How much should you have saved by 40?
The short answer
On a $100,000 income, about $269,000 at 40, which is 2.7 times salary. That keeps you on track for 65 while saving 15% a year for the 25 years in between, against a target of $1.63M.
Why one multiple cannot fit every income
Social Security is a fixed dollar amount, so it covers most of a modest retirement and very little of a large one. That is why the required multiple of salary rises with income instead of holding at the single figure every benchmark quotes.
| Income | Portfolio target | On track at 40 | Times salary | To stop saving |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $50,000 | $493K | $40K | 0.8x | $146K |
| $75,000 | $1.06M | $154K | 2.1x | $313K |
| $100,000 | $1.63M | $269K | 2.7x | $480K |
| $150,000 | $2.76M | $498K | 3.3x | $815K |
| $200,000 | $3.89M | $727K | 3.6x | $1.15M |
Raise it and the balance you need today falls, because future contributions do more of the work.
Set it to zero to see the figure most benchmarks imply. It roughly doubles at the low end.
Where 40 sits on the curve
On a $100,000 income the on-track balance runs $146,000 at 35, $269,000 at 40 and $426,000 at 45. The requirement accelerates because every year removed from the runway is a year of compounding the portfolio has to replace with cash.
The last column of the table is worth a second look. It is the Coast FIRE number: what you would need today if you stopped contributing entirely and let growth finish the job. It is always larger than the on-track figure, and the gap between them is the value of the contributions you are still planning to make.
Both numbers assume a smooth real return that no real portfolio delivers. A run of weak years early does more damage than the same years later, which is why a projection against actual market history tells you more than a benchmark does.
Common questions
How much should you have saved by 40?
On a $100,000 income, about $269,000, or 2.7 times salary. That assumes you keep saving 15% from here to 65 and that Social Security covers $24,000 of your retirement spending. Both assumptions move the answer, and both are editable on this page.
Why is this different from the usual "3x salary by 40" rule?
Because a single multiple cannot be right at every income. Social Security is a fixed dollar amount, so it covers most of a modest retirement and very little of a large one. On these assumptions the required multiple at 40 runs from 0.8 times salary at $50,000 up to 3.6 times at $200,000. Higher earners need a bigger multiple, not the same one.
What if I am behind?
Raise the savings rate, which is the input that moves the answer most at this age, then check what it does on this page rather than guessing. Cutting planned retirement spending works twice over, since it lowers the target directly. Working two extra years does three things at once: more contributions, more compounding and a shorter retirement to fund. Being behind at 40 with 25 years left is a solvable problem.
Is this the same as Coast FIRE?
No, and the difference matters. This figure assumes you keep saving. The Coast FIRE number is what you would need if you stopped contributing today and let compounding finish alone, which is always larger. At 40 on a $100,000 income the on-track figure is $269,000 against a Coast number of $480,000.
Related: Coast FIRE by age, Savings rate, Spending levels, All ages.