Can You Enjoy Retirement and Still Leave Something Behind?

Chips came roaring back. The Dow crossed 53,000 for the first time. SpaceX joins the Nasdaq-100 today.

The quick scan: Monday's return from the long weekend was decisively positive. Technology led a broad rally as semiconductor stocks reversed last week's selloff ahead of Samsung's preliminary Q2 earnings. The Dow set a new record above 53,000. The Russell 2000 reclaimed 3,000. The VIX fell to 15.57, its lowest level since before the Iran war began. Markets are pricing in a constructive second half.

S&P 500: +0.72%, 7,537.43 – Broad-based gains; technology, financials and industrials all contributed. The index is now up approximately 10.5% year-to-date
Dow Jones: +0.29%, 53,056.74 – A record first close above 53,000; Boeing (+3.55%), IBM (+3.43%) and Goldman Sachs (+3.28%) led. Amgen (-2.32%), Disney (-2.13%) and Merck (-2.13%) were the notable decliners
NASDAQ: +1.12%, 26,121.16 – Semiconductors led; AMD surged 6.6%, Broadcom rose 3.7% after extending its Apple partnership, Micron gained 0.9%, and Nvidia added 0.4% after its assembly partner signalled continued AI demand strength. SpaceX formally joins the Nasdaq-100 today.

What's driving it: Two catalysts drove Monday's chip recovery. First, Samsung's preliminary Q2 earnings – due this week – are expected to show strong memory chip demand, supporting the AI demand thesis that the previous week's selloff had called into question. Second, SK Hynix's ADR issuance signals continued confidence in the sector's growth trajectory. Broadcom's extended Apple partnership is an independent positive for the semiconductor supply chain. Oil held near $69, Iran peace talks continue progressing, and the rate environment remains benign after last Thursday's soft jobs report. The combination of easing macro risk and recovering semiconductor sentiment produced the cleanest session in weeks.

Bottom line: Last week's chip selloff looks increasingly like the profit-taking it was described as at the time, rather than a fundamental shift in the AI trade. For L-Plate Retirees, Monday's session reinforces the case for holding quality positions through sector-level volatility rather than reacting to individual down weeks. The portfolio that held through last week's semiconductor selloff is now sitting on the recovery.

Spend Freely in Retirement. Leave Something for the Kids. Can You Do Both?

The scoop: Most retirees who have children carry a quiet tension that doesn't come up in financial planning conversations. They want to enjoy their retirement – the travel, the dinners, the grandchildren's education fund, the home renovation that's been deferred for fifteen years. And they also, in the back of their minds, want to leave something behind.

The financial planning industry tends to treat these as competing goals. Spend more, leave less. Save more, enjoy less. The article from 24/7 Wall St argues that framing is wrong – or at least incomplete. Whether you can achieve both goals simultaneously depends not on how much you save, but on the specific structure of how your savings generate income.

The key variable is dividend yield. And the relationship between yield, income, and inheritance is more counterintuitive than most investors expect.

The inheritance test

The article uses a benchmark of US$80,000 per year in retirement spending – roughly the average annual household expenditure for American retirees. The question it asks: which portfolio structure generates that income reliably over 25 years while also leaving the principal intact or growing?

The answer breaks into three distinct tiers, each with a different capital requirement and a different long-term outcome.

Tier One: The 3.5% portfolio that grows

At a blended yield of 3.5%, generating US$80,000 a year requires approximately US$2.29 million in capital. That's the largest number. It's also the portfolio most likely to leave your heirs more than you started with.

The building blocks at this yield level are dividend growth companies with decade-long track records of increasing their payouts. Johnson & Johnson has raised its dividend for 64 consecutive years. Procter & Gamble for 70. These companies yield modestly – 2% to 3% – but the dividend grows each year, the share price tends to follow earnings upward, and twenty years of compounding produces a materially larger asset base than the one you started with.

The Singapore-listed equivalent of this tier includes DBS Group Holdings, which currently yields approximately 4.7% with a consistent track record of dividend growth, and Singapore Exchange, which has committed to specific quarterly dividend increases through FY2028. Neither looks flashy. Both pass the inheritance test.

The mechanism: a 3.5% yield growing at 7% per year doubles its income in roughly ten years. The portfolio that pays you $80,000 today pays $160,000 in a decade – without you adding a dollar. The principal grows alongside the income. That's how inheritance happens.

Tier Two: The 6% middle ground

At 6% yield, the capital requirement drops to approximately US$1.33 million. This is REIT, preferred share, and higher-yielding equity territory. Realty Income – paying monthly, with 114 consecutive quarterly dividend increases – is the US archetype. Parkway Life REIT is its rough Singapore equivalent: healthcare real estate, stable distributions, and the kind of defensive business profile that holds through market cycles.

The trade-off at this tier is meaningful. Dividend growth slows. Capital appreciation moderates. The income line keeps pace with inflation approximately, but not comfortably ahead of it. The estate you leave behind is roughly similar in real terms to the one you started with – not growing, not shrinking, essentially preserved.

For retirees who don't have US$2 million but have US$1.3 million and an inheritance goal, this tier represents a workable compromise: real income, reasonable preservation, modest growth aspirations.

Tier Three: The 10% portfolio that spends itself

Push yield to 10% using business development companies, mortgage REITs, and leveraged covered-call funds, and US$80,000 requires only US$800,000 in capital. The headline yield looks extraordinary. The long-term outcome is not.

Above 8%, distributions frequently include return of capital – meaning the fund is paying you back your own money while making the pool smaller. Net asset values drift lower over time. The portfolio slowly liquidates itself. The cheque arrives monthly. The estate shrinks annually.

The article is direct about this: "The check clears; the estate shrinks." This is the mechanical problem that this newsletter has flagged in the value trap issue and the sequence-of-returns discussion: yield is not the same as income, and a high percentage on a declining base produces less and less over time.

What actually wins the inheritance test

The article's core conclusion is one worth stating plainly: a 3.5% yield growing at 7% per year outperforms a 10% yield growing at zero over any period beyond about eight years. By year 25 of a retirement, the dividend-growth portfolio is paying out significantly more income, while the base asset value has grown substantially. The high-yield portfolio is paying out the same nominal amount while the underlying capital has eroded.

This is not an abstract finding. It's the same logic behind the recommendation to defer CPF Life or Social Security – trading a lower payment now for a permanently larger guaranteed stream later. The portfolio equivalent is accepting a lower starting yield in exchange for a growing one.

The practical questions

Three questions the article recommends asking before choosing a yield tier:

First, what do you actually spend? If your real annual expenditure is S$65,000 rather than S$80,000, you may be designing your portfolio around a spending need that doesn't exist – and unnecessarily pushing toward higher yield to hit a number that's too high. Start with actual spending, not a benchmark.

Second, stress-test total return, not just yield. Compare a dividend-growth basket against a double-digit yield fund over ten years, including reinvested dividends, any dividend cuts, and the ending portfolio value. The annual income matters. The inheritance test depends on what remains after the income is taken.

Third, if inheritance matters, use the conservative tier as the core and the moderate tier as ballast. Reserve high-yield instruments for the portion of the portfolio you're genuinely willing to spend down. Position sizing is the inheritance decision.

Actionable Takeaways for L-Plate Retirees

• Identify which yield tier your current portfolio sits in. Calculate your blended portfolio yield – total annual dividend income divided by total portfolio value. If it's above 7–8%, the inheritance test becomes difficult to pass unless you're intentionally drawing down capital. Below 5% with growth, the odds favour preservation.

• Understand that yield and income are not the same thing. A 10% yield on a declining asset base produces less income each year. A 3.5% yield on a growing asset base produces more. The number that matters for inheritance is not the percentage – it's the dividend per dollar in ten years.

• Singapore-listed dividend growers can anchor a Tier One or Tier Two portfolio. DBS, SGX, Sheng Siong, and Parkway Life REIT have the characteristics the article identifies as essential: consistent dividend growth, solid balance sheets, and durable competitive positions. They're not exciting. They pass the inheritance test.

• Calculate your actual spending before choosing a yield target. If you design your portfolio to generate S$100,000 and you actually spend S$70,000, you've accepted yield risk you didn't need. The inheritance plan starts with the real spending gap after CPF Life, pensions, and other guaranteed income.

• If leaving an inheritance matters, say so explicitly and plan accordingly. The tension between enjoying retirement and preserving capital is real but manageable if it's named. Portfolios that try to satisfy both goals implicitly – without explicit targeting – tend to drift toward whichever goal feels more urgent in the moment, usually spending.

Your Turn:
If you're honest about your current portfolio's dividend yield, which tier does it most closely resemble – and is that the tier you'd choose if you designed it deliberately from scratch today?
The article argues that a 3.5% yield growing at 7% beats a 10% yield growing at zero after about eight years. Does that framing change how you think about the trade-off between current income and long-term growth in your own holdings?
Leaving an inheritance is something most parents want but few explicitly plan for. Is it an explicit goal in your retirement plan, or more of a quiet hope that the money is still there at the end?

👉 Hit reply and share your thoughts – your answers could inspire fellow readers in future issues.

Writing this takes considerably more time than drinking coffee. If you'd like to help balance that equation, consider supporting L-Plate Retiree on Ko-fi.

Resources:

The Next Level Options (NLOMBA) course is a solid, all-in-one roadmap for mastering options investing. You’ll learn what options really are, how to invest in different market conditions, and how to pick strong companies using Buffett-inspired fundamentals.

Inside, the lessons walk you step-by-step through strategies like BOSS and Strategy X, so you’re not guessing – you’re following a proven structure that helps you invest with clarity and confidence.

What to see everything that’s included?
👉 Check out the Options Workshop