Back

Development and Validation of a Parsimonious Financial Well-Being Index in the Health and Retirement Study

Habib, M. H.; Mayeda, E. R.; Barry, L.; Arah, O. A.; Nau, C. L.; Zhou, H.; Kezios, K. L.; Nianogo, R. A.

2026-10-20 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.10.18.26365842 medRxiv
Show abstract

Financial well-being (FWB) encompasses objective and subjective financial status and may influence health. We developed and validated a parsimonious FWB index using data from 23,006 Health and Retirement Study (HRS) participants aged 50 years and older from 2006 to 2022. The FWB-5 Index was derived using correlated two-factor confirmatory factor analysis accounting for household clustering. Indicators included household wealth, household income-to-poverty ratio, monthly financial strain, satisfaction with one's financial situation, and perceived financial mastery. We assessed convergent and discriminant validity using the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being (CFPB-FWB) Scale and Satisfaction with Life Scale, respectively. Associations with pre-baseline socioeconomic factors and subsequent depressive symptoms and health conditions were examined to assess construct and predictive validity. Model fit indices supported the two-factor structure (robust comparative fit index = 0.99; robust root mean square error of approximation = 0.05). Correlations were stronger with the CFPB-FWB Scale (Spearman P = 0.80) than with life satisfaction (Spearman P = 0.43). Associations with socioeconomic factors and subsequent health outcomes were in the hypothesized directions. These findings support the FWB-5 Index as a parsimonious measure for examining financial well-being and its associations with health across HRS waves, including those predating the CFPB-FWB Scale.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.