<?xml version="1.0"?>
<oembed><version>1.0</version><provider_name>AFCPE</provider_name><provider_url>https://www.afcpe.org</provider_url><author_name>Rachael Deleon</author_name><author_url>https://www.afcpe.org/news-and-publications/blog/author/rachael/</author_url><title>Quantitative Comparison of US Private Employers' Defined Benefit Plans - AFCPE</title><type>rich</type><width>600</width><height>338</height><html>&lt;blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="M7RVHnk6uh"&gt;&lt;a href="https://www.afcpe.org/news-and-publications/journal-of-financial-counseling-and-planning/accepted-papers/quantitative-comparison-of-us-private-employers-defined-benefit-plans/"&gt;Quantitative Comparison of US Private Employers&#x2019; Defined Benefit Plans&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://www.afcpe.org/news-and-publications/journal-of-financial-counseling-and-planning/accepted-papers/quantitative-comparison-of-us-private-employers-defined-benefit-plans/embed/#?secret=M7RVHnk6uh" width="600" height="338" title="&#x201C;Quantitative Comparison of US Private Employers&#x2019; Defined Benefit Plans&#x201D; &#x2014; AFCPE" data-secret="M7RVHnk6uh" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;&lt;script type="text/javascript"&gt;
/* &lt;![CDATA[ */
/*! This file is auto-generated */
!function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&amp;&amp;d.addEventListener&amp;&amp;"undefined"!=typeof URL&amp;&amp;(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&amp;&amp;!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i&lt;o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i&lt;a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&amp;&amp;(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3&lt;(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r&lt;200&amp;&amp;(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&amp;&amp;(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&amp;&amp;n.host===r.host&amp;&amp;l.activeElement===s&amp;&amp;(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r&lt;s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document);
/* ]]&gt; */
&lt;/script&gt;
</html><description>The focus of this paper is to quantitatively evaluate and compare three of the most popular defined benefit plan types based on various variable assumptions. The decision of when to retire and take a pension, or being given the option to change plans, often happens only once. This makes the evaluation and comparison critical. This paper provides a numerical analysis [&hellip;]</description></oembed>
