For years, retirement has been treated as a fixed milestone – a date circled on the calendar, often tied to state pension age, company scheme rules, or the culturally ingrained notion of “65 and done.” But in practice, that model is becoming increasingly outdated. What we are now seeing, and planning around more frequently, is the personalisation of a retirement age: a shift away from these traditional retirement milestones towards a more nuanced, personalised approach.
From a financial planning perspective, this is both an opportunity and a challenge.
The traditional retirement framework had a certain simplicity. Accumulate assets, reach a predefined age, switch off income, and draw down. That linear path made assumptions that are often no longer reliable: stable careers, defined benefit pensions, predictable life expectancy, and relatively uniform lifestyle expectations.
I now see more and more clients with different starting points.
Some have built significant wealth early and are financially capable of stepping back in their 50s. Others, despite high earnings, have delayed saving and may need, or want, to work well into their 70s. Increasingly, I see people who don’t even define retirement as a single event. Instead, they view it as a phased transition: reducing hours, changing roles, or pivoting into something more fulfilling but less demanding.
This is where the idea of a specific retirement age begins to lose its meaning.
Instead, we focus on what I would describe as “financial independence points.” These are not tied to age, but to capability. At what point does your asset base, combined with expected future income streams, give you the flexibility to make work optional? That might be 57 for one client and 72 for another.
Why are traditional retirement milestones no longer applicable?
The key driver behind this shift is longevity. People are living longer, and importantly, healthier lives means they’re able to do more for longer. A client retiring at 60 today could reasonably expect a 30-year retirement horizon (or longer – in some cases we plan to age 100, depending on individual circumstances). That is not a short period of rest – it is an entire life phase that needs funding, structuring, and planning.
And this is where personalisation becomes critical.
A blanket approach, retire at X, draw Y% per year, simply doesn’t account for variability in spending patterns, health trajectories, family dynamics, or risk tolerance. Some clients will front-load their retirement, spending heavily in the early years while they are active. Others will spend more later, perhaps supporting children onto the property ladder or helping with grandchildren. Some want certainty and guarantees; others are comfortable flexing withdrawals in line with markets.
The role of the advisor has shifted accordingly, and often guiding someone to a fixed finish line is no longer applicable. Now, we look at modelling multiple scenarios and helping clients understand any trade-offs.
For example, delaying retirement by even two or three years can have a disproportionate impact on outcomes. It reduces the drawdown period, allows further contributions, and gives investments more time to compound. Conversely, bringing retirement forward may require a more conservative withdrawal strategy or acceptance of higher risk.
Beyond the numbers, there is a behavioural element that cannot be ignored
Many clients underestimate the psychological transition into retirement. Work provides structure, identity, and social interaction. Removing that overnight can be challenging. This is why phased or partial retirement is becoming more popular, and in many cases more sustainable. It allows individuals to adjust gradually, both financially and emotionally.
From a planning perspective, this introduces additional complexity. Income streams can become less predictable, and tax planning can become more nuanced, particularly when combining earned income with pension withdrawals.
Sequencing – which assets to draw from and when – becomes more important.
It also raises important questions about pension access. In the UK, the minimum pension access age is rising, and state pension ages continue to shift. But these are policy constraints, not planning objectives. The real question is: how do we bridge the gap between when a client wants flexibility and when their assets become accessible?
Personalisation beyond traditional retirement age
This is where broader financial planning comes into play. ISAs, general investment accounts, and even property can all form part of the strategy. The idea is to create the ability for a client to step back from work when they want, without being forced into decisions that aren’t right.
Another key factor driving the personalisation of retirement age is the changing nature of work itself.
Flexible working, remote roles, and the growth of consultancy or portfolio careers mean that retirement no longer has to involve stopping work entirely. Many clients are choosing to continue working in some capacity because they enjoy it.
This has significant implications for financial planning. Continued income, even at a reduced level, can dramatically improve sustainability. It can allow for lower withdrawal rates (the percentage drawn from your portfolio each year, which if set too high can deplete savings prematurely), reduce sequence risk (the possibility of poor investment returns early in retirement which can affect the sustainability of a portfolio, even if returns recover later), and provide a buffer during market downturns.
However, it also requires careful management. Overconfidence in future earnings is a risk and can lead to under-saving. The ability or willingness to work can diminish earlier than expected, whether through ill health, redundancy, market conditions, or a change in personal circumstances.
Why stress testing is so important
When we model retirement plans, we do not just look at a single path. We examine what happens if markets underperform, if inflation is higher than expected, or if income stops earlier than planned. The goal is not to eliminate risk but to ensure that the plan is resilient.
Ultimately, the personalisation of retirement age reflects the need for holistic, client-centric planning. It requires deeper conversations about values, priorities, and what clients actually want their lives to look like, as well as their assets and income for retirement.
When do you want to slow down? What does an ideal week look like? How important is leaving a legacy versus maximising your own lifestyle? These are not purely financial questions, but they have profound financial implications.
Importantly, the answers are rarely static. Circumstances change, markets move, and priorities evolve. A retirement plan set at 45 may look different when a client reaches 55. This is why ongoing advice, including regular reviews, adjustments, and recalibration, is essential.
In many ways, we are emphasising the move to flexibility in retirement planning
The concept of a single retirement age belongs to a time when careers, pensions, and life expectancy were more predictable. Today, the reality is far more complex, but also far more empowering. Clients have greater control over how and when they transition out of work.
Our role is to provide the framework that makes that retirement planning meaningful. Not by anchoring someone to a number, but by helping them understand what is possible, and what trade-offs come with each choice.
If this article has raised any questions for you, feel free to get in touch!
Written by Andrew Smith, Independent Financial Adviser at Flying Colours
Please note:
This article is for general information only and does not constitute advice. The information is aimed at retail clients only.
All information is correct at the time of writing and is subject to change in the future.
The value of your investments (and any income from them) can go down as well as up and you may not get back the full amount you invested. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance. Investments should be considered over the longer term (minimum of 5 years) and should fit in with your overall risk profile and financial circumstances.
A pension is a long-term investment not normally accessible until 55 (57 from April 2028). The fund value may fluctuate and can go down, which would have an impact on the level of pension benefits available. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.
The tax implications of pension withdrawals will be based on your individual circumstances. Thresholds, percentage rates, and tax legislation may change in subsequent Finance Acts.
Planning horizons are illustrative and will vary based on individual health, circumstances and life expectancy