Over the next two decades, an estimated $90 trillion will pass from older generations to heirs in what’s been called the “Great Wealth Transfer.” It’s a huge shift for those who follow estate and retirement planning trends. But if you ask hedge fund manager and best-selling author Bill Perkins, what’s really being transferred isn’t just money — it’s trillions in unlived experiences.
In his book Die With Zero: Getting All You Can from Your Money and Your Life, Perkins argues that life is better spent maximizing experiences rather than maximizing wealth. After all, wealth is only valuable if you actually use it.
As Perkins puts it: “[Y]ou need money to survive in retirement, but the main thing you’ll be retiring on will be your memories — so make sure you invest enough in those.”
Subscribe to Kiplinger’s Personal Finance
Be a smarter, better informed investor.
Save up to 74%
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more – straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice – straight to your e-mail.
The book’s popularity has motivated many people to rethink their approach to retirement, embracing what we might call the “Die with Zero” rule. The goal is to live a fulfilling life within the limited time we have.
But is this philosophy truly practical, or is it more idealistic than realistic? More fiction than fact?
What is the “Die With Zero” rule?
News coverage often highlights the alarming shortfall in retirement savings. It’s true, many Americans aren’t saving enough — more than half worry about running out of money after they stop working. And with rising inflation and longer lifespans, some financial experts question whether the traditional guideline of stashing away 80% of your income is still sufficient.
Perkins, however, sees another issue, one that gets far less attention: people hoarding wealth at the expense of living their best lives.
In fact, a recent study found that many retirees hesitate to spend their savings, preferring the security of untouched nest eggs. They tend to be more comfortable spending Social Security and pension income than withdrawing from their retirement accounts. For example, households with married 65-year-olds withdrew an average of just 2.1% of their savings annually — far below standard withdrawal recommendations.
Financial advisers frequently see this hesitation firsthand. Loren Sherman, founder of Integrity Wealth Management, says, “As retirement approaches, people should ask themselves: ‘What is all this for?’ Many struggle to shift from saving mode to actually enjoying the fruits of their labor while not getting attached to seeing a number continually increase.”
Perkins believes this mindset leads people to miss out on life. Instead of accumulating memories, they just accumulate money until it’s too late to enjoy it.
The “Die with Zero” rule encourages a different approach: Spend your money intentionally — whether it’s on yourself, your loved ones or charity — while you’re alive to maximize life experiences. The logic is simple. If you die with money left over, it essentially represents potentially years you spent working for free, as it’s wealth you never got to use.
That said, the goal isn’t to hit zero too soon and end up in financial distress. As Ryan Theisen, financial advisor at Advance Capital Management, cautions, “Retirees need to keep in mind that the money they saved while working is meant to last them a lifetime, so it’s important to be responsible with your spending.”
Instead, the “Die with Zero” rule focuses on making sure that, by the end of your life, you’ve made full use of the money you spent so much valuable time and energy to earn.
How to follow the “Die With Zero” strategy
The Die With Zero rule involves timing your spending wisely by balancing health, money and time — each abundant at different life stages.
When you’re young, you have time and health but little money; in middle age, you have money and health but less free time; in later years, you have time and money but declining health. The key is to spend strategically. For instance, prioritizing physically demanding experiences when young and using money to “buy time” in middle age, such as outsourcing chores to free up leisure hours.
Sherman advises, “Spending along the way requires balance and flexibility. Find what truly brings you joy so you’re getting maximum value out of each dollar.”
For example, a major part of the “Die with Zero” philosophy is giving while living. Perkins notes that adult children often need financial help in their 20s — when buying a first home or starting families — not when they inherit wealth decades later. Similarly, donating to charity during your lifetime allows you to see the impact of your giving rather than leaving it in your will.
One tool Perkins suggests is time bucketing: dividing your life into five-to-ten-year intervals and setting experience goals for each stage. This helps you prioritize meaningful activities while still being able to enjoy them.
Sherman says, “It starts by having a real intentional conversation about what brings you joy and aligning money with what matters most.”
The risks and criticism of “Die With Zero”
Despite its appeal, the “Die with Zero” rule faces criticism.
For one, it doesn’t account for those struggling just to retire at all. Consider that one survey reported that U.S. households had an estimated median retirement savings of $64,000, yet Americans think they need $1.46 million in savings to retire comfortably.
Longevity risk — the possibility of outliving savings — is another concern. Medical emergencies, disability or unexpected expenses can derail even the best-laid plans. As Theisen notes, “The last thing anyone wants is to outlive their money. It’s a tightrope walk, especially if unforeseen expenses arise.”
In the book, Perkins suggests annuities as one way to mitigate this risk by providing guaranteed income for life. However, their complexity, costs and restrictions seem to conflict with the “Die with Zero” emphasis on financial flexibility and using wealth for life experiences.
Overspending can also be a potential pitfall. Sherman warns that withdrawing too much too soon means missing out on additional compounding. A spend-heavy mindset can leave retirees vulnerable if their financial situation takes a turn for the worse.
So, is the “Die with Zero” rule good advice? It largely depends on your circumstances, but for everyone, there are varying degrees to which it can be applied in retirement.
Should you follow the “Die With Zero” rule?
Perkins acknowledges that “Die with Zero” isn’t optimal for everyone. It’s best for those who have already built substantial savings and tend to be overly frugal despite having more than enough.
Therefore, for most people, following the rule exactly may be unrealistic. But adopting aspects of it — like spending more on experiences, gifting money earlier and breaking free from unnecessary frugality — could help lead to a more fulfilling retirement.
Psychology plays a big role. Behavioral science shows that people tend to feel the pain of losses more intensely than the joy of equivalent gains, a bias that makes shifting from saving to spending difficult. An objective opinion can help counter this mindset. Perkins writes of the benefit of working with a financial adviser, a point echoed by Theisen: “An advisor can help create a game plan that allows individuals to maximize spending while maintaining a healthy savings for a rainy day.”
The old saying goes, “You don’t want to be the richest person in the graveyard.” Sure, it’s normal to fear outliving your money — but fearing not living at all might be the greater risk. The fact is, we’re all going to die someday. We might as well enjoy the ride while we can.
Read More Retirement Rules
Source link
