Goldman Sachs: Paycheck-to-Paycheck Risk Spikes Under $50K and Over $500K

Americans earning less than $50,000 a year are the most likely to live paycheck to paycheck in 2026—but the second-most-likely group earns more than $500,000, according to new research from Goldman Sachs.

The finding comes from Goldman's "New Economics of Retirement" study, which surveyed 5,106 respondents. A little over 60% of those earning under $50,000 reported living from one pay slip to the next. They were followed by the $500,000-and-up bracket, where approximately 38% said the same.

Goldman Sachs describes the pattern as a K-shaped divide with a pronounced impact on long-term savings at both ends of the income spectrum. The data shows the strain runs across multiple personal finance metrics, not just cash flow.

Respondents earning above $500K were the cohort most likely to report having delayed financial goals, at 80%. Those earning less than $50K followed closely at approximately 79%. Both groups also topped the rankings for paying only the minimum—or less—on their credit cards, at roughly 45% of respondents each.

The causes of the squeeze differ sharply by income level. The bank told Fortune that lower-income individuals are stretched primarily by inflation on everyday goods and housing. Those in higher brackets, between $100,000 and $500,000, face different pressures: caregiving and housing for family members.

"Higher-income individuals may be the financial anchors for their extended families," a Goldman Sachs spokesman told Fortune. "The data suggests that the 'sandwich generation' squeeze can be a key factor redirecting financial resources from long-term financial goals."

The numbers bear that out. Among respondents earning above $500K, 28%—the highest share of any cohort—cited family caregiving or support among the greatest barriers to their own retirement savings. Nearly 27% in the top bracket also said medical expenses were having a major impact on their savings.

For those earning under $50,000, the barriers are more basic. Day-to-day living expenses topped the list, with 42.5% saying they prevented saving as much as they would like. Debt payments and housing followed, cited by 36.8% apiece.

Lifestyle creep

Lifestyle creep adds another layer for high earners—the phenomenon by which increasingly luxurious household and discretionary spending comes to feel like a necessity as income grows. Goldman also told Fortune that if rising costs require lifestyle adjustments to maintain a consistent budget, such changes may be difficult to implement across a family that depends on its key financial anchors.

At a media roundtable ahead of the survey's release, Jonathan Barber, head of compensation and benefits solutions at Goldman Sachs Ayco, offered a blunt read on why contribution rates stay low.

"The reason they're not contributing potentially to the retirement plan is not because of its indifference. It's certain expenses are always going to come first … it's living expenses, housing costs, things like that," Barber said.

His proposed remedy runs through employers. "What I think, and these are the conversations we have with our corporate partners all the time: 'What are some of those tools that a company can offer? What are some of those benefits that can help establish that initial foundation that gives the employee the confidence to contribute to the retirement plan? How do we help with those initial issues like debt, cash flow, and how do we put in some type of personalization into these benefits? And overall, how do we interconnect them?'"

He added: "And certainly we'll talk about financial counseling. That's a big part of this."

The study's implication for employers and benefits providers is that retirement plan participation cannot be fixed with plan design alone. If household-level pressures—debt, cash flow, caregiving—divert money before it ever reaches a 401(k), Goldman's answer is interconnected, personalized benefits built around financial counseling.