4 pieces of outdated retirement advice you should probably ignore

Flickr / Nams82

Some things are timeless. They never go out of style. But the same can't be said for retirement advice.

Retirement today looks vastly different than it did for seniors of generations past. Workers now have access to a variety of new retirement accounts, and the economy looks markedly different than it did when people were leaving the workforce in the 70s, 80s and even 90s.

If you want to retire comfortably, some experts say you need to modernize your thinking on the following four pieces of outdated retirement advice.

Outdated advice: A 60/40 portfolio split is safe and profitable.

More modern take: An 80/20 split may be better suited for most people.

Workers have long been advised that a 60/40 split in their portfolio is ideal. By placing 60% of their money in stocks and 40% in bonds, they would be able to assure adequate growth while keeping a significant amount of assets secure in low-risk investments. "In the past, you'd be able to get 3, 4 or 5% on a no-brainer bond portfolio so [a 60/40 split] was a very standard move for wealth advisors," says Mitch Tuchman, managing director at Rebalance IRA. "It was as predictable as shifting gears in a car."

However, in today's low-interest-rate environment, bonds are earning practically nothing. What's more, people are living longer, which means even if bonds were performing better, they may not earn enough to sustain a person's income throughout retirement.

Instead of going with the old 60/40 advice, Tuchman says many people may be better served with an 80/20 split that puts more money in stocks. He acknowledges some people have an aversion to the risk presented by stocks, but he adds they have always gone up in value over a 10-year period.

Outdated advice: You should use your age to allocate your portfolio.

More modern take: Low interest rates mean you need more money in stocks.

A similar bit of advice tells workers to use their age to determine how much money should go into stocks and bonds. Under this rule of thumb, a 30 year old would allocate 30% of his portfolio to bonds and 70% to stocks while a 70 year old would have 70% in bonds and 30% in stocks. "It's a dreadful strategy because it ignores how long people live nowadays," says Joe Duran, CEO of United Capital in Newport Beach, California. Like Tuchman, Duran says people should keep more money in stocks where they can earn enough gains to last for what could be a 30-year retirement.

For those in retirement who balk at the idea of leaving their savings in higher risk funds, Duran recommends pulling out two to three years of income and keeping it in a savings account for peace of mind. If the market tanks, you'll have enough money in savings to live on while waiting for the price of stocks to recover.

Outdated advice: You can safely withdraw 4% of your retirement fund each year.

More modern take: How much you withdraw should be a year-to-year decision.

For years, 4% has been the magic number when it comes to taking withdrawals from retirement accounts. Retirees were advised this amount would make their savings last the rest of their lives.

The problem is retirement funds nowadays don't reliably have gains each year. "Last year, it was almost impossible to get 4% on your portfolio," Duran says. Those who took out that amount were likely dipping into their principal. Doing that consistently could cause a person to either run out of money in retirement or eat away at any inheritance they expected to leave.

A more modern approach is to skip the rule of thumb and decide annually how much to withdraw based upon current market conditions.