Just realized something interesting about how most Americans approach Social Security. Everyone talks about claiming at 65, but the actual numbers tell a different story.

Looking at the data, the average retirement age when people actually claim benefits has been creeping up steadily. Back in 1998, folks were claiming around 63.4 for men and 63.5 for women. By 2022, that shifted to 65.0 for men and 64.9 for women. That's a pretty significant shift over 24 years, and it reflects changes in how Social Security calculates early vs delayed benefits.

Here's where it gets interesting though. If you claimed at 65 in 2022, you'd get about $1,874.56 monthly. But the average new award across all claiming ages was $1,938.75. So even at that supposedly standard retirement age in the US, you're actually below average. Fast forward to 2024 with cost-of-living adjustments, and we're talking roughly $2,174.86 for average recipients.

The gap makes sense when you think about it. People claiming early typically had lower lifetime earnings, which meant lower benefits and less retirement savings. So they had to claim sooner just to survive. Meanwhile, those who waited until full retirement age or beyond had higher primary insurance amounts to begin with.

Here's the thing that surprised me most: the data suggests that for most people, waiting until 70 actually maximizes lifetime wealth. A 2019 United Income study found about 70% of retirees would be better off delaying. Only 8% actually maximize benefits by claiming before 65. So the crowd wisdom of claiming at the standard US retirement age? It's probably costing most people real money.

The challenge is that everyone's situation is different. If you can afford to wait and you're in decent health, delaying seems like the obvious play. But that requires having other income sources or savings to bridge the gap, which not everyone has. It's one of those decisions where following the average might actually work against you financially.