WHY I BUILT RETIREBETTER
Retirement deserves
a better explanation.
You should not have to reverse-engineer a retirement framework to understand what it means for you.
I respect EPF’s investment expertise. But I found its retirement messaging frustrating. A savings target, the income that capital can produce, and a strategy for spending it are three different questions.
That frustration—and, yes, a little spite—became RetireBetter.
The two questions that started it.
Before understanding the method
What does that savings target assume?
A headline number should make its assumptions clear. How do investment returns, inflation and the length of retirement fit into it?
After understanding the method
What is the drawdown model trying to achieve?
Explaining the arithmetic is not enough. Why choose that withdrawal strategy? What are the alternatives? And what happens if retirement lasts longer?
My criticism is about communication and modelling choices—not a claim that EPF never accounts for returns, or that one target is wrong for everyone.
Primary source: EPF’s original 12 December 2024 Belanjawanku and Retirement Income Adequacy Framework announcement .
The same standard applies to us.
Every assumption visible.
Every calculation explainable.
Every projection challengeable.
Including our own. RetireBetter is here to help you compare choices, not hand you another magic number. No calculator can promise what the future will look like.
Spite got me started.
Clarity is the point.