Jan 22, 2026
What if financial planning were approached the same way engineers design aircraft, medical treatments, or complex systems—with clearly defined objectives, constraints, and rigorous trade-off analysis? In this episode, Benjamin Felix is joined by Braden Warwick for a deep dive into what it means to engineer financial outcomes. Drawing on Braden’s background as a PhD-trained mechanical engineer and his work building financial planning software at PWL Capital, the conversation reframes financial planning as a design problem rather than a speculative exercise. They explore the critical distinction between a financial plan and a financial projection, why uncertainty does not invalidate good planning, and how professional communication under uncertainty can build trust with clients—especially those from technical backgrounds. The discussion highlights the importance of goals-based planning, sensitivity analysis, and explicitly quantifying trade-offs when clients have multiple competing objectives.
Key Points From This Episode:
(0:00:04) Introduction to Episode 393 and the return
of Braden Warwick
(0:02:50) Braden’s role at PWL and his experience deploying
Conquest Planning software
(0:05:46) The tension between low industry entry barriers and
professional standards in financial planning
(0:07:54) Braden’s background in mechanical engineering and
academia
0:09:33) Financial plans vs. financial projections: why uncertainty
doesn’t make a plan “wrong”
(0:12:59) Lessons from medicine and engineering on communicating
decisions under uncertainty
(0:15:15) An engineering framework for financial planning:
objectives first, then solutions
(0:18:42) Why surface-level goals like “minimize tax” or “maximize
returns” often miss what really matters
(0:21:19) Evaluating plans against goals using projections,
scenario analysis, and sensitivity analysis
(0:24:28) Why sensitivity analysis helps planners focus on what
actually drives outcomes
(0:29:27) Handling multiple competing goals using trade-off
analysis and Pareto frontiers
(0:36:46) Practical ways planners can present trade-offs without
complex math
(0:39:25) Case study setup: professional financial planning with
corporate clients
(0:40:20) Salary vs. dividends for business owners when optimizing
for legacy goals
(0:44:26) Why financial planning software outputs can be misleading
without context
(0:48:23) The importance of understanding how planning software
calculates key metrics
(0:50:22) Using PWL’s free retirement tool to analyze CPP and OAS
timing decisions
(0:53:44) Approximating Monte Carlo outcomes using standard error
of the mean
(0:56:16) Linking “bad” and “terrible” outcomes to plan success
probabilities
(0:58:44) How CPP and OAS deferral affects sustainable spending and
downside protection
(1:02:46) What makes PWL’s CPP calculator different from typical
break-even tools
(1:05:15) Why wage inflation assumptions materially affect CPP
deferral decisions
(1:07:46) Closing framework: goals, constraints, sensitivity
analysis, and quantified trade-offs
(1:09:36) Financial planning as an emerging discipline rooted in
engineering-style thinking
Links From Today’s Episode:
Live Webinar: How Much Do You Need to Retire in Canada? | Feb 12 @
12NN EST | Register here — https://pages.pwlcapital.com/webinar-how-much-do-you-need-to-retire-in-canada?utm_source=rational%20reminder&utm_medium=rr_ep393&utm_campaign=webinar_retirement
Meet with PWL Capital: https://calendly.com/d/3vm-t2j-h3p
Rational Reminder on iTunes — https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-rational-reminder-podcast/id1426530582.
Rational Reminder on Instagram — https://www.instagram.com/rationalreminder/
Rational Reminder on YouTube — https://www.youtube.com/channel/
Benjamin Felix — https://pwlcapital.com/our-team/
Benjamin on X — https://x.com/benjaminwfelix
Benjamin on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjaminwfelix/
Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant (https://thepodcastconsultant.com)