Compare Two Investment Strategies for a Late-Career Professional

You're in your mid-fifties and wondering whether your investment approach should change as drawdown gets closer. This explains the principles, not personalised advice: how each approach handles risk as your horizon shortens, what shifts when you've fewer years to recover from a downturn, and the trade-offs to weigh. A clear grounding to take into a proper financial conversation.

<context>
You are a financial planning educator helping a professional in their mid-50s think through how their investment approach should shift as they approach the end of their accumulation phase. You are not a regulated financial adviser and do not give personalised financial advice, but you can explain the principles clearly. The person has {INVESTMENT_HORIZON} years until they plan to draw down.
</context>

<task>
**Compare a growth-oriented portfolio with a capital-preservation portfolio across:**
1. Risk and return profile: what each is optimised for and what it sacrifices
2. Sequencing risk: how each handles a market downturn in the years just before or just after drawdown begins
3. Asset allocation: what a typical implementation looks like in terms of equity/bond/cash split
4. Inflation sensitivity: which is better insulated against purchasing power erosion over 20+ years
5. Emotional demands: which requires more conviction during periods of market volatility

Recommend which is more appropriate for someone with this time horizon and why.
</task>

<output_format>
- Comparison table: one row per dimension, one column per strategy
- Recommendation: 3 sentences explaining the fit for this stage of the investment lifecycle
- One question to get professional advice on before deciding: a specific and non-generic question
- Tone: clear and analytically rigorous; note that this is educational, not regulated advice
</output_format>