Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
My FIRECalc #'s
Old 04-10-2016, 10:12 AM   #1
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: warren
Posts: 184
My FIRECalc #'s

So I ran my numbers on FIREcalc and this is what they come up with:

Here is how your portfolio would have fared in each of the 115 cycles. The lowest and highest portfolio balance at the end of your retirement was $180,142 to $4,712,394, with an average at the end of $1,785,873. (Note: this is looking at all the possible periods; values are in terms of the dollars as of the beginning of the retirement period for each cycle.)
For our purposes, failure means the portfolio was depleted before the end of the 30 years. FIRECalc found that 0 cycles failed, for a success rate of 100.0%.

I used 30 years (I'm 59). I didn't enter any future SS income, so I'm thinking I'm looking pretty good?
I haven't retired yet, looking possibly at next year, when I turn 60.
I haven't read that much on FIREcalc, so does it use a certain investment %, ie 60-40 stocks/bonds?
__________________

__________________
garyt 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 04-10-2016, 10:32 AM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyt View Post
I haven't read that much on FIREcalc, so does it use a certain investment %, ie 60-40 stocks/bonds?
If you go to the "Portfolio Tab" there's a place to input your actual asset allocation. Otherwise FIRECalc defaults to a 75%/25% stock / bond mix.

Under the "Other Income" tab you can also include pension and SS income if you wish.

I suspect the consensus opinion from ER.org will be that your plan looks solid based on the information you provided.

You say you haven't read much on FIRECalc. It's probably worthwhile for you to become familiar with how it works. The calculator assumes certain behaviors on the part of the retiree (that you'll rebalance your portfolio annually back to your starting asset allocation, and that your withdrawals will rise annually with inflation but no more and no less). At the very least you'll want to consider whether the behaviors assumed by the model (as well as any other model assumptions) are ones you can live with.

Good luck and happy retirement!
__________________

__________________
Retired early, traveling perpetually.
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 10:40 AM   #3
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyt View Post
So I ran my numbers on FIREcalc and this is what they come up with:

Here is how your portfolio would have fared in each of the 115 cycles. The lowest and highest portfolio balance at the end of your retirement was $180,142 to $4,712,394, with an average at the end of $1,785,873. (Note: this is looking at all the possible periods; values are in terms of the dollars as of the beginning of the retirement period for each cycle.)
For our purposes, failure means the portfolio was depleted before the end of the 30 years. FIRECalc found that 0 cycles failed, for a success rate of 100.0%.

I used 30 years (I'm 59). I didn't enter any future SS income, so I'm thinking I'm looking pretty good?
I haven't retired yet, looking possibly at next year, when I turn 60.
I haven't read that much on FIREcalc, so does it use a certain investment %, ie 60-40 stocks/bonds?
looks encouraging. how accurate are your "estimated expenses". With people living longer, I personally started using 94 as a target when I first did estimates over a decade ago (age 44). I have now increased my hypothetical EOL ... using both 105 and 115 just to be silly.

Depending on your health and other factors, you might want to see how the plan works to a bit older age.
__________________
bingybear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 11:32 AM   #4
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: warren
Posts: 184
Quote:
Originally Posted by bingybear View Post
looks encouraging. how accurate are your "estimated expenses". With people living longer, I personally started using 94 as a target when I first did estimates over a decade ago (age 44). I have now increased my hypothetical EOL ... using both 105 and 115 just to be silly.

Depending on your health and other factors, you might want to see how the plan works to a bit older age.
It's funny, the longer life span I use, the better my numbers get. I guess my spending is less than what it figures I'll make.
__________________
garyt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 11:49 AM   #5
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
DrRoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,725
Longer periods are probably better because the history of the stock market is better over longer periods. If your input numbers are good and you have not counted SS in there then you should be good.
__________________
"The mountains are calling, and I must go." John Muir
DrRoy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 12:43 PM   #6
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 355
In the portfolio tab, it is also worthwhile to check what your average investment expense ratio is. The default is pretty low @ .18% Unless you are all very low cost index funds. Increasing to .5% or more can make a pretty big difference.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
jabbahop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 01:26 PM   #7
Moderator
rodi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 8,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrRoy View Post
Longer periods are probably better because the history of the stock market is better over longer periods. If your input numbers are good and you have not counted SS in there then you should be good.
Yes and no. The longer numbers may not include some semi-recent bad years at the beginning of the run. Sequence of returns suggests that a bad market (or inflation) at the beginning of your retirement can have a bigger (negative) impact than at the end of your retirement. If you skip the hyper inflation of the 70's and early 80's (because of a longer run) - then you are missing a historical data point that you should consider.

I'm 54 and I run 30 years, 35 years, and 40 years.
__________________
Retired June 2014. No longer an enginerd - now I'm just a nerd.
micro pensions 7%, rental income 18%
rodi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 03:40 PM   #8
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrRoy View Post
Longer periods are probably better because the history of the stock market is better over longer periods. If your input numbers are good and you have not counted SS in there then you should be good.
sometimes it does... sometimes if it will push you into a failure case.
Firecalc is back testing... it provides a warm fuzzy.. it does not predict the future. But historical results do not guarantee future results.
__________________
bingybear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 03:57 PM   #9
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
DrRoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,725
I didn't mean to say that longer periods would always be better. If your principle was falling rapidly it would not work. I'm sure there are other failure situations as well. I was just giving an explanation for why it would work in some cases.
__________________
"The mountains are calling, and I must go." John Muir
DrRoy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 07:10 PM   #10
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Senator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 3,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrRoy View Post
I didn't mean to say that longer periods would always be better. If your principle was falling rapidly it would not work. I'm sure there are other failure situations as well. I was just giving an explanation for why it would work in some cases.
Another way to pick up extra Firecalc cycles is to put in half as many years for the portfolio to last, and half the value.
__________________
FIRE no later than 7/5/2016 at 56 (done), securing '16 401K match (done), getting '15 401K match (done), LTI Bonus (done), Perf bonus (done), maxing out 401K (done), picking up 1,000 hours to get another year of pension (done), July 1st benefits (vacation day, healthcare) (done), July 4th holiday. 0 days left. (done) OFFICIALLY RETIRED 7/5/2016!!
Senator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2016, 10:08 PM   #11
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator View Post
Another way to pick up extra Firecalc cycles is to put in half as many years for the portfolio to last, and half the value.
Does that actually work correctly? Would you halve your other inputs too like social security, rental income, and pensions? I don't know if this is correct, but I have been using 48 years for my time variable in FireCalc, and then inputting $200,000 for how much money I want left when I die. That way, if I don't die by the time I am 88, I will still have $200,000, social security, and a tiny pension to live off of. I use 48 years because that is the number of years that seems to give me the highest failure rate and also has the highest starting nest egg to be 100% successful. Does this sound like a good way to deal with Firecalc's longevity limitations?
__________________
Dreaming of Freedom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 02:18 PM   #12
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,495
I believe people do the most playing with calculators before retirement, which makes sense because most are looking for a degree of confidence regarding the ability to retire. I would caution relying on only one calculator in deciding whether or not to retire. Before retirement, I ran Financial Engines, Firecalc, cFIREsim, ESPlanner, and FRIP often, and found them to be conservative in exactly this order. Now retired, I might use cFIREsim and FRIP once a month to look at trends. I posted about FRIP on another thread but found the tone to be condescending and uncivil, so I abandoned it. I will say I am personally comfortable with the results of the above calculators taken in totality.
__________________
Options is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2016, 03:23 PM   #13
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreaming of Freedom View Post
Does that actually work correctly?
No.
__________________

__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet 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
FIREcalc rewrite - suggestions? dory36 FIRE and Money 74 02-13-2005 09:20 AM
Question for Dory36 on FIRECalc moguls FIRE and Money 24 03-06-2004 06:03 AM
New version of FIRECalc for testing dory36 FIRE and Money 24 11-25-2002 08:12 AM
Alternate use of FIRECalc patnbj FIRE and Money 0 11-17-2002 09:49 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:19 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.