Am I On Track for Retirement? Benchmarks by Age

Nearly half of workers have never run the numbers. EBRI's 2025 Retirement Confidence Survey found that only 52% of workers have estimated the monthly income they'll need in retirement, so the other 48% are guessing (Source: EBRI/Greenwald Retirement Confidence Survey 2025, Fact Sheet 3). If you're asking "am I on track for retirement?", you've already started. The quick answer is to compare your savings to a multiple of your salary for your age. Fidelity's checkpoints are 1x by 30, 3x by 40, 6x by 50, 8x by 60 and 10x by 67. The fuller answer is that "on track" is a probability, not a yes or no. That version is the one you can plan with.

Below you'll find the benchmarks, how real savers compare, what the benchmarks leave out, and what to do if you're behind.

Am I on track for retirement? The benchmarks by age

Most guides use Fidelity's savings milestones. Each one is a multiple of your salary at that age:

The example column is just arithmetic. Use your own salary.

Other firms do it a little differently. T. Rowe Price gives a range for each age instead of one number, and it assumes you retire at 65 rather than 67. Ramsey groups its targets by generation. The idea behind all of them is the same: a rough checkpoint to tell you whether you're near the path.

What the 10x target assumes

This is the part most articles leave out. Fidelity's milestones assume you:

• Save 15% of your pay every year, employer match included
• Get real wage growth (after inflation) of 1.5% a year
• Retire at 67
• Need the money to last to age 93
• Replace 45% of your pre-retirement income from savings
• Have no pension
• Invest in something like a target-date fund

If your life doesn't fit those assumptions, the target changes. Fidelity says itself that the multiple goes up if you retire earlier. Retiring at 60 against a target built for 67 means you're measuring yourself with the wrong ruler.

How you compare with other savers

Some people care less about a target and more about how they stack up against everyone else. Here's what the latest data says.

Vanguard's How America Saves 2026, its 25th edition, uses year-end 2025 data. The average 401(k) balance hit a record $167,970. The median was $44,115.

That gap is important. A few very large accounts pull the average up, and Yahoo Finance's coverage of the report notes that the average sits around the 75th percentile. That means most savers have less than the "average." The median, the balance in the exact middle, is the fairer comparison.

By age, secondary sites restating Vanguard's 2026 data report:

Figures as restated by wealthvieu.com and investtofire.com; see the Vanguard report for the original breakdown.

Savings rates are also below the usual advice. TheStreet reports the average total savings rate in Vanguard plans was 12.1% in 2025, short of the 15% guideline.

Different data sources can give very different pictures. Empower's data, which counts more account types, puts people in their 60s at an average of $1,247,718 and a median of $568,450. That's not a contradiction. It's measuring something else. A 401(k)-only number leaves out IRAs, taxable brokerage accounts, old workplace plans and pensions. Before you compare, check what's in the number.

Why one benchmark can't tell you if you're on track

A salary multiple is a decent smoke test. But two people with the same balance at the same age can end up in very different places. Here's why.

You spend money, not salary

Salary multiples treat income as a stand-in for what you'll spend. That's often wrong. A high earner who lives on a small share of their pay may need far less than 10x. A moderate earner with high fixed costs may need more. What actually drains a portfolio is your monthly spending, so that's the number to plan around.

When the bad years hit matters

This is called sequence-of-returns risk. Picture two retirees with the same savings and the same long-run average return. One gets a market drop in the first years of retirement, while they're withdrawing money. The other gets it ten years later. The first retiree sells more shares at low prices, and those shares aren't there for the recovery. Same average, very different result. A single average-return projection can't show this.

You might live longer than you think

The Social Security Administration's planning guidance says about one in three 65-year-olds may live to at least 90 (Source: Social Security Administration, Retirement Information for Medicare Beneficiaries, 2026). Fidelity's milestones plan to 93. A plan that stops at 85 is quietly betting against a third of retirees.

Health care is a real line item

Fidelity's 2025 Retiree Health Care Cost Estimate puts lifetime costs for one 65-year-old retiring this year at $172,500 for Medicare premiums, deductibles and prescriptions. That figure excludes long-term care (Source: Fidelity Investments, 2025 Retiree Health Care Cost Estimate, July 2025). It's not a rounding error, and a salary multiple won't show it to you.

"On track" is really a probability

So what's a better way to answer the question? Ask a different one: across a wide range of possible market futures, how often does my money last?

That's what a Monte Carlo simulation does. Don't worry about the name. Instead of assuming the market returns the same amount every year, it runs your plan through many possible sequences of good and bad years, then counts how many of them still have money left at the end. If 900 out of 1,000 simulated futures stay funded, your plan has a 90% success rate. That's a probability, not a promise.

Researchers use the same method. Morningstar's 2025 research puts the safe starting withdrawal rate at 3.9% for a 30-year retirement, and it judged that by whether money was still there in 90% of simulated outcomes, not by an average return (Source: Morningstar, The State of Retirement Income 2025, December 2025). For example, 3.9% of a $500,000 portfolio is $19,500 in the first year.

Thinking in probabilities changes the question you ask. You stop asking "Did I hit 8x?" and start asking "What are my odds, and what would raise them?" Retiring a year or two later, trimming monthly spending, or saving more each move your success rate, and you can see by how much.

What to do if you're behind

Being under the benchmark isn't a verdict. It tells you which levers to look at. The catch is that the later you start, the harder each lever works.

SuperMoney's analysis shows the trade-off. A 40-year-old with half a year's salary saved would need to save about 25.5% of pay to retire at 67, or about 17.1% to retire at 70. Three extra working years cut the required savings rate by about a third.

The main levers:

1. Save more. Get the full employer match first. After 50, catch-up contributions let you put away more in tax-advantaged accounts.
2. Work a little longer. Each extra year adds contributions, adds growth, and takes a year off the time your money has to cover.
3. Spend less in retirement. A small cut in monthly spending lowers how much you withdraw every year for decades.
4. Count everything. Add up your IRAs, taxable accounts, any pension and old workplace plans, not just your current 401(k).
5. Think about Social Security timing. When you claim changes your guaranteed income for life, so it's worth modeling more than one claiming age.

Bankrate and others go through these steps in more detail. What matters most is seeing how each change moves your own odds, not someone else's average.

Check your own numbers

Benchmarks tell you whether you're near the path. They can't tell you how likely your plan is to work. For that you need your own numbers run through many possible futures.

You can do that with three numbers: your age, what you've saved for retirement, and what you spend each month. Monte Climb's retirement calculator runs them through 1,000 simulated futures and gives you a success rate. It runs in your browser, and nothing is saved until you say so. Plans run to age 95 by default to account for longevity, and the engine charges Medicare premiums and income-based surcharges year by year instead of using a flat guess.

If you want to dig deeper, ask William, our AI planner. Ask him "Am I on track?", "Can I retire at 62?" or "What's a sustainable spend?" He shows his work, and you can talk to him like you'd talk to a friend.

It's planning software, not advice. But it's a clear, honest first answer. Show my answer →

Frequently asked questions

How much should I have saved for retirement by age?

Fidelity's widely used milestones are 1x your salary by 30, 3x by 40, 6x by 50, 8x by 60 and 10x by 67. They assume a 15% savings rate, retirement at 67, a plan that runs to age 93 and no pension. If you plan to retire earlier, Fidelity says the target goes up.

What is the average 401(k) balance?

Vanguard's How America Saves 2026 reports an average 401(k) balance of $167,970 and a median of $44,115, based on year-end 2025 data. The median is the fairer comparison because a few very large accounts pull the average up.

Am I behind if I don't hit the salary multiple for my age?

Not necessarily. Salary multiples rest on one set of assumptions about income, spending, retirement age and pensions. A low spender may need less, and someone retiring early may need more. Your probability of success, which depends on your savings, your spending and your timeline, is a better test.

What is a safe withdrawal rate in retirement?

Morningstar's The State of Retirement Income 2025 (December 2025) puts the safe starting withdrawal rate at 3.9% for a 30-year retirement. That rate kept money in the portfolio in 90% of simulated outcomes.

What does a Monte Carlo retirement simulation tell me?

It runs your plan through many possible sequences of good and bad market years, not one average return, and counts how often your money lasts. The result is a success rate, such as 900 of 1,000 futures staying funded. That's a probability, not a guarantee.