• Home
  • About Us
    • Client Experience
    • Mission & Vision
    • Providers
  • Resources
    • FAQs
    • Financial Education
    • Testimonials
  • More
    • Home
    • About Us
      • Client Experience
      • Mission & Vision
      • Providers
    • Resources
      • FAQs
      • Financial Education
      • Testimonials
Free Financial Needs Analysis
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Client Experience
    • Mission & Vision
    • Providers
  • Resources
    • FAQs
    • Financial Education
    • Testimonials
Free Financial Needs Analysis

Investment Examples

Before the Review

Case #1: Building a "Pay Off Debt Quicker" Fund


A 47-year-old couple was wanting to retire in eight years at age 55. They had

$500,000 in investable assets and were making contributions of $650/month

to their existing investment vehicles. 


If they had no debt, their existing investments were on track to reach their 

financial independence number if they continued to contribute $650. 


BUT, by contributing $650, it left them with limited cash flow to pay down 

their outstanding mortgage, credit card & line of credit. As a result, they were 

on pace to retire at age 65 instead of age 55. 

After the Review

With proper risk education, we showed them how they could improve their rate of return to reach their financial independence number with only $150/month contributed instead of $650.


This allowed us to repurpose $500/month towards debt, which would have it fully paid off before their retirement goal age of 55. 

Before the Review

Case #2: Building your Own "Personal Pension"


A 26-year-old school teacher wanted to leave the profession to start 

her own business, but was scared to lose out on the security that

comes with having a pension. 


This individual had $97,000 of investable assets (outside of her

emergency fund) earning less than 1% return at the bank. 


She wanted to invest, but didn't know where to start. We showed her

how to use an online investment calculator to project what her existing

savings and future contributions could grow to by the time she was 55,

60 and 65-years-old. 

After the Review

In her first three years as a client, her portfolio with us earned nearly an 18% average annual return, turning $97,000 into $150,000. 


She knew that even if the fund performance decreased to 8% over time, this $150,000 would grow to over $1.6M by age 60 and would be more than enough to replace the pension she would have received. 


This education and understanding of compound interest and how to maximize your rate of return reduced anxiety and gave her the confidence to pursue a dream.

Before the Review

Case #3: Another Underperforming Portfolio


A couple in their late 40's came to us for a free consult. They were 

skeptical of our rate of return projections because they had always

identified themselves as medium-to-high risk investors, but never 

saw the regular annual returns promised by their previous advisors.


They had $300,000 of total investable assets, had been investing for

15 years, and their contributions (rather than interest from investment 

growth) made up the majority of the balance. 

After the Review

Through their first five years of working with us, their initial $300,000, plus an additional $130,000 in contributions to total $430,000 has experienced a double-digit rate of return.


With an account balance just shy of $700,000, nearly $300,000 has been earned in interest in spite of volatile market conditions. 


We have also adjusted the portfolio from being 100% taxable on disposition to having over 30% of the assets in tax-free vehicles. 

Before the Review

Case #4: The Cost of Staying Locked In


A 25-year-old male switched jurisdictions in a government role and was 

given two options with the $40,000 that had accumulated in his pension: 


1. Use the $40,000 to "buy back" service time. Meaning, he could retire 

with a full pension at age 55 instead of age 58. 


2. Transfer the $40,000 into a personal retirement account, accessible to

him at age 55. 


Because some people aren't aware of how to use compound interest to 

make their money work for them, they tend to choose the "security" of 

the buy back. 


Let's play out what they looks like. 

After the Review

Scenario #1: retire with a full pension three years sooner. 


Let's say that pension is $80,000/year (which is a huge overstatement). 


Getting it three years early would mean an extra $240,000.


Scenario 2: let $40,000 compound for 30 years. 


At an 8% return, this would be over $400,000 that he would have access to, that can be liquidated anytime after age 55, not just from age 55 to 58. 

Pension Transfer Example

If there is anything we learned from the previous example, it is that when you have a great advisor, it can be advantageous to be in control of your assets. 


Many people are leaving thousands and sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars on the table by not at least considering the option of taking their pension as a one-time lump sum (commuted value) rather than a monthly amount.


It isn't always the right fit, but it is always worth doing an apples-to-apples comparison of your options. 


The example below was for an individual who, at the time of being introduced to our team:

 

  • Was 53-years-old
  • Had been a nurse in Ontario for 30 years; and
  • Intended to work full-time for another five years until age 58 to receive her full pension.


Here was the simplified version of her options. 

Option #1: A $3,500 Monthly Income Starting at Age 58

How it Would Play Out


This individual would work five more years full-time until age 58, then receive a $3,500/month income for life. 


Pros

  • Provides a set, fixed income
  • Generally simpler to manage and understand
  • May include benefits such as inflation indexing or a CPP/OAS bridge.


Cons 

  • Have to work until age 58 to receive the full amount
  • No control over how the money is invested
  • Little to no estate value after death
  • Less flexible (can't access more than $3,500/month, even though it is your money that you have contributed to the plan). 
  • Payments are thought to be guaranteed, however it is dependent on the long-term health of the pension company. It has historically been sustainable, but it is not "risk-free/guaranteed" as some may suggest. 

Option #2: A One-Time Lump Sum of $900,000 at Age 53

How it Would Play Out 


  • About $600,000 would be transferred into her LIRA, her RRSP and a spousal RRSP for her husband to defer taxation until withdrawal. 


  • The remaining $300,000 would be added to her income (split over two tax years), subjecting her to about $100,000 in tax owing. This leaves $200,000 that could be immediately deposited into a TFSA for her and her husband. 


At this point, they can either: 


  • Choose to draw some of the money out of any one of their investment vehicles (LIRA, RRSP or TFSA) to provide an income source; OR
  • Go back to work for five more years (as originally planned) and allow the investments to compound during those years. 


For context, even at only 6% return, $800,000 would grow to $1,070,000 in five years.


Using a "How Long Will it Last Calculator", assuming $1,070,000 invested, a 2% rate of inflation, and a 5% rate of return, if this individual wanted to withdraw $3,500/month (to receive the same monthly income as what option #1 would have been, it would take 47 years (age 105) for her investments to reach zero. 


Using the same calculator, you can also determine how much she would be able to withdraw over a shorter timeframe. For example, for the investment to last for 30 years from age 58-88, she would be able to draw out about $4,500/month (which is $18,000/year more than option #1).


Here is one more example of where controlling your own assets rather than leaving them to a pension company could be lucrative.


Let's say you become terminally ill and are given 1-2 years left to live. 


  • In option #1, you would continue to receive $3,500/month. 


  • In option #2, you would have access to hundreds of thousands of dollars to either use for treatment or to check off a few bucket list items while you still can, because you are no longer worried about outliving your money. Then, what's left of the wealth will roll to your chosen beneficiary rather than back to the pension company. 


Pros

  • Full control over investments and withdrawals, which allows for an opportunity to implement tax reduction strategies & a potential for higher returns. 
  • Flexibility to adapt to life changes and major expenses. 
  • Greater ability to leave a financial legacy. 


Cons

  • Requires more active management (the expertise of an advisor).
  • Potential to incur a large tax bill upon transfer and withdrawal (especially if the advisor does not structure it correctly). 
  • Assumes market risk.
  • Potential to run out of money if too much is withdrawn too soon or if it is invested incorrectly. 

Which option was chosen?

This couple decided to take the lump sum. 


They liked the idea of being able to have flexibility on when to withdraw the wealth as some years they planned to work part-time in retirement and needed less fixed income, while other years they wanted to be able to not work at all and travel, in which case they would draw out more income. 


They also wanted to make sure that any of what was left of the wealth they accumulated was passed on to their kids and not just funneled back to the pension company. 


Lastly, having seen health issues arise in the past within their family, they liked the idea of having access to additional wealth in case it was needed for illness treatment or long-term care. 


Required Conversation


Upon choosing this option, we needed to ensure: 


  • They secured personal benefits equivalent to what they would have previously had at work. 
  • That an employment position would be available for the next five years at a similar income level to the job she was leaving. 
  • That we worked in tandem with their accountant to ensure that the investment strategy was as tax effective as possible; and 
  • That their wealth was invested according to their risk tolerance, with a mix of the downside protection that is necessary in retirement to secure a fixed income and  the upside reward that would make the transfer worthwhile. 


To Summarize 


The answer is definitely not as clear cut as "pension good, lump sum bad" or "lump sum good, pension bad". Which is why it is important to know and discuss all of your options. 


Every family's situation is different and the final decision will factor in a mix of wants, needs, goals, math and emotion. 


We don't yet know which option is best for you, but we do know that it is worth completing a proper breakdown of all of your options. 

Click here to go to the client debt casesClick here to go to the client insurance cases

Cooper Allen

cooper@cooperallen.ca

705-796-7947

Copyright © 2025 Cooper Allen - All Rights Reserved.

This website uses cookies.

We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.

Accept