***** vs FIRECalc?

[bulbar]

I have been using FIRECalc 3.0 for a while but I now found ********. Is ******** just as good? Better? I like the input screesn better. Give you the same answers? Can you trust it?

 

[REWahoo]

That calculator is, in my opinion, a ripoff of the hard work and intellectual capital invested to create FIRECalc. I don't trust anything I consider to be obtained by unethical means.

 

[bulbar]

I ran a quick comparison myself and on the same inputs. ***** ran 115 cycles, FIREcalc ran 109. ***** had a higher success rate for the run. Maybe ***** has market data that is more current. That could explain it.

 

[REWahoo]

I thought you found no value in calculators that failed to include taxes?

 

[bulbar]

I really like the use of historicals tho. I've been trying out the Pralana calculator and it's great. It also uses historicals, but it only shows you 3 cases instead of all the historical runs like FIREcalc. It does do taxes and a lot more tho. I suggested he show all the runs like FIREcalc and he said he might do that for 2015

 

[spicoli]

I prefer ********. ******** is crowdsourced, updated more frequently with new features, and has much superior spending models.

firecalc until recently wasn't updated with the past few years of data.

I trust the results and you can save the output to a CSV file for further examination if you wish. Sometimes there are bugs but if you notify the author on the ******** forum he responds and fixes them promptly.

All of the CPI and Case Shiller data is historical and publicly available.

 

[2B]

That calculator is, in my opinion, a ripoff of the hard work and intellectual capital invested to create FIRECalc. I don't trust anything I consider to be obtained by unethical means.

You're more than entitled to your opinion but I don't consider it a ripoff. There are certain similarities in the information requested but it's not like the information needed for any historical based program wouldn't be very similar. In a crowd sourced scenario, contributors obviously were familiar with other programs available. I'm sure FireCalc was well known to many contributors.

Now if they totally copied the entry format and stole code or historical data, I'd change my opinion. If I'm missing something, FireCalc is copyrighted. There's also the issue of FireCalc no longer being supported. I would think it would be available for not too much in cash.

 

[photoguy]

That calculator is, in my opinion, a ripoff of the hard work and intellectual capital invested to create FIRECalc. I don't trust anything I consider to be obtained by unethical means.

This is obviously a sensitive point with you. I don't know much about the history of ******** other than I remember seeing some posts on bogleheads about its development.

Why do you say it's a ripoff and unethical? Replication and reproducibility of work is extremely important in science/analysis and can help catch bugs. Furthermore, the idea of doing simulations/backtesting goes back further than Firecalc.

 

[bulbar]

thanks spicoli. yeah, it looks like ***** was just recently updated. it doesn't produce a summary page showing all your inputs tho like FIREcalc does.

 

[REWahoo]

There are previous discussions on this subject that should be available with a search.

 

[spicoli]

thanks spicoli. yeah, it looks like ***** was just recently updated. it doesn't produce a summary page showing all your inputs tho like FIREcalc does.

Yeah, that would be a nice feature and maybe it will be implemented in the future. You can check "Create CSV file with output stats" and then Run Simulation. On the bottom of the output page you could then click on "Download Simulation Data" which I think contains your inputs. This is more cumbersome than having an input summary at the top of the output page.

 

[MichaelB]

This has been discussed previously in this and other threads.