Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Best sites about WR for early retirees
Old 02-22-2017, 06:18 AM   #1
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Islands
Posts: 361
Best sites about WR for early retirees

These are the best two sites I have ever read about WR.

I have never been a fan of the 4% rule for early retirees. It is based on a 30 year depletion-based model. I certainly hope I have more than 30 years and would like to leave a legacy for my family. For those of you in a similar situation these may be useful.

Cheers

https://earlyretirementnow.com/2016/...-part-1-intro/

https://portfoliocharts.com/2016/12/...ng-retirement/
__________________

Travelwanted is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 02-22-2017, 11:05 AM   #2
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Islands
Posts: 361
wow, I thought these were gems...not one comment...hmmm.
__________________

Travelwanted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 11:19 AM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 5,231
I'm waiting for one that stochastically models death
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 11:42 AM   #4
Moderator Emeritus
W2R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 42,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travelwanted View Post
These are the best two sites I have ever read about WR.

I have never been a fan of the 4% rule for early retirees. It is based on a 30 year depletion-based model. I certainly hope I have more than 30 years and would like to leave a legacy for my family. For those of you in a similar situation these may be useful.

Cheers

https://earlyretirementnow.com/2016/...-part-1-intro/

https://portfoliocharts.com/2016/12/...ng-retirement/
I like the idea of a perpetual withdrawal rate discussed in the second link. For those of us who don't know at what age we will die, it seems to me that this would be a smart method to use, in order to make sure our money lasts until the end. It looks like for a 60:40 portfolio, the PWR is around 3.5% for 35-40 years. I read another paper many years ago that suggested 3% for a PWR (but perhaps that was for a 50:50 portfolio?). Anyway, that is in the same ballpark.

The first link says that for a 50:50 portfolio there is a 98% chance that a 3.5% WR will last for 40 years. Lookin' good, since I retired at age 61.

Anyway, good safe numbers like this are why I decided on 3.5% as my upper limit for a WR in my 34 year retirement plan. Seems like a pretty safe number to me and it's good to read a couple of additional papers that confirm that.
__________________
I have drunken deep of joy,
And I will taste no other wine tonight.

― Percy Bysshe Shelley
W2R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 12:43 PM   #5
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Hitter View Post
I'm waiting for one that stochastically models death
I am waiting for a model that determines Schrödinger's cat's SWR (and PWR)?!?!?!?
DrBrisket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 12:56 PM   #6
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 5,231
this guy is touting 4.5% swr

https://www.kitces.com/blog/safe-wit...ment-spending/

just saying, you throw annual mortality in there and the swr has to increase
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 01:07 PM   #7
Full time employment: Posting here.
RetiredGypsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travelwanted View Post
I have never been a fan of the 4% rule for early retirees.
But the 4% rule is 4% the first year and is assumed to increase with inflation each year, right, and that's based on the initial value of the nest egg without yearly re-evaluations? Or did I read the Trinity Study all wrong?

Has a strict perpetual 4% rule been tested? Because my spending isn't anything near what COLA increases say they should be, and that's going back through 12 years of tracking finances.
__________________
I'm free and I like it!
RetiredGypsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 01:16 PM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 45,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetiredGypsy View Post
But the 4% rule is 4% the first year and is assumed to increase with inflation each year, right, and that's based on the initial value of the nest egg without yearly re-evaluations?
Correct.
__________________
Numbers is hard

Charter resident of the lumpen slums of cyberspace

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 02:31 PM   #9
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,025
But let's say your personal calculated SWR is 4% and one year you only withdraw/spend 3%. Does that mean you could withdraw 5% (4%+1% unused) the following year?
__________________
Living well is the best revenge!
Retired @ 52 in 2005
marko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 02:54 PM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 23,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
But let's say your personal calculated SWR is 4% and one year you only withdraw/spend 3%. Does that mean you could withdraw 5% (4%+1% unused) the following year?
Yes... the same as if you withdrew the 1% put it under you mattress and decided to spend it a year later.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56...60/35/5 AA
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 02:55 PM   #11
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 23,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Hitter View Post
this guy is touting 4.5% swr

https://www.kitces.com/blog/safe-wit...ment-spending/

just saying, you throw annual mortality in there and the swr has to increase
I read it not as mortality but more adjusting for less activity/lower spending as one ages... looking at our activity and spending compared to my mother and aunts in their 80s I think it make perfect sense.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56...60/35/5 AA
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 03:04 PM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 5,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
I read it not as mortality but more adjusting for less activity/lower spending as one ages... looking at our activity and spending compared to my mother and aunts in their 80s I think it make perfect sense.
that's how he's justifying it - the problem I have with all these analyses is that they don't take into account the probability of death during withdrawal. If they did, the SWRs would be higher.

no one lives "30 years" or "35 years" or "20 years"; a little piece of us dies each year until we are 100% dead
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 03:06 PM   #13
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 23,450
Yea, but if you happened to be one of those who lived to 105 you would be screwed if I am understanding you right. IOW, you can use the law of large numbers for a cohort of one.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56...60/35/5 AA
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 03:08 PM   #14
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 5,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
Yea, but if you happened to be one of those who lived to 105 you would be screwed if I am understanding you right. IOW, you can use the law of large numbers for a cohort of one.
I think one would be screwed most of the time anyway - geez that's old

One way we could incorporate mortality into the SWR analysis would be to stochastically model it along with the returns. I don't think it would be difficult.

Maybe when I fire I'll build a model
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 04:16 PM   #15
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
DrRoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,770
My only problem with these and other similar studies is that they use historical investment returns. I do not believe that future returns will hold up to the past going forward. Bond rates are near historic lows. Bonds cannot mathematically provide the returns that are in the studies. Stock returns are based on corporate profits and profit growth. The past growth rate included factors that are not being sustained going forward such as population and productivity growth. Equity prices cannot live off of PE expansion forever. If past returns are not repeated, the study results are too optimistic.
__________________
"The mountains are calling, and I must go." John Muir
DrRoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 04:30 PM   #16
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 23,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by marko View Post
But let's say your personal calculated SWR is 4% and one year you only withdraw/spend 3%. Does that mean you could withdraw 5% (4%+1% unused) the following year?
Well - not exactly, because that 1% you left behind in the portfolio might have shrunk, or it might have grown.

But in most cases it would make little difference.

If it was beginning of 2008 when you took out your 3%, then at the beginning of 2009, with a much smaller portfolio, would you be willing to take out 5%?

In most cases though the portfolio is growing, even if just slightly.

I prefer to keep my % withdrawal constant whether I need the funds immediately or not.
__________________
Retired since summer 1999.
audreyh1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 05:30 PM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
ER Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Hitter View Post
I'm sorry, I'm not trusting my retirement to a guy who looks like this:

ER Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 05:47 PM   #18
Recycles dryer sheets
JohnnyBGoode's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 142
I have always found Mr. Money Mustache's take on SWR very clear: The 4% Rule: The Easy Answer to “How Much Do I Need for Retirement?”

The whole post is worthwhile reading, but specifically related to the topic of retirement duration there is a relevant passage:

Quote:
This brings me to a critical point: this study defines “success” as not going broke during a 30-year test period. To people like you and me who will enjoy 60-year retirements, that would not be successful – we want our money to last much longer than 30 years. Luckily, the math in this case is pretty interesting: there is very little difference between a 30-year period, and an infinite year period, when determining how long your money will last. It’s much like a 30-year mortgage, where almost all of your payment is interest. Drop your payment by just $199 per month, and suddenly you’ve got a thousand-year mortgage that will literally take you 1000 years to pay off. Increase the payment by a few hundred, and you have a fifteen year payoff! In other words, above 30 years, the length of your retirement barely affects the safe withdrawal rate calculations.
YMMV of course, but it is still one of the best analysis I've seen on the topic.
JohnnyBGoode is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 05:50 PM   #19
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Hitter View Post
...the problem I have with all these analyses is that they don't take into account the probability of death during withdrawal. If they did, the SWRs would be higher.
Nicely said!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Hitter View Post
no one lives "30 years" or "35 years" or "20 years"; a little piece of us dies each year until we are 100% dead
I fully intend to plagiarize that quote. Thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
Yea, but if you happened to be one of those who lived to 105 you would be screwed if I am understanding you right. IOW, you can use the law of large numbers for a cohort of one.
This is where I disagree with the current thinking on WRs. Obviously I'm literally betting my life on it, so I hope I'm right.

I'm thinking that, at 105, I'm not going to need much to get by on. If I live that long, a small non-private room in a nursing home would probably be more fun than many of the alternatives. If I don't, why waste the time I do have, worrying about something that's unlikely to happen to most of us?
CaptTom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2017, 05:57 PM   #20
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
exnavynuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Acworth
Posts: 1,175
The other fun part is that the SWR calculations effectively assume that money is your ONLY source of retirement income. That is almost never the case in reality. When you account for pensions, social security payments, etc, the "real" safe withdrawal rate for most people is likely a significantly higher percentage of their assets. At 62, my COLA's "pension + SS" payments will cover 81.4% of my spending levels for my current lifestyle. If my nest egg only has to fund 80% of my spending for 17 years and then 20% of my spending for 30 years, then the "4% rule of thumb" becomes quite meaningless...
__________________

exnavynuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
best sites for cd rates frank FIRE and Money 4 04-13-2015 11:01 PM
Which States Give Retirees the Best Deal? Midpack Life after FIRE 32 06-27-2008 04:14 PM
Good Schools for Early Retirees Kids thinkingaboutit Life after FIRE 24 03-05-2006 04:07 PM
Re: Gov't Dependent Early Retirees? GDER SteveMcgarret Hi, I am... 22 08-11-2003 10:14 AM
MD early retirees??? txdoc Hi, I am... 0 07-19-2003 04:28 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:46 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×