Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
SWR - Amortize your portfolio
Old 03-27-2007, 11:27 AM   #1
Confused about dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5
SWR - Amortize your portfolio

One way to look at the question of SWRs, asset allocation, how much do I need to get all FIRE'd up and stuff like that is to break the problem down into simple pieces, understand the basic mechanisms, then add complexity and real world considerations. The tool for doing this is the formula used to determine the periodic payment for a loan or an investment: PMT(principal, rate, term), where (in this case) principal is the portfolio value in $; rate is the net rate of return in decimal form, i.e., 0.05; term is the length of time in years. The formula can be found on the Excel spreadsheet under Tools, Easy Calc, Other, Financial. The net rate of return is the average portfolio return minus the average inflation rate, both on a yearly basis. For this illustration, principal and PMT are expressed in thousands of dollars; to relate to a portfolio of, say one million, multiply results by 1000, a pay out of 50 is $50,000.

Very important consideration; the term is the point where the principal is zero. If you want your investment to last 40 years, the term is 40. If you want something left at 40 years, make the term much larger.

Let's determine several initial payout amounts 'payments'. In all cases principal = 1000 and term = 40.

Rate = 0; PMT(1000,0,40) = 25. So for a million $ portfolio, the initial payout is $25,000. This is the case for either zero rate of return and zero inflation or equal rates for both. We can check this because 1000/40 = 25.

100% bond case; coupon = 0.05, inflation = 0.03, rate = 0.02 (the difference), PMT = 36.6. Note here that we are not taking all the coupon amount, the inflation part must be re-invested for the yearly payment increase at the 3% inflation rate.

100% equity case: For the years 1941-2006, the DJIA was 0.086, inflation was 0.041, rate = 0.045, PMT = 54.3.

60/40 equity/bond ratio case: PMT is 60% up from the difference, (54.3-36.6)*0.6 = 10.6. PMT = 36.6+10.6 = 47.2. LAB (Lo And Behold), this 47.2/1000 = 4.72% is within the 4 to 5 percent initial SWR currently in vogue.

In those cases where you are re-investing the inflation part; if you look at the balance over time, it will increase for roughly half the term, then fall to zero. The excess balance is the inflation part compounding to pay for future 'inflated' payments. Remember this in the real world, if you are concerned about conserving spending power, don't eat up an increasing portfolio balance indiscriminately. Part of that MAY be market return (which is fair game), but part IS banked inflation monies.

Also, if you can express the advantages of re-balancing, for example, in terms of improved portfolio return, you can judge whether it is worth it or not. You can easily evaluate any scheme that improves, or not, portfolio return and see the effect on SWR.

So the question of how much one needs to FIRE can be estimated. If your portfolio in one million, time span, 40 years, your return is 4.5% above inflation, bonds at 5% with a 60/40 mis and you can live with $47.2K/yr adjusted for inflation, go for it. Adjust the numbers for your case. Change the term value for different time spans.

So you do it! At the end of the year, you re-do the calculation (do I have to go back to work?). The differences are: principal is your new portfolio balance and term is one year less (in this case 39). PMT will tell you the inflation adjusted amount to take out, assuming the rate is still valid. It turns out the precise rate value is not critical in the short term. PMT is self-adjusting, if you take out too much one year, the balance will decrease calling for a lower PMT the following year. The one year difference between, say, 4 and 5 % payout is meaningless when you can be slammed with a 20% market jerk in either direction. An updated averaged rate difference between your portfolio return and inflation is more mathematically correct, but probably not worth the trouble. Being as accurate as you can is important, it does have an effect on the payout spread.

So every year we re-do the calculation. All we need is the updated portfolio balance for principal and to reduce term by one year. The advantage of all this is that (1) it deals with you portfolio performance and time periods, (2) it gives you every year the best payout advice taking into account all the variables. It does not predict future market performance, but it does know that the end of term, you want to have spent down the portfolio balance. This payout advice is bases on the most likely future, i.e., your average return over inflation from the most current balance and time to go, and not a worst case. It also gives flexibility if you want to vary the payout, maybe take more up front and less when you are older. Every year you get an update and can judge the 'damages'. In the testing I have done so far, it is amazing how much you can ask of the portfolio without it going belly-up. Part of that is because we are not asking for anything left after the 'party'. Even with no portfolio return and 3% inflation (rate = -0.03), the initial payout is 12.6; not much, but it increases 3 % every year for 40 years.

As an example, I took the 1996-2005 time period using the DJIA as the portfolio. Avg. market return = 0.074, avg. inflation = 0.047, giving a rate of 0.027. However, I used the 0.045 rate in the PMT formula. This was a time period where in the 1st year, the market dropped 19%, in the 4th year, 15% and the 8&(th years 17 and 28%, with only two +15% years in between. For the 16 years between 1966 and 1981, the market return was 0.0075 (nearly flat), inflation was 0.068. The initial rate was, as calculated, 54.3 (100% stocks). This time period also included the good years from 1995-1997 as well as the bad ones 2000-2002. The initial run was made using the calculated payouts every year. The results: total payout $ = 2321 (2.3 million from a 1 million start). There were 4 years with payouts less than 25 and 7 years with payouts over 100. To test changes, I added 10 to each yearly payout for the 5 years 2-6 (from roughly 40 to 50). Further, I set a minimum (floor) payout of 25. The results: total payout $ = 2142, 8 years at the 25 cutoff and 6 years with payouts over 100.

Comments, please.
__________________

__________________
To be successful in Wealth Management, you need to derive more pleasure in making money, rather than spending it.<br /><br />himself
RgrGd 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!

Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio
Old 03-27-2007, 11:32 AM   #2
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
MasterBlaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,359
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio

I didn't wade through all of your post but I beleive that you have forgotten about portfolio volatility.

Yes if the world stays flat as it now is and interest rates, inflation and stocks neither really take off or nosedive then you can model it as you did.

However what if after being retired for 5 years we do a 1970's style stagflation. Just how long would your now much lower portfolio last. That would be a real bummer if you spend all of your money by the time you hit 70 years old !

Check out this link about the retirement calculator from hell:

http://www.efficientfrontier.com/ef/998/hell.htm

The thing about Firecalc is that using historical data you can test run a withdrawal scheme and hopefully never go broke.
__________________

__________________
MasterBlaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio
Old 03-27-2007, 12:42 PM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio

Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterblaster
I beleive that you have forgotten about portfolio volatility.

Yes if the world stays flat as it now is and interest rates, inflation and stocks neither really take off or nosedive then you can model it as you did.
Exactly. It mystifies me when someone does calculations based on future average investment returns and future average inflation. Only if the future numbers hover closely around the mean (very low variation) will there be any accuracy. If the historically typical wide swings take place, then calcualtions based on averages will be very inaccurate, even if the wide swings turn out to average exactly what was projected.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio
Old 03-27-2007, 01:26 PM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,012
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio

Actually this method reminds me of the fixed percentage WD method.&#160; This amortize method has the advantage of taking life expectancy into account in determining each year's WD.&#160; However the problem as written is you are not updating your life expectancy as you get older, instead you are always using the initial life expectancy.

At first I also thought using an average real ROR in the calculation was a problem but upon further considersation I realized that using that average would moderate&#160; the fluctuations in yearly WD brought about by the change in portfolio value.&#160; Another reason the average ROR is appropriate is that this method is amortizing the portfolio over a long period of time.&#160; The portfolio volatility is taken into account by the actual portfolio volatility since you recalculate every year with the actual portfolio value.

This method does have the advantage that if your portfolio starts to drop your annual WDs drop as well thus limiting the risk that you will exhaust your portfolio. However this method also appears to allow large changes in your yearly WDs which in and of itself might be a problem.

drigooch, you state that you ran an example
Quote:
Originally Posted by drigooch
As an example, I took the 1996-2005 time period using the DJIA as the portfolio.&#160; Avg. market return = 0.074, avg. inflation = 0.047, giving a rate of 0.027.&#160; However, I used the 0.045 rate in the PMT formula.&#160; This was a time period where in the 1st year, the market dropped 19%, in the 4th year, 15% and the 8&(th years 17 and 28%, with only two +15% years in between. For the 16 years between 1966 and 1981, the market return was 0.0075 (nearly flat), inflation was 0.068.&#160; The initial rate was, as calculated, 54.3 (100% stocks).&#160; This time period also included the good years from 1995-1997 as well as the bad ones 2000-2002.&#160; The initial run was made using the calculated payouts every year.&#160; The results: total payout $ = 2321 (2.3 million from a 1 million start).&#160; There were 4 years with payouts less than 25 and 7 years with payouts over 100.&#160; To test changes, I added 10 to each yearly payout for the 5 years 2-6 (from roughly 40 to 50).&#160; Further, I set a minimum (floor) payout of 25.&#160; The results:&#160; total payout $ = 2142, 8 years at the 25 cutoff and 6 years with payouts over 100.

Comments, please.
I would be interested in seeing the input data used and the WDs on a yearly basis.&#160; BTW I hope that your stated time frame of "1996-2005" was a typo and the actual period was 30 - 40 yrs long
__________________
jdw_fire is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio
Old 03-27-2007, 02:38 PM   #5
Confused about dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio

On the life expectancy issue: I was assuming someone retiring at 60 & would live a max of 40 years. Pick your own #. I think you should pick the max. year and not change it.
On the large changes in WDs: The formula calculates the 'best' WD each year. You are free to change it (within reason). I would think that in real life if your portfolio has been battered for several years, you could set a high floor knowing the odds were high that reversion to the mean was forthcoming. In the example I used, it took 8 years for this to happen, but hopefully the 70s won't return. This method assures the portfolio will last to the end, no more, no less. If WDs come out in spurts, you don't have to spend it all; re-balance 'off campus'?

The DJIA data used from 1966-2005 are: -19, 15, 4, -15, 5, 6, 15, -17, -28, 38, 18, -17, -3, 4, 15, -9, 20, 20, -4, 28, 23, 2, 12, 27, -4, 20, 4, 14, 2, 33, 26, 23, 16, 25, -6, -7, -17, 25, 3, -1, 16.

The yearly WDs, without added changes: 54.3, 41.5, 45.9, 45.6, 36.6, 36.8, 37.4, 41.3, 32.3, 21.7, 24.0, 33.0, 25.8, 23.8, 23.7, 26.2, 22.6, 26.2, 30.4, 27.7, 34.4, 41.0, 40.0, 43.1, 53.2, 48.5, 56.3, 56.0, 61.7, 60.1, 78.5, 96.9, 116.6, 131.6, 162.5, 142.4, 122.4, 88.0, 114.5, 111.2
__________________
To be successful in Wealth Management, you need to derive more pleasure in making money, rather than spending it.<br /><br />himself
RgrGd is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio
Old 03-28-2007, 11:29 AM   #6
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,375
Re: SWR - Amortize your portfolio

[quote=drigooch ]



I'll give you 10 shots a side. (Very rarely I would do that sight unseen. But in your case I'll make an exception).

Holy Mackeral
__________________

__________________
Jarhead* 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
indexing SWR to inflation or to valuation perinova FIRE and Money 16 05-15-2006 06:48 PM
Another SWR Question? mb FIRE and Money 14 01-06-2006 08:55 AM
SWR for basic vs discretionary spending sgeeeee FIRE and Money 33 02-11-2005 02:45 PM
Implications of SWR GDH FIRE and Money 13 10-26-2004 07:53 AM
SWR, terminal values, TIPS, I-bnds & comm paper sgeeeee FIRE and Money 144 02-25-2004 04:35 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:12 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.