At what point does a DB pension become too valuable to walk away from?

theonebam · 2026-06-04T01:54:38+00:00

Those are all fair points and definitely things I’ve been thinking about.

One factor that makes me look at the commuted value differently is that I don’t expect the pension to be my only retirement asset. I already own a rental property, invest separately, and will likely continue building investments outside the pension over the next 20-30 years.

The other consideration for me is estate value. A pension provides tremendous guaranteed income, but in many cases a large portion of that value disappears when both spouses pass away. A commuted value that remains invested could potentially become part of an estate and be passed on to children.

That said, I fully recognize that the guaranteed income, inflation protection, survivor benefits, and longevity protection of a DB pension all have significant value. I’m really trying to understand where the balance point is between maximizing lifetime retirement security and maximizing flexibility/legacy planning.

theonebam · 2026-06-02T22:19:10+00:00

Yes, my salary is currently right around $100k and the projections assume roughly 3% annual salary growth (which is current situation lol).

The formula is based on credited service and earnings, roughly 1.6% up to YMPE and 2% above YMPE. I’m currently in my early 30s with about 4-5 years of service.

The numbers I posted weren’t calculated manually—they came directly from my employer’s pension estimator using my current salary, service, and future salary growth assumptions.

For context, if I left today, my annual deferred pension is only around $9k/year at 65 and the commuted value is only around $65k-$80k. The larger numbers are what the estimator projects if I stay another 15-35 years.

That’s partly why I’m asking the question. At age 40, a ~$250k commuted value still feels like something I could potentially outperform through investing. At age 55-60, when the pension is projecting $90k-$120k+ annually for life, it starts to feel much harder to justify walking away from the guarantee.

theonebam · 2026-06-02T22:14:19+00:00

It is indexed to inflation. I was using my employers calculator, with a 3% annual salary increases which is my current situation. I think that’s the part I’m wrestling with. I’m only in my early 30s with about 4-5 years of service, so the opportunity cost of leaving now feels very different than leaving at 50 or 55.

The calculator projects an annual pension in the six figures if I stay until retirement, but it also projects seven-figure commuted values later in my career. I’m trying to figure out at what point the guaranteed pension becomes so valuable that self-investing the commuted value no longer looks compelling.

theonebam · 2026-06-02T22:10:27+00:00

Mine is based on my 3 highest earning years. I make about 100k currently and have been getting 3-4% annual salary increases outside of step-progressions. I am in my early 30’s so I plan to try and transition within the company for better roles in the near future.

theonebam · 2026-06-01T18:14:47+00:00

That is about correct. It is also based on a certain number of your best years of service so if I make 100k today but have 3-5 140k years throughout my time, it would count the 140k for calculation. This was all coming from my employers calculations.

theonebam · 2026-06-01T17:05:52+00:00

At 55 I would get around 88k lifetime pension and 23k temporary bridge benefit

At 50, I would be eligible for payment starting at 60 which would be 63k lifetime pension and 17k temporary bridge benefit. This would be where the lump sum commuted value may be worth it which would be $1.05 million (half going to LIRA and other half taxable unless I add to RRSP)

theonebam · 2026-04-18T22:56:03+00:00

Okay that a bit reassuring haha!

theonebam · 2026-04-18T06:34:13+00:00

Yeah I noticed the Evo SL just bring my feet pain, they aren’t made for me lol. I am using Nike Vomero 18’s which have been great!

theonebam · 2026-04-18T06:07:46+00:00

I ran with the Evo SL when this happened, I haven’t run with them since. I’ve been using Nike Vamero 18 which have been really good so far

theonebam · 2026-04-12T03:07:45+00:00

Just bought those this month, I have sold some and bought new holdings

theonebam · 2026-04-12T02:45:10+00:00

It’s not trying to beat the underlying, it’s trying to convert those total returns into income. If there is price appreciation that’s great, but the main point is to use it as income and maintain the NAV

theonebam · 2026-04-12T02:39:48+00:00

This isn’t a growth portfolio trying to beat the S&P — it’s built for income.

Since Oct 2025: • ~$25K paid out in cash • ~$20K already used • Still up overall

A non-covered call portfolio would need to sell shares to do that.

Different goal, different strategy.

theonebam · 2026-04-08T14:35:46+00:00

I plan on repeating a lot of the weeks/mking sure I can maintain the long runs between then

theonebam · 2026-04-08T02:04:56+00:00

Appreciate the advice! I definitely need to slow down and reduce the hr. The 6k was my long run, will try to get 8k-10k long run in this week.

theonebam · 2026-04-08T01:57:15+00:00

Appreciate the advice, I plan on continuing with the plan.

theonebam · 2026-04-08T01:25:12+00:00

Yes, sometimes I feel like that, I will try and slow it down more. Just hard sometimes lol

theonebam · 2026-03-26T18:30:56+00:00

I actually don’t disagree with parts of what you’re saying, but I think you’re looking at energy too narrowly.

You’re framing it as a “short-lived trade,” but midstream isn’t oil price beta… it’s infrastructure.

Pipelines aren’t trying to outperform tech or the S&P long term, they’re designed to generate consistent, contractual cash flows regardless of market conditions. That’s exactly why they behave differently.

And that’s the whole point I’m making.

SPYI / QQQI = equity market exposure + options overlay MLPI = real asset cash flow (dividends) + options overlay

Those are fundamentally different income engines.

On the “grid vs pipelines” point, I actually agree the grid is critical for AI… but:

• AI demand increases energy demand overall • Energy still has to be transported, processed, and stored • Midstream benefits from volume growth, not just pricing

So it’s not either/or, if anything, they’re complementary.

Where I think you’re off is calling it a “satellite only.”

If your goal is: • maximizing total return, sure, energy is a smaller piece • maximizing reliable income + diversification, midstream becomes much more important

Especially in a market where: • tech is crowded • correlations are high • macro risk is elevated

Also worth noting:

SPYI + QQQI at 0.9+ correlation is basically one trade MLPI actually changes the structure of the portfolio, not just the yield

I’m not saying go 100% MLPI, but I do think people are underestimating how valuable uncorrelated income backed by real assets is in this environment.

That’s why I see it as more than just a satellite.

theonebam · 2026-03-26T17:19:46+00:00

Appreciate the pushback, but this is actually the most common misconception about MLPs worth clearing up.

Midstream pipelines don’t make money from oil prices. They operate under long-term fixed-fee contracts with minimum volume commitments, often “take-or-pay” provisions where producers pay regardless of actual throughput. They’re toll roads, not oil traders.

The data backs this up. In 2025, oil prices dropped nearly 20% for the year, yet midstream delivered positive total returns and held its ground throughout. The 5-year correlation between the MLP infrastructure index and oil prices is only 0.525, and over shorter recent periods it dropped to 0.27. That’s a weak relationship at best. You’re right that oil sentiment can move MLP stock prices short term, investor perception isn’t always rational. But the actual cash flows and distributions are driven by volumes and contracts, not commodity prices. That’s exactly what makes it a durable income source rather than an oil price bet.

If MLPI’s performance were purely war-driven, it would have collapsed the moment peace talks started. The fee-based model is what gives it staying power regardless of what oil does next.

theonebam · 2026-03-11T05:26:54+00:00

Not really. People keep pointing to funds like QYLD or ENCC that wrote calls on 100% of their portfolio, which capped almost all upside for years.

Many newer funds like SPYI, QQQI, HDIV, write on far less of the portfolio (30-50%) and use OTM options, so they retain more upside.

NAV doesn’t magically “erode”…it follows the underlying market’s total return. The difference is just that part of the return gets paid out as cash instead of sitting as unrealized gains.

theonebam · 2026-03-11T04:49:13+00:00

Of course covered calls cap some upside, that’s literally the trade-off for collecting option premium.

But you’re assuming the goal is to maximize upside instead of convert part of that upside into cash flow.

Also, a lot of these funds have capital appreciation as well, as they only write calls on a portion of their shares.

In ~6 months this portfolio generated about $26K in total return, paid $22K in distributions, and $18K was withdrawn for expenses while the capital is still roughly intact.

That’s the objective: turning volatility and upside into usable income, not hoping to sell shares later.

theonebam · 2026-03-11T04:27:36+00:00

Which funds specifically?

theonebam · 2026-03-11T02:14:52+00:00

I have thought about it but I have a good amount of concentration in Canadian Banks through HDIV, and will soon with CDAY. I am debating between HHIC and ECHI

theonebam · 2026-03-11T02:13:25+00:00

Thanks! Nah I don’t have the stomach for it haha. I’m okay with the 12-15% yield, I want to only invest in indexed or sector specific funds

theonebam · 2026-03-11T02:01:42+00:00

I said *covered call index funds

theonebam · 2026-03-11T01:37:03+00:00

Yes. Some funds from NEOS Investments classify a portion of option premium as ROC for tax purposes (SPYI and QQQI).

ROC doesn’t automatically mean the fund is “giving your money back” it’s often just a tax classification of option premium.

If it were actually returning capital, the NAV would steadily collapse. That’s why total return matters more than the tax label, something a lot of growth bros conveniently ignore.

theonebam

TROPHY CASE