retiring without a pension may need their savings to last 25 to 35 years. That length of time changes almost everything about portfolio design. It means you likely need more growth assets, not fewer, to outpace inflation and sustain your lifestyle. It also means the risk of running out of money may be a greater threat than the risk of a temporary market decline.
How do advisors think about how much risk to take in a portfolio?
Meghan and Chris break it into two questions. First, how much growth do you mathematically need? Given your expenses, savings, and expected retirement length, what return does your portfolio need to deliver for your plan to work? Second, what is your actual emotional tolerance for volatility? Someone who needs strong returns but cannot psychologically handle large drawdowns is in a difficult position that pure math cannot resolve. A good financial plan has to account for both, because a strategy you abandon in a panic is worse than a more conservative strategy you can stick with.
What is the bucket approach, and how does it help manage risk in retirement?
The bucket approach divides your portfolio by time horizon and purpose rather than treating it as a single pool. Bucket one covers near-term expenses, held in stable, liquid assets that will not lose significant value in a downturn. Bucket two generates income to cover living expenses over the medium term. Bucket three is your long-term growth engine, invested in equities and higher-growth assets. The practical benefit is that when markets fall, you draw from bucket one rather than selling growth assets at depressed prices. You do not need to react emotionally because you already have a structured plan.
What if I take less risk and miss out on a strong market run?
This is a real risk that does not get discussed enough. If you reduce your equity allocation and markets rise significantly over several years, the emotional pressure to chase that return can cause investors to buy back in at much higher prices than they would have paid originally. Meghan calls this FOMO risk. If the market keeps running and your portfolio does not keep pace, what would you actually do? Being honest about that in advance leads to a more realistic allocation decision.
When is the right time to buy more stocks?
In theory, the best time to buy growth assets is when they have gotten significantly cheaper, during recessions and sharp corrections. In practice, almost no one does it. Chris notes that across market downturns in 2009, 2011, 2018, 2020, and 2022, very few clients called eager to buy more stocks. Understanding this tendency ahead of time and building a plan that does not rely on making courageous decisions in the middle of a crisis is one of the most practical things a financial advisor can help with.
The question of how much risk to take becomes urgent for most people somewhere in their late 40s or 50s, often triggered by a down market, a conversation with a friend, or the feeling that something should change. The instinct to protect what you have built is completely rational. The challenge is that acting on it without a clear framework often leads to decisions that are more harmful than the risk you were trying to avoid.
This episode is especially relevant for:
At Morton Wealth, building the right investment risk framework is a core part of how we work with clients approaching and entering retirement. The math matters. So does the emotional reality of how you will actually respond when markets get difficult.
Age is not the right variable.
The question is not how old you are. It is how long your money needs to last, how much growth you need to get there, and whether your portfolio structure matches both your financial needs and your emotional tolerance for volatility.
Behavioral risk may be your biggest threat.
A well-designed portfolio abandoned in a panic produces worse outcomes than a simpler, more conservative one you can stick with. Building a plan that accounts for how you actually behave under pressure is more valuable than optimizing for returns on paper.
Longevity has changed the math on risk.
Portfolios that need to last 30 or more years cannot be managed the same way as portfolios designed to last 10 or 15. Being too conservative too early is a real risk, not just a missed opportunity. Your money has to outpace inflation over a very long horizon.
The bucket approach gives you permission to stay invested.
When you know your near-term expenses are covered by stable assets, you do not have to make emotional decisions about your growth assets during a downturn. Structure removes the need for in-the-moment courage.
"The risk is that you're not sticking to the strategy that you deploy. When things start to not go well, people got worried and they sold. And now they're never quite sure when to get back in." — Chris Galeski, Wealth Advisor, Morton Wealth
DISCLOSURES
Information presented herein is for discussion and illustrative purposes only and is not intended to constitute financial advice. The views and opinions expressed by the speakers are as of the date of the recording and are subject to change. These views are not intended as a recommendation to buy or sell any securities, and should not be relied on as financial, tax, or legal advice. You should consult with your finance professional, accountant, or tax professional before implementing any transactions or strategies concerning your
