Why Your Life Expectancy Number Might Be Wrong with Dale Hall

Dale Hall of the Society of Actuaries explains how to project your longevity and why informed life expectancy matters for retirement planning.

Most people build their retirement plan around a single number: life expectancy.

They’ll say, “My dad died at 78, my mom at 82, so I’ll probably be gone by then too.” Then they quietly design their plan to “run out” around that age.

But as my guest Dale Hall, Managing Director of Research at the Society of Actuaries, shared on the Retire Today podcast, that’s a risky way to approach the rest of your life.

“Even people who would rate themselves a little bit poorer in health are often very surprised of what their longevity can be.”

In other words: you may live much longer than you think. And if your money isn’t prepared for that, longevity becomes what author Moshe Milevsky calls “the great risk multiplier.”

---

Life Expectancy vs. Longevity: You’re Asking the Wrong Question

In the episode, we talked about a common problem: people treat life expectancy like death certainty.

If the table says your life expectancy at 62 is 84, most people assume, “I’ll probably die at 84.” But Dale pointed out that life expectancy is just the middle of the curve:

“Life expectancy is basically 50% of the time you’ll die before that age, and 50% of the time you’ll die after that age.”

The probability that you die exactly at that age is tiny.

That’s why I like to say, “The retirement longevity number you have in mind right now is probably wrong.” You shouldn’t just plan to make it to your life expectancy—you should plan for what happens if you live well past it.

Dale shared how the Longevity Illustrator tool (from the Society of Actuaries and American Academy of Actuaries) helps people see that full distribution, not just a single number. It shows the probability of living to 90, 95, 100—numbers that often shock people when they see them.

He ran it for himself and his wife and found that, even as healthy professionals:

“We were surprised by the probabilities of each of us living to a very old age… in our case, there’s something like a 40–45% chance one of us makes it to 95.”

For couples, that’s the key: you’re not just planning for one person, you’re planning for the last survivor. Your joint longevity is often much longer than either individual life expectancy.

---

Why Using Your Parents’ Ages Is Dangerous

Another trap Dale and I discussed: anchoring your expectations to when your parents died.

In our Retirement Risk Survey work, the Society of Actuaries sees this all the time. People say, “My dad died at 70, so I probably will too.”

But as Dale explained, that ignores 25–30 years of medical progress:

“The landscape for health care, pharmaceuticals, and treatments is radically different than it was 15 or 25 years ago.”

Add in lifestyle changes—less smoking, better diets, more preventive care—and you’ve got a completely different mortality picture.

Your dad may have started smoking in Korea, eaten fast food daily, and had no statins or modern heart care. If you’re living a different lifestyle with better medicine, why would you assume the same outcome?

This is why tools like the Longevity Illustrator ask about age, sex, smoking status, and health. Those four factors explain a huge portion of the difference in longevity between individuals.

---

Longevity: The Risk That Multiplies All the Others

Dale shared a line I love:

If you don’t live that long, inflation, markets, and healthcare costs don’t have as much time to hurt you. But the longer you live, the more chances you give those risks to show up—and the longer they have to compound.

That’s why longevity is a risk multiplier:

• More years for inflation to erode purchasing power
• More years for market downturns to hit your portfolio
• More years for health events, caregiving needs, or home repairs to show up as financial shocks

In the Society of Actuaries’ Retirement Risk Survey, retirees report all kinds of unexpected shocks: health issues, helping family, home maintenan