How much should be in 401k at age 40?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me give you one possible scenario:
If you have 300k now and max your own contribution every year, and have an employer contribution of 25k. You 401k will become $1.6M in 10 years assuming 9% annual return (so you have to take the risk and invest aggressively).

WHAT EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTES 25K YEARLY

My spouse gets a 10% contribution regardless of whether he contributes or not. So not quite $25k, since he doesn’t make $250k, but last year was $22k.

Meanwhile, I’ve got a 5% match so nowhere close to $25k!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me give you one possible scenario:
If you have 300k now and max your own contribution every year, and have an employer contribution of 25k. You 401k will become $1.6M in 10 years assuming 9% annual return (so you have to take the risk and invest aggressively).

WHAT EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTES 25K YEARLY

My spouse gets a 10% contribution regardless of whether he contributes or not. So not quite $25k, since he doesn’t make $250k, but last year was $22k.

Meanwhile, I’ve got a 5% match so nowhere close to $25k!

Similar. I get a 401k contribution regardless of what I put in.

[Anonymous]

Employers can put up to $69000 minus your up to $23000 contribution in 2024. But only at firms that only have highly paid employees, due to the weird laws to incentivize outsourcing low paid employees.

[Anonymous]

We have 600k at 35

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the rule of thumb for 40 is 3x your salary

Terrible rule of thumb and is completely unattainable for most people

How is it unattainable?

If you make 100k, you think it's ridiculous to have 300k after 18 years of working?

If you saved 10% of your income + company match, with below avg growth you would have well over 300k

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me give you one possible scenario:
If you have 300k now and max your own contribution every year, and have an employer contribution of 25k. You 401k will become $1.6M in 10 years assuming 9% annual return (so you have to take the risk and invest aggressively).

WHAT EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTES 25K YEARLY

I get 30k per year from my employer.

Like a 125% match?? Or is this firm profit-sharing?

Combo of match and across the board contribution. Everyone at my company gets a % of their base. This is common in my industry… ranges from 6-8% of base + a match of up to 4-5%. While this is much higher than many, there are some sectors where this would be at the low end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the rule of thumb for 40 is 3x your salary

Terrible rule of thumb and is completely unattainable for most people

How is it unattainable?

If you make 100k, you think it's ridiculous to have 300k after 18 years of working?

If you saved 10% of your income + company match, with below avg growth you would have well over 300k

Well for one, I spent my 20s making below $60k. In my 30s I made more, but also had 2 kids and over 5 years of daycare to pay for.

[Anonymous]

I make 225K and get a 3% contribution from my employer.

[Anonymous]

Dh gets no match (never has) and I get a match but for a much lower salary. We have about 250k total.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:37 and I have 20k

Someone like me.

[Anonymous]

This! I am 42 with around $200k. How did you achieve this??

Anonymous wrote:I had $206,000 in my 401k when I was 40. Have $1.4 million now at 53.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This! I am 42 with around $200k. How did you achieve this??

Anonymous wrote:I had $206,000 in my 401k when I was 40. Have $1.4 million now at 53.

Curious as well. But I think it is maxing out contribution, very good match, plus aggressively invested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the rule of thumb for 40 is 3x your salary

Terrible rule of thumb and is completely unattainable for most people

How is it unattainable?

If you make 100k, you think it's ridiculous to have 300k after 18 years of working?

If you saved 10% of your income + company match, with below avg growth you would have well over 300k

Um.....between myself and my employers, it's over 10% and I don't have 300 K. I'm over 200 K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the rule of thumb for 40 is 3x your salary

Terrible rule of thumb and is completely unattainable for most people

How is it unattainable?

If you make 100k, you think it's ridiculous to have 300k after 18 years of working?

If you saved 10% of your income + company match, with below avg growth you would have well over 300k

Um.....between myself and my employers, it's over 10% and I don't have 300 K. I'm over 200 K.

It's really dependent on how the money is invested. Some plans are very conservative. Some companies and agencies have different levels of risk that employee can choose from. We chose very conservative funds and were way behind (also had no matches) then became self-employed and started making up for lost time. Hard to be older, though, taking on greater risk when we should be lessening risk.

[Anonymous]

34 and have $26,263.53
, but I feel like I am 25