This metric has been criticized since, for example, a 20-year-old making k a year should have a net worth of 0k to be considered an "average accumulator of wealth".That makes little sense since it would take a new graduate years of strong savings and investments to accumulate that amount.
The authors compare the behaviour of those they call UAWs (Under Accumulators of Wealth) and those who are PAWs (Prodigious Accumulator of Wealth).
Under Accumulator of Wealth (UAW) is a name coined by the authors used to represent individuals who have a low net wealth compared to their income.
E.g., a 50-year-old person who over the past twelve months earned employment income of ,000 and investment income of ,000 should have an expected net worth of 0,000.
An "Under Accumulator of Wealth (UAW)" would have half that amount, and a "Prodigious Accumulator of Wealth (PAW)" would have two times.
If her net worth is lower, she is an "Under Accumulator".
The UAW style is based more on consumption of income rather than on the method of saving income.