A V-shaped path, down to 40 percent stocks at retirement and back to 50 by 75, is justified by a capacity figure in the MT423 glide path design for Unit 7. Searches like "mt 423 unit 7 assignment example", "mt423 unit 7 sample" and "mt423 unit 7 example" land here.
What a finished MT423 Unit 7 glide path design looks like
Five pages with a path chart, an age table and two comparison panels. The table gives the stock share at each age: 50 at 58, 47 at 60, 44 at 62, 40 at 65, 42 at 67, 45 at 70 and 50 at 75, holding flat after. The first panel explains the descent. On a projected 935,635 at 65, the same bracketed crisis replay takes about 240,365 from the 50 percent mix, above the 210,518 limit, while the 40 percent mix loses about 187,013. The second panel sizes the safe side: 60 percent in bonds and cash at 65, about 561,381, covers two bridge years before Social Security and roughly 14.5 years of the later gap. A straight decline to 30 percent by 75 is shown for contrast.
How a MT423 Unit 7 example is structured
The design states its purpose before its shape: keep the largest plausible loss inside the capacity limit as that limit tightens toward retirement. The slope of the descent follows from the distance separating the two limits, 28.3 percent now and 22.5 at 65, and the paper shows the arithmetic rather than choosing a round number. The low point sits at the retirement date because sequence risk peaks when withdrawals begin. The ascent after 65 is argued from published research, Kitces and Pfau's 2014 work on rising equity glide paths, and from the plan itself: as the bond side is spent on early withdrawals, the stock share rises without new purchases. A comparison with a conventional straight decline shows what the V gives up and gains. Implementation notes cover annual steps, which accounts shift and when the path would be revisited.
Purpose before shape
Keeping a severe-year loss inside a limit that tightens from 28.3 percent now to 22.5 percent at 65.
A slope from arithmetic
Ten points of stock removed over seven years, about 1.4 a year, sized by the replayed loss at each age.
The low point at retirement
Forty percent stocks at 65, where withdrawals start and a large early loss would do the most lasting harm.
Spending the bond side first
About 561,381 in bonds and cash at 65, drawn on first, so the stock share climbs back toward 50 largely by itself.
Against a straight decline
A conventional path to 30 percent by 75, compared on crisis loss at 65 and on growth given up in later years.
Where marks go in MT423 Unit 7
Glide paths drawn as a smooth line from an age rule, with no reason for the slope, miss what the unit is usually testing, and graders tend to ask why the path falls at the rate it does. Tying the slope to a computed limit, or to the size of early withdrawals, earns far more than citing convention. A low point placed at an arbitrary age rather than the withdrawal start misreads where sequence risk concentrates. Rising paths after retirement are legitimate but need their source and rationale, and papers presenting the V as consensus overstate it. Points are also lost where the path ignores the gap years before Social Security, which make the first withdrawals twice as large. Implementation left vague, with no rule for annual steps or accounts, leaves the design unusable.
Get a MT423 Unit 7 example written to your instructions
Whatever retirement date, income sources and allocation the Unit 7 case gives its client, a first custom MT423 glide path can be designed from them free of charge, slope justified by computed limits and low point placed deliberately, in the rubric's format. Delivery runs 24-48h, and a conventional declining path is equally possible if required.
MT423 Unit 7 questions, answered
Should a glide path always decline with age?
Not necessarily. Target-date funds typically decline through retirement, but research on rising equity paths after retirement argues for the reverse once early withdrawals have passed. Either can be defended; what matters is that the shape follows from the client's income, capacity and withdrawal pattern, stated in the paper with the figures that drive it.
How steep should the slope be?
Steep enough to meet whatever limit the design is protecting, and no steeper. Here the slope comes from the gap between today's loss limit and the tighter one at retirement. A slope chosen as a round number, or copied from a fund family, usually draws a question about where it came from.
Do I need to cite research for the bond tent?
Yes, if the design rises after retirement, because that choice departs from the most familiar paths. Kitces and Pfau's 2014 article in the Journal of Financial Planning is the usual reference. Cite it accurately, and present it as one supported view rather than a settled rule, noting that other researchers favor declining paths.