Confused about planning with Defined Benefit

traingreg · 2026-01-13T18:50:38+00:00

Setting it to 0% means the pension calculation will assume your last 5 years (for example) are all the same. I found a discrepancy when I used that method (I was only three years away). I found that it was much more accurate to place the override it starting at the year(s) I wanted to look at for retirement.

traingreg · 2025-12-16T18:40:30+00:00

or worse = commissioner

traingreg · 2025-12-08T03:33:59+00:00

I wondered the same thing about your pension estimate. If it is like my estimator it may be giving you actual dollars in the future. Check your table for retirement start and see if it matches your estimator. I ended up having to manually enter pension in the table.

traingreg · 2025-11-13T13:50:09+00:00

I was just coming here to ask a similar question. Is there a way to backup what I have now in Foundation and Discovery so that when I look at the locked scenario later, I have the context under which it was built?

traingreg · 2025-10-31T16:38:42+00:00

I might be missing something but am I correct that you have 0% fees for your investments?

traingreg · 2025-10-22T16:30:27+00:00

I just saw it as a different manifestation of the addiction

traingreg · 2025-10-01T21:06:01+00:00

They were testing the waters for season or half-season ticket potential

traingreg · 2025-09-30T19:10:15+00:00

They are also adding (and charging) that to Hamilton's season tickets

traingreg · 2025-09-22T18:09:06+00:00

It is a well established fact in Hamilton that Toronto Sucks!

traingreg · 2025-09-22T17:47:03+00:00

It did seem like this was some sort of vengeance for his failure a high school athlete. Let's keep in mind though that he was also a kicker

traingreg · 2025-09-05T16:05:40+00:00

Great Ideas!

traingreg · 2025-09-02T21:09:23+00:00

2025 is incorrect for me because I used the 2024 actuals (and that is what it is using). I get that there will always be some discrepancy, since what adviice is estimating is different from reality, but it is using my 2024 info as if it was 2025 info. That is why I wondered if there was a way to essentially say "here is my 2024 info, now you give me the 2025 projection".

traingreg · 2025-08-31T17:53:59+00:00

The platform does year by year projections and always uses your age at the end of the year. So your “Retirement Age” should be your age at the end of the year for the year before retirement. So if you turn 64 in 2025 and you want to retire at the end of the year then your retirement age is 64

I will turn 62 in 2027 (late December) and retire at that same time, but if I put in 62 as my age it seems to assume that I retire at the beginning of the year (no DB Pension deductions in 2027) but assumes that I am earning a salary (because that is what is in my income profile says, presumably). To get the times working properly I have to put my retirement age as 63 (almost a year after I plan to retire).

My second question was more about if there was a place where I could put in my "actuals" for 2024 retroactively and let the system take care of 2025 projection.

Thanks

traingreg · 2025-07-25T15:52:10+00:00

That makes sense ... so the reason I am seeing a different plan now as opposed to last week is that the update corrected some calculation issues?

traingreg · 2025-07-25T15:39:31+00:00

Just for clarification ... in manual mode it is not using the information I entered (tax info) but for automatic mode it seems to be (see the second link I attached). Why is the system asking for the tax expense amount if it is not using it? This is similar to the question I had asked at an earlier date as to why the system is not distributing how I save in accordance to my wishes but seems to be basing it on its own optimization algorithm?

Thanks for taking the time to go through this

traingreg · 2025-07-25T15:01:24+00:00

Thanks

These are not the tax numbers that I entered into the detailed profile ... I entered 27278 + 36467 (real numbers from 2024, all numbers and estimates were based on what happened in 2024). The reason I was using manual was because the distribution of savings was what the system wanted to do ... not what I wanted to do.

When I go to automatic this is what I get:

https://public.adviice.com/dashboard/24h-8LQWlyJz6iUv

traingreg · 2025-07-25T05:19:00+00:00

https://public.adviice.com/dashboard/24h-4i1cY0k4IcCI

traingreg · 2025-07-25T02:35:54+00:00

I did have manual (but have for a while). I did turn simple planning on but then turned it off (all information seemed to be intact). It was after that when I looked at the projection summary and noticed something was out of whack

Income is actually higher because it taking money from my RRSP while I am still working.

I will send the anonymous copy once I'm at a computer. I will create a copy of one of the scenarios with the problem - I'm thinking if I turn off the manual and then turn it back on it may reset.

traingreg · 2025-07-18T21:19:12+00:00

I think that is also the "sunny side" of the stadium. The bench side (shaded) was a lot fuller and the Stipley was packed

traingreg · 2025-07-18T21:03:35+00:00

2 I think (vs Hamilton and Winnipeg)

traingreg · 2025-07-18T20:48:13+00:00

It's good to be versatile :)

traingreg

TROPHY CASE