There are some, but they are more expensive, and there are studies that have shown diverting money away from dirty companies actually makes them worse.

What I have clients do instead, donate the different in cost of regular fund for the ESG to a local charity that supports green initiatives.

When you jump back in, go with a globally diversified index instead of the S&P.

It will save you from ever doing this again. ;)

Honest question then for you: if you don't want them doing it, why are you?

Not to mention, with an annuity in place, if it covers your baseline retirement needs, you don't need to worry or react as much anyway.

And let’s say you bought the S&P 500 instead of the globally diversified portfolio I’ve already suggested.

For anyone who bought, holds it, and waits for recovery has lost nothing.

You don’t lose unless you sell.

But selling early and buying back in late cost actual return. That’s the point.

Cash on hand mean you missed part of the upswing leading up the current drop.

That’s not a gain in your favour.

Again, your logic is flawed.

I’m not saying that all.

I’m saying humans are horrible at investigating.

Timing the market, picking stocks, have a terribly negative effect on your returns.

Instead, a globally diversified passive equity portfolio will do everything you need without needing to guess and guess wrong.

Everyone said the same thing about Covid, the financial crisis, the dot com bubble, and on and on it goes.

None of it matter for those who stayed invested and did so passively.

Your logic is flawed.

That’s the point.

There’s no need to do what you’re doing and the nearly four decades of evidence demonstrates you’re the one harming yourself.

You think you’re being effective, and yet you’re costing yourself money long term.

And you’ll miss the upswing like everyone who does the same continues to do.

Those who ride out miss nothing.

It’s the whole point of passive investing for the long term. You don’t need to predict and risk being wrong. Because you, indeed, are wrong, and you just don’t know it.

Love this!

Such a great conversation, Robb!

Situations like this make me want to scream.

Most advisors don’t have a clue how to produce retirement income.

It’s why I had to give props to this guy for not trying, even though he could have chosen a better response.

PS – If your advisor hesitates when you mention ‘using your retirement assets,’ it might be time for a second opinion.

Retirement isn’t just math—it’s emotion. A great advisor will discuss the fear of outliving your money, the guilt of spending hard-earned savings, and help you spend more while you still can.

Not all advisors deliver the same kind of advice. Ensure yours specializes in your phase of life.

If they can also talk you through the latest developments in retirement income research, you can hit them with a follow-up question.

“How will you address the psychological challenges of spending my savings?”

“What’s your experience with decumulation strategies?”

A strong answer should include the limitations of the "4% rule," why dividends aren't a strategy, and the behavioural pitfalls of systems like Guyton Guardrails.

Retirement income planning demands distinct strategies–tax efficiency and withdrawal sequencing while managing the risks of longevity and brevity.

Missteps here can cost you the retired life you promised yourself.

If you’re nearing retirement, ask your advisor:

I have to admit—I respect this advisor's self-awareness.

He didn’t pretend to know what he doesn’t.

I've seen this situation many times before.

Advisors who focus on growing wealth often lack the expertise to convert it into income.

It’s like expecting a family physician to become a brain surgeon overnight: both are doctors, but only one has the specialized skills for the task.