This paper examines how risky labor income and retirement affect optimal portfolio choice. With idiosyncratic labor income risk, the optimal allocation to stocks is unambiguously larger for employed investors than for retired investors, consistent with the typical recommendations of investment advisors. Increasing idiosyncratic labor income risk raises investors' willingness to save and reduces their stock portfolio allocation towards the level of retired investors. Positive correlation between labor income and stock returns has a further negative effect and can actually reduce stockholdings below the level of retired investors.

We develop an analytical solution to the dynamic portfolio choice problem of an investor with power utility defined over wealth at a finite horizon, who faces a time-varying investment opportunity set, parameterized using a flexible vector autoregression. We apply this framework to study the horizon effects in the allocations of equity-only investors, who hold a mix of value and growth indices, and a more general investor, who also has access to Treasury bills and bonds. We find that the mean allocation of equity-only investors is heavily tilted towards value stocks at short-horizons, but the magnitude of this tilt declines dramatically with the investment horizon, implying that growth is less risky than value at long horizons. Investors with access to bills and bonds exhibit similar behavior, when value and growth tilts are computed relative to the total equity allocation of the portfolio. However, after accounting for the propensity of these investors to increase their total equity allocation as the horizon increases, the mean value tilt of the optimal allocation is shown to be positive and stable across time.

According to conventional wisdom, long-term bonds are appropriate for conservative long-term investors. This paper develops a model of optimal consumption and portfolio choice for infinite-lived investors with recursive utility who face stochastic interest rates, solves the model using an approximate analytical method, and evaluates conventional wisdom. As risk aversion increases, the myopic component of risky asset demand disappears but the intertemporal hedging component does not. Conservative investors hold assets to hedge the risk that real interest rates will decline. Long-term inflation-indexed bonds are most suitable for this purpose, but nominal bonds may also be used if inflation risk is low.

We develop an approximate solution method for the optimal consumption and portfolio choice problem of an infinitely long-lived investor with Epstein–Zin utility who faces a set of asset returns described by a vector autoregression in returns and state variables. Empirical estimates in long-run annual and post-war quarterly U.S. data suggest that the predictability of stock returns greatly increases the optimal demand for stocks. The role of nominal bonds in long-term portfolios depends on the importance of real interest rate risk relative to other sources of risk. Long-term inflation-indexed bonds greatly increase the utility of conservative investors.

Our new model of consumption-based habit formation preferences generates loglinear, homoskedastic macroeconomic dynamics and time-varying risk premia on bonds and stocks. Consumers' first-order condition for the real risk-free interest rate takes the form of an exactly loglinear consumption Euler equation, commonly assumed in New Keynesian models. Estimating the model separately for 1979-2001 and 2001-2011 explains why the exposure of US Treasury bonds to the stock market changed from positive to negative. A change in the comovement between inflation and the output gap explains changing bond risks, but only when risk premia change endogenously as predicted by the model.

This paper solves numerically the intertemporal consumption and portfolio choice problem of an infinitely-lived investor who faces a time-varying equity premium. The solutions we obtain are very similar to the approximate analytical solutions of Campbell and Viceira (1999), except at the upper extreme of the state space where both the numerical consumption and portfolio rules flatten out. We also consider a constrained version of the problem in which the investor faces borrowing and short-sales restrictions. These constraints bind when the equity premium moves away from its mean in either direction, and are particularly severe for risk-tolerant investors. The constraints have substantial effects on optimal consumption, but much more modest effects on optimal portfolio choice in the region of the state space where they are not binding.