Join Early Retirement Today
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-08-2013, 05:53 PM   #41
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Huston55's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: The Bay Area
Posts: 1,284
Originally Posted by FIRE'd@51 View Post
I am not faulting FireCalc. To the contrary, I think it's the best program around. I am only wondering if there is a way to manipulate the overlapping historical data to better simulate a statistical ensemble of "independent" data points. This has nothing to do with PE10 or other valuations, which will always be present. I believe these affect the mean of the ex-ante distribution, but not the variance. I'm interested in focusing soley on the statistical analysis which, I believe, can give us a better handle on the variance, which ultimately determines the ex-ante probabilities.
Originally Posted by Fred123 View Post
Another Firecalc problem that hasn't been mentioned is undersampling of recent years. If, for example, you are looking at 30 year periods then the 2008 meltdown is only included in 5 time series, while years 1982 and earlier are included 30 times. And, of course, it get worse the longer the time period you are using in the calculator. I'm guessing that the underweighting of 2008 makes Firecalc overoptimistic.

I wrote my own little calculator using three methods: Firecalc, MC analysis assuming a normal distribution, and MC analysis using resampling with replacement (analagous to bootstrap sampling). Firecalc is much more optimisitic than the MC analysis, so I tend to be more comfortable with MC.
FIRE'd: Looks like this is close to what you're looking for.

Fred: Can you expand on what your resampled MC runs revealed?

You may be whatever you resolve to be.
Huston55 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 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 12-08-2013, 08:07 PM   #42
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 16,443
Originally Posted by FIRE'd@51 View Post
Maybe it can't be done, although I have to believe there are statistical methods that attempt to deal with the overlap problem, .... I started this thread with the hope that someone better versed in statistics than myself could opine on this subject.
OK, I'm certainly no expert with stats (I used to work with some PhD-level stats guys so I know I know don't much!), so I'll sit back and see if anyone with credentials can come up with some positive contributions. It's an interesting idea, I'm not sure if I think it can't be done because I don't know enough about stats, or because I do know enough.


ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote

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


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:26 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.