How Much Should a 35-Year-Old Attorney Have Saved for Retirement?

If you're a 35-year-old attorney wondering whether you're on track for retirement, you've probably come across the standard advice: have two times your salary saved by now.

That number comes from Fidelity, whose widely-cited guideline suggests saving 1x your salary by 30, 2x by 35, 3x by 40, and so on until you reach 10x your salary by 67.

It's a useful benchmark. But if you went to law school, it probably doesn't apply to you—at least not in the way it's usually presented.

The standard benchmark doesn't account for law school

Fidelity's model assumes you start saving 15% of your income at age 25. That's a reasonable assumption for someone who finished a bachelor's degree and went straight into the workforce.

But you didn't do that. You spent three more years in law school, likely took on significant debt, and didn't start earning a real income until your mid-to-late twenties—if not later.

That debt doesn't just delay your savings. It actively works against you. Every dollar going toward loan payments in your late twenties is a dollar not compounding in a retirement account. And given that early contributions matter most (thanks to compound growth), the impact is substantial.

So when someone asks whether a 35-year-old attorney should have 2x their salary saved, the honest answer is: probably not, and that's okay—if you understand where you actually stand and have a plan.

What the math actually looks like for attorneys

Let's be concrete. Consider a 35-year-old associate at a large firm earning $250,000. According to the standard benchmark, she should have $500,000 saved for retirement.

But let's trace her actual path:

• Graduated law school at 25 with $150,000 in debt
• Started at a firm earning $190,000 (first-year salary in 2015)
• Spent the first several years aggressively paying down loans while also trying to save
• Became debt-free around age 32
• Only then began saving at full capacity

In this scenario, expecting $500,000 saved by 35 isn't realistic. A more reasonable target might be $150,000 to $250,000—still a meaningful nest egg, but reflecting the reality that her high-earning years effectively started later.

The key question isn't whether she hits an arbitrary benchmark. It's whether she's positioned to catch up now that her debt is behind her.

Catching up is possible—if you're strategic

Here's the good news: attorneys who make it to 35 with their debt paid off (or nearly so) are often well-positioned to accelerate their savings significantly.

At $250,000 per year, saving 23% means contributing roughly $57,500 annually. That's aggressive, but consider what's available to you:

• 401(k): Up to $23,000 in 2024 ($30,500 if you're 50+)
• Backdoor Roth IRA: An additional $7,000
• After-tax brokerage: No limit

If your firm offers a 401(k) match, that helps close the gap further. The point is that attorneys often have the income to catch up—the question is whether they're deploying it intentionally.

What about partners? In-house? Government?

The calculus shifts depending on your practice setting.

Partners face a different challenge: highly variable income. A partner earning $600,000 one year and $400,000 the next needs a savings strategy that accounts for that volatility—typically by saving aggressively in good years and maintaining a larger cash reserve.

In-house counsel often trade top-end compensation for stability and work-life balance. If you moved in-house at 32 earning $180,000, your savings rate matters more than your raw numbers. The goal is consistency over time.

Government and public interest attorneys face tighter constraints but may have access to pension plans and loan forgiveness programs (like PSLF) that fundamentally change the math. If you're on track for loan forgiveness, that's effectively a form of compensation that doesn't show up in your savings balance.

The number that matters more than any benchmark

Rather than fixating on whether you have exactly 2x your salary, focus on this: your savings rate going forward.

If you're 35 and saving 20%+ of your income consistently, you're building wealth at a pace that will likely get you where you need to be—even if your current balance looks modest compared to the standard benchmarks.

If you're saving less than 15%, that's worth examining. Not because you're "behind," but because the math gets harder every year you wait.

A realistic framework for 35-year-old attorneys

Here's how I'd think about retirement readiness at 35, adjusted for the realities of a legal career:

If your student loans are paid off: You should be saving at least 20% of your gross income, including any employer match. Your current balance matters less than your trajectory.

If you're still paying down loans: Prioritize high-interest debt, but don't neglect retirement entirely. At minimum, capture any 401(k) match—that's free money. Once the debt is gone, redirect those payments to retirement savings immediately.

If your income is variable (partners, of counsel): Save aggressively in high-income years. Consider setting a baseline savings amount and sweeping any excess above that into investments.

The standard benchmarks are a starting point, not a verdict. What matters is whether you're being intentional about your money—and whether your current decisions are setting you up for the retirement you want.