TIAA survey: 53% of adults fear outliving savings more than underspending

The 2026 Retirement in the Age of AI and GLP-1s Survey from TIAA, published this morning, asked 1,000 U.S. adults aged 18 to 65 whether they worry more about outliving their savings or underspending and not enjoying retirement, and 53% said the first, while 83% carry some financial concern about living longer. Because the sample is adults rather than plan participants, the finding reflects household sentiment as much as any single plan roster, and the two forces in the title—AI's effect on the workforce and GLP-1 medications that may lengthen lifespans—are the ones the survey points to.

The costs respondents named were ordinary ones: 46% cited basic expenses, 42% a lack of disposable income to enjoy retirement, and 41% healthcare—longevity priced in monthly increments, the near term crowding out the far term.

AI adds a second worry, and it skews young: one-third of adults said they were very concerned that AI could threaten their earning potential before retirement, while 42% of Gen Z adults described themselves as extremely or very concerned about AI's effect on their career and retirement savings, against 33% of Millennials and 28% of Gen X and Baby Boomers combined. Among pre-retirees, 14% were extremely concerned and 19% very concerned.

Tim Pitney, TIAA's head of lifetime income distribution, told PLANADVISER that longevity deserves the most immediate attention, because rising costs erode purchasing power across a longer retirement while AI-driven career disruption shortens the years workers have to build savings—a framing that leaves both concerns, at bottom, as longevity questions.

Jason Key, the firm's head of consultant relations, told the publication that what stood out was how interconnected these worries have become, a change from a few years ago when the industry studied them separately; for advisers and sponsors, he framed that as a larger demand on plan design than the industry has typically faced, with participants asking not only whether they have saved enough but whether their plan can convert savings into guaranteed income that lasts.

That point lands near an argument this publication has made: in August we covered an IRIC white paper that treated underspending as a design flaw and handed advisers a playbook for fixing it, while TIAA's respondents invert the emphasis, with a majority fearing running out more than they fear not spending. Both can hold at once, and the fear of outliving savings may be what keeps retirees underspending in the first place, which would make guaranteed income a behavioral fix as much as a product.

On the cost question, the sample divides: 27% expect AI to raise healthcare costs by producing expensive new treatments, while 22% expect it to lower them, and which way that resolves will shape the back half of the retirement projections advisers build from here.