Big_Hitter
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
just save more and spend less, no biggie
Agree, but the ancillary question is can folks still use the 4% rule or actually the reciprocal 25x expenses guideline in order to see if they are in good shape to retire?
Just curious, anyone look back at his prior predictions and compare against what actually occured? It's easy to predict anything, being consistently right is that hard part. [emoji3]
He takes no heat for being too conservative but his name continues to echo down the canyon. I think the reality is he has no idea but I think people that think he's gold will be chronically underinvested. But not making as much doesn't bother people quite as much.
Seems like Bogle even at his age likes the attention playing the prediction game brings. He just works it from the other angle. Which is to predict lower returns. This way he stays relevant. Less chance of being bashed by disappointed followers. Smart guy but & knows how to work the crowd. He takes no heat for being too conservative but his name continues to echo down the canyon. I think the reality is he has no idea but I think people that think he's gold will be chronically underinvested. But not making as much doesn't bother people quite as much.
I still think it's a good planning tool..... And remember the '4% rule' worked in some pretty bad times over the last 100 years.... Also note that the SWR is a 'Worst Case Percentage', and in all probability most people will not experience the Worst Case.
so, the folks that are employing a 3.5%, 3%, 2.5% WR are mostly short changing themselves.
So theoretically if one were to use the 4% WR adjusted for inflation for the first 10 years of retirement in conjunction with Bogle's prediction, would their 1mm portfolio be at a scary level, then hope for a 2009 -2018 market return scenario.
Well, this is very easy to simulate in past history.... Using FireCalc, or VPW Backtesting... Which I'm guessing you've done one or the other or both. And then of course you would have to decide if it was at a 'Scary Level'....
For myself that is retired and employing VPW, there is no 'Scary Level', which is a benefit of VPW for me personally.
So 10 years of lower returns kills the 4% SWR? I don't think so. The last couple of hundred years seem to indicate that decades of low return are followed by decades of higher returns. Unless REWAHOO's asteroid takes care of things in which case all bets are off.So, the 4% SWR is dead.... I have never seen any member of any Investment forum using this as an actual Withdrawal Tool.
This looks like a pretty good case for VPW to me.
So 10 years of lower returns kills the 4% SWR? I don't think so. The last couple of hundred years seem to indicate that decades of low return are followed by decades of higher returns. Unless REWAHOO's asteroid takes care of things in which case all bets are off.
Unless REWAHOO's asteroid takes care of things in which case all bets are off.
So he's been spot on... Lol. As I said earlier, anyone can make a prediction. Would be great if there was a site that tracked the predictions of the "experts" against how things turned out. I predict they are wrong more than they are right. [emoji3]I have kept track of some predictions from various sources. Here are Bogle's:
2012 - 7% stks & 3% bonds for next decade, minus 2% inflation.
2015 - 4% stks & 3% bonds for next decade, minus 2% inflation.
2018 - 4% stks & 3.5% bonds for next decade, minus 2% inflation.
FWIW, Michael Kitces in 2016 - Using Shiller PE, real returns of stocks 2% through 2020's, and 1% real for bonds. 2030's and 40's could be quite good for investors.
So, hang in there till the 2030s!
Let's see, closest approach at 1.7 million miles yup time to bend over and plant a big kissYep. Speaking of which...
NASA asteroid WARNING: Giant ONE MILE wide asteroid will skim the Earth before Christmas
True, but it's a good reference -lets see, I'm below the magical 4% I'm golden...Well, I don't think so either ...... As I said, I think the 4% is a viable planning tool. And I don't think anyone on any investment forum that I've seen, actually employs it.
IF I get a 4% return on equities and a 3.5% return on bonds WITH 2% inflation. I would be very happy. Inflation is the silent killer.
Well, this is very easy to simulate in past history.... Using FireCalc, or VPW Backtesting... Which I'm guessing you've done one or the other or both. And then of course you would have to decide if it was at a 'Scary Level'....
For myself that is retired and employing VPW, there is no 'Scary Level', which is a benefit of VPW for me personally.
Not sure about that. When taking a percentage of remaining portfolio, the *“scary level” is on the income side it seems. Sure, you won’t deplete your portfolio as quickly but your income can quickly become insufficient to cover your expenses if returns are lackluster for a long time.
So he's been spot on... Lol. As I said earlier, anyone can make a prediction. Would be great if there was a site that tracked the predictions of the "experts" against how things turned out. I predict they are wrong more than they are right. [emoji3]
Well, I don't think so either ...... As I said, I think the 4% is a viable planning tool. And I don't think anyone on any investment forum that I've seen, actually employs it.
Here you go:
Guru Grades
It's a bit dated (2005 - 2012 data) but I doubt the bottom line of an average accuracy of 47% has changed much.