At what age should i start moving my investments away from stocks?

I am 40 and have my 401k in 100% stocks. I plan on retiring at 65.

I know what the theory is. I do not know whether it is a good theory or a worthless theory; but the major investment houses certainly follow it. I also tend to follow it.

Here is the theory.

As you age, the number of years left become fewer, so if the market tanks you have fewer years to recover from the disaster and you should invest accordingly. Therefore as you approach retirement, your portfolio should become progressively more conservative. So at retirement a relatively conservative allocation would be 30-50% debt, 20-30% money market, 30-50% equities. And the equity portion should as one grows older become less aggressive. And the debt portion should be relatively short term.

And of course at retirement you may want the portfolio to provide a steady stream of income.

There is just one thing wrong with the theory. That is the generous Alan drove interest rates to zero in 2000 as the stock market bubble burst and currently debt instruments do not pay their keep. 4.8% long term bonds are a joke with inflation runing at 3 to 4% maybe higher. I personally think the government lies about the inflation rate.

100% stock is extremely aggressive at any age. You still have 25 years though, which is a fairly long horizon, so an aggressive balance would probably be appropriate. I'd consider moving 10% over to bonds, and maybe change your additions to 80/20 stocks and bonds, so you'll be slowing increasing your bond holdings as you go. Maybe every 5 years, move another 5-10% over, since when you're 55, you don't want so much sitting at risk of principal loss anymore. By then, a 60/40 split would probably be more appropriate.

You might be well advised to find a fee-based financial planner. One you pay by the hour, not by the commission on products he's selling. Ideally, you're getting less-biased opinions that way.

At 40 you should be 5 to 10% in bonds and moneymarket. This should in grease at about 5% every 3 years. Please note that once the percentage is established it never changes. The money amount will if there is a shift in the stock market or bond market.

Generally, I would reccommend that a client who plans on retirement at age 65 begins switching small portions of their account to more secure, lower risk capital guranteed or cash investment options from about 50-55 onwards.

Of course this depends on market conditions and if you believe the market will turn sour well before then, then you should move them earlier.

This is coming from an Australian.

First off, congrats if you can actually pull off retiring at 65. Secondly, it's really a personal choice. There are definitely some mutual funds out there that are "safer" so to speak just due to their highly diversified nature. Oppenheimer has worked well for me and my fam. However, given that you're still looking to work for 25 years, keep in mind that the stock market generally goes up. There's never been a window of 25 years in the history of the markets where you'd have lost money even if you adjust for inflation. Maybe a scaling back approach in a time frame that you're comfortable with would be best. Slowly transfer some money into some income funds for instance. Keep in mind also, that currently, with the dollar where it is, it's highly advisable to keep up to 20% of your portfolio in foreign interests or multinationals based either here or abroad (i.e. Coke or Pepsi, General Electric, McDonald's). But, in short, there really is no right answer to this question. It's more what you're most comfortable with. And, considering you're still only 40, maybe you still want to take on a little more risk so as to hopefully reap a greater reward over the next 5 to 10 years before you really begin making any drastic changes. Never hurts to go to finance.yahoo.com and look into some funds in the interim. Good luck and I hope that helped a little.

I WOULD START NOW AND SEEK OUT OTHER INVESTMENT OPTIONS, ANNUITIES OR EVEN A CASH INVESTMENT AT A BANK AND JUST LET THE INTEREST ACCRUE. JUST LET IT WORK WHILE YOUR WORKING, I DONT BELIEVE IT WOULD BE TAXABLE UNLESS YOU WITHDRAW FROM CERTAIN INVESTMENTS. WHEREAS STOCK DIVIDENDS I THINK ARE TAXABLE. EVEN WITHIN THE 401K FRAME YOU CAN MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT THAT BUILDS WITHOUT TAXATION. POSSIBLY.

Mision_v: It is NOT, a matter of age: it is the (growing WARNING SIGNS): a Middle-Eastern War -one, financed -by "them" simply printing (even more) ..paper money..

When Assrt-Bubbles" -deflate.. well, for 400 years -WHEN it has ever occured, as in 1986, 1990, again, mid '90s.. it happens with TERRIFIYING, accelerating swiftness: faster than YOU can sell; (and there ARE very, very few buyers -at those 'correction-to-sanity', moments)..

All the warning sighns are almost, "in place". A U.S. Democratic Victory
could well 'set it all tumbling -as a pack-of-cards:
leaving YOU with "slim-pickings"..
Do NOT GET caught; THIS time!

China IS (still) "on-the BOIL") -okey.. but do you know [that there are]
-more than a dozen very serious Farmer-Uprisings, per-day -IN China? -eh?!
The cousins of the Farmer-Gardeners, actually producing the vast countrries food
are growing increasingly ALARMED.. as 540 HUGE Yalu River-type dams,
begin to INNUNDATE -forever, their fertile, ancestoral land.
They have seen, 3 years ago so many cousins, and other farmers cojouled,
& bullied-with clubs-& rifle-butts -into "estates", [wose than] TONDO;
and it has..[not worked-out, for] those unfortunate families!

Bare in mind, Mission-v, that there ARE many-hundreds of MORE peasants:
peasants with NO interest in "Fashion", nor shopping arcades..
-than there are Chinese Military-numbers to bully them, much further..
(It is only -I would say 4-years away: the emmergence of another,
charismatic 'Maotsi-Tung'-like Peasants "Moses" -who will instigate
a Revolution: a.. return to-sanity;
AND, normal Chinese harmony-of Life: general Contentment!

(If anybody here believes, that over-ONE Billion Chinese CAN, totally join..
the Western World: mimmick Western/Amerikano-style;
I say to those Market Investors: "YOU, are dangerously deluding, yourself"!!)
The "Bubble-Burst", may come 2011.. as a guess..).

Never,Did you ever here the saying only widows and orphans own those kind of stocks?When you get older move into utility stocks because they keep ahead of inflation.Owning bonds and cd is a losers game because the interest rate is not high enough to make up for the taxes you pay and the loss of purchaseing power due to inflation.My grand mother is 93 and still owns phone company stock.

You will still need growth (stocks) during retirement so don't consider "you still have 25 years left" its more like 50 years. I like Richard D's answer.

Simple rule of thumb is the age / 100 ratio. It might be oversimplified but it gives some general direction for a decent asset mix tied to age.

It works like this: At 40 you should have 40% of your investments in equities (stocks) and 60% of your investments in Bonds.
At 50 it should be a 50-50 split at 65 a 65-35% split and so on and so on...

Actually, he's got it backwards. At 40, you would have 40% in bonds and 60% in stocks. The older you get, the more bonds and the less stocks you hold. The "rule" is, subtract your age from 100 (or 120, which is the popular number now) and that will tell you how much of your money should be in stocks, with the rest in bonds. E.g., 120 - 40 = 80% in stocks.