********???

[slv1]

It seems ******** is more conservative in it's calculations than firecalc. Are both up to date.

Also in ******** at the bottom of the calculations it gives you historical times that money lost more than 20% or 40% etc. and it gives what the lowest dip was in some years.

Some of those dips are low even at a 100% success rate. Should that be a cause for alarm if I'm trying to retire soon?

[REWahoo]

That calculator is an unauthorized ripoff of FIRECalc. I have no confidence in the accuracy of any information it provides.

[razztazz]

Somewhere on the ******** site, at least a while ago, the guy gave his explanation as to how he put it together and why. The upshot is that he found (or that's his claim) that Firecalc and all other previous similar studies ie Trinity et al were incorrectly calculating bond values during rebalancing, and the way they were doing it gave a bias towards positive outcomes.

He used his different (and in his opinion more correct) way of calculating things which led to the less hopeful outcomes seen in ********.

[ERD50]

If you look at the graphs on FIRECalc, you will also see those dips, though it doesn't provide any numerical output for interim values. I started a thread on it years ago. Ahhh, here it is:

http://www.early-retirement.org/foru...tml#post606756

Quote:

Should that be a cause for alarm if I'm trying to retire soon?

I think they are a cause for alarm at any time. But a conservative WR survived those dips even with no cutting back on inflation adjusted spending. So maybe that should be comforting?

The alternative is to work until you die. Your choice.

-ERD50

[slv1]

I hear you.

[SecondCor521]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo That calculator is an unauthorized ripoff of FIRECalc. I have no confidence in the accuracy of any information it provides.

Are you confident in the accuracy of FIRECalc? If so, why does your opinion differ between the two calculators?

I think it is W2R here who recommends that people don't rely on the results of any one calculator.

[REWahoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecondCor521 Are you confident in the accuracy of FIRECalc? If so, why does your opinion differ between the two calculators?

I was a moderator at the time ***** was created. It would not be appropriate for me to go beyond saying having knowledge of what took place behind the scenes tainted my opinion of the calculator.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecondCor521 Are you confident in the accuracy of FIRECalc? If so, why does your opinion differ between the two calculators? I think it is W2R here who recommends that people don't rely on the results of any one calculator.

I don't recommend that people rely on the results of any one calculator or model; this is true. I don't even recommend that people rely on any one computation of any kind, calculator, model output, financial advisor's chicken scratches, or whatever, for that purpose. Get as many reliable sources of input as you can and stick to those you think are the very most reliable.

That said, FIRECalc is one of the most well known retirement calculators on the internet because it has established a firm reputation over many, many years and many uses. ******** has not. It was supposedly "reverse engineered" recently from FIRECalc with all that implies. For that reason, and for the reasons REWahoo refers to, I suggest eliminating that calculator from your list of possible calculators to run, before you decide on which ones to use.

[SecondCor521]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R I don't recommend that people rely on the results of any one calculator or model; this is true. I don't even recommend that people rely on any one computation of any kind, calculator, model output, financial advisor's chicken scratches, or whatever, for that purpose. Get as many reliable sources of input as you can and stick to those you think are the very most reliable.

I meant what I wrote originally in a positive light towards you and the idea. I agree with everything quoted above.