Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I found this online and I thought I would share it here. This is a tool by fidelity that allows you to enter your age and zip code and shows you how you compare to the average for your zipcode or nationally both from a contribution and average balance. I thought it was pretty interesting.
Obviously the shortcoming is that this for Fidelity plan members only, but as every statistic, this actually a really good representation of the overall set.
Here is the link and also where the data is drawn from
***Figures are based on actual available data for individuals in a workplace savings plan for which Fidelity provides recordkeeping services.* The data excludes tax-exempt plans, nonqualified plans, and plans for Fidelity employees. If insufficient data is available at the ZIP code level for a particular age cohort, the average figure for the state is used. Contribution rates are for actively employed individuals contributing more than 0% to a workplace savings plan with a plan balance greater than zero.
*Fidelity Investments recordkept data of 20,900 corporate defined contribution plans and 13.1 million participants, as of December 31, 2014. ***
I will throw a word of caution out here. Make sure you keep in mind the news is also flooded with articles indicating that the average American does not have enough saved. The figures Fidelity are using are not average Americans, of course, and it would be reasonable to expect they would be above average Americans as they are at least employed and saving, but still, this is not the yardstick you should be aiming for.
As I have often heard and will repeat here, I have never heard of anybody regret they saved too much. I have often heard the opposite.
I can't see how this is accurate as a comparison or check your progress against others tool. Because the maximum allowable contribution is fixed by the IRS, highly salaried individuals may result in a lower overall percentage contribution (but not average account balance). In other words, this year's max contribution is 18k (never mind the catch up for individuals aged 50 or higher). If an individual earns $200k/annually and contributes the max, it's 9%. If an individual earns $50k/annually and contributes the max, the result is approximately 36%. Fidelity's tool would be much provide a much more accurate picture if it also accounted for salary.
I can't see how this is accurate as a comparison or check your progress against others tool. Because the maximum allowable contribution is fixed by the IRS, highly salaried individuals may result in a lower overall percentage contribution (but not average account balance). In other words, this year's max contribution is 18k (never mind the catch up for individuals aged 50 or higher). If an individual earns $200k/annually and contributes the max, it's 9%. If an individual earns $50k/annually and contributes the max, the result is approximately 36%. Fidelity's tool would be much provide a much more accurate picture if it also accounted for salary.
I get what you are saying but I don't think it would impact things nearly as much as you might think. In the last few years only 9-12% of 401k participants actually max out so it's a relatively small portion in the end of a meaningless stat
I thought the numbers seemed kind of low too. Are these really averages of all the 401k partcipants with Fidelity? I thought it looked more like an average of the general population as a whole.
I can't see how this is accurate as a comparison or check your progress against others tool. Because the maximum allowable contribution is fixed by the IRS, highly salaried individuals may result in a lower overall percentage contribution (but not average account balance). In other words, this year's max contribution is 18k (never mind the catch up for individuals aged 50 or higher). If an individual earns $200k/annually and contributes the max, it's 9%. If an individual earns $50k/annually and contributes the max, the result is approximately 36%. Fidelity's tool would be much provide a much more accurate picture if it also accounted for salary.
This is a sample of 13 mn people. Outliers with high pay will be lost in the sheer number of people.
Also, high paying jobs tend to be more prominent in coastal cities, so that is captured by the local comparison.
interesting , high cost of living areas and higher pay does far better at saving then low cost areas and lower pay . i always thought that would be the case . many folks tend to avoid high cost areas but as you see here the proportion of pay that can be saved is greater despite costs.
we saw this when we were going to retire to the pocono's when we had the 2nd home .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
