Getting close, question on SWR

B

Brian99

Confused about dryer sheets
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
6
Hello all. I've been lurking and reading and learning. This seems to be a great forum with intelligent, sometimes humorous, and always respectful dialog. Thank you for having me.:greetings10:

My Basics: I'm 51, DW is 45. We both have jobs in megacorps and are getting tired of it all. We currently have $1M+ mixed in pre-tax and post-tax accounts. We also currently have a large house from which we will downsize and add some incremental funds into the allocation mix. Our retirement home will still be in the $700-800K range - e.g. potential for a further downsize later. We each have non-COLA'd pensions which we're planning to start drawing on at 55. Likewise, current plans are to start SS at 62, but we'll make that decision later. Since the value of the pensions will decay with inflation, I typically think about SS as "covering" the inflation loss of the pensions and not adding any real incremental income. The pensions (with SS inflation support) will cover about 40% of needed retirement income. The remainder to come from drawing against our portfolio - which is a typical Boglehead, 65/35 kind of mix.

We've played with FIREcalc, Fido RIP, etc. and I've been building my own spreadsheets for years.

I have a question regarding SWR. I understand 4% is "traditionally" accepted as a valid number to use - certainly many prefer 3% or less.

If I punch a $1M portfolio and $40K/annual spending for 30 years into FIREcalc, I get a 95% success rate. Increasing to 40 years drops success rate to 86%. This then seems to be "justification" for the 4% SWR number.

When I change the annual spending to $50K (or 5%), the success rates drop to 71% (30 years) and 57% (40 years).

(Note - the above FIREcalc numbers assume "spending power is preserved". When I use Bernicke's spending models, the success rates are, of course, significantly higher.)

My current thinking is to proceed with a 5% SWR. Under the following understanding:
- it is likely to be successful (57-71% range),
- "only" 60% of needed income comes from the portfolio,
- if needed we can downsize our home in the future,
- if needed we can opt for the Bernicke spending model (my assumed spending plan has a a few "luxury" items included which could be reduced/eliminated)

Is the 5% SWR approach just too aggressive? am I overlooking something/anything?

All feedback is much appreciated. :cool:

PS - I just finished "The Joy of NOT Working" and highly recommend it. (I found it from other posts on this forum - thanks again!)
 
A lot depends on your personal risk tolerance. Take mine as an example. Reading your post made my hair stand on end! I would be a nervous wreck if I was spending 5%, especially at your relatively young ages. I'd rather spend half as much and feel more secure. But then, others do spend 5% and aren't bothered by that at all.
 
It depends. If your willing to take a 30-40% chance that you'll run out of assets and live solely on pensions and SS in your old age then 5% would be fine. I think 4% would be the most I would be comfortable with for a 40+ year time horizon and I think 3.5% or less would be more comfortable.

That said, did you include SS in your Firecalc analysis? Also, since the risk is running out of money late in life, would your success rate improve if you delayed pension start and/or delayed SS until age 70?
 
Make sure your Plan B is good! If you can be very flexible, you can certainly start at 5%. Merriman used to have a white paper showing that withdrawing 4%/year from a diversified portfolio (not adjusted for inflation, just 4% of the portfolio value each year) resulted in higher withdrawals after a few (6?) years than withdrawing 5% a year. 4% let things grow nicely, 5% kind of stunted portfolio growth. So 5% may not really be a good as it seems unless you want more just at the start.

Here's a link to Pfau's blog describing Guyton's approach to taking 5%:

Retirement Researcher Blog: Jonathan Guyton on Combining Dynamic Withdrawals and Dynamic Asset Allocation
 
Only you can answer if 5% is too aggressive. If you both live a very long time you might find yourselves with little income during your final years. Will you see that coming in time to make adjustments to your lifestyle and be able to avoid the really bad outcomes?

"Sell the house" was the plan for a generation and might have worked for some, but if you don't need that much house you are much better off downsizing and converting part of it into portfolio now.
 
MichaelB said:
Only you can answer if 5% is too aggressive. If you both live a very long time you might find yourselves with little income during your final years. Will you see that coming in time to make adjustments to your lifestyle and be able to avoid the really bad outcomes?

"Sell the house" was the plan for a generation and might have worked for some, but if you don't need that much house you are much better off downsizing and converting part of it into portfolio now.
Click to expand...

+1 on the house. I haven't fired yet but I plan on at least cutting my housing expense by moving to a lower cost area or downsizing. All that goes with a high value home is a drag on funds.....taxes, upkeep, utilities, etc. For me it's a no brainer....I expect to only have about 10% - 15% max of my net worth in my home longer term.
 
One more vote for being a bit overly agressive at 5%. I would hang in there for a year or two in megacorp and sock away every penny I could (this would also be good pratice for retirement).
 
I've answered this question before, but I'll save you the trouble of doing a search on my previous responses.

I retired in early 2007, DW in March of this year.

Our only "income" comes from a joint SPIA (purchased with qualified funds from my rollover IRA) and our retirement portfolio withdrawls. We will have additional income streams in the future (two small pensions for DW, along with our respective SS income - including my 50% spousal claim in just over a year when DW starts SS, at FRA).

You mentiond that you use FIDO's RIP program. As you know, it contains a year by year forecast of taxes, expenses, income, RMD's, etc. It also shows (in the last column) your forecast withdrawl rate.

Our joint withdrawl rate for the last 5+ years has been above that magic 4%. Are we concerned? Not at all.

Going down the report to age 70 (we're the same age, within a few months), our WD rate drops to 3% - at the time I claim my SS.

I would say for a lot of folks who retire earlier than "normal" (whatever that is) fall into the same situation. Is 4% valid? I don't know, but it's certainly easier to use that as a beginning goal if on day one of your retirement, all income sources start and not be delayed into the future.

The second reason we're above that 4% is our desire to "burn" a good deal of our joint retirement accounts to minimize "excessive RMD's" at age 70.5. What are excessive RMD's? Those are the withdrawls you are required to take by law, but don't need to take to satisfy your retirement income needs at that age.

Sure, you can just take the remainder (after paying taxes) and reinvest, but I look at it as just another thing I have to consider as I (and DW) age. I want financial management to become easier, not harder as I age.

Should we (as a couple, in our personal situation) adhere to that 4% WR come h*ll or high water at our age (mid-60's)? Heck no. We enjoy retirement and spend a lot at this age. Assuming I/we live till our 90's (financial plan is to age 100 - but that's another story), we don't want to have regrets that "we should have, at an earlier age" (even if that earlier age is in our 6th decade :cool: ).

Just our way of looking at the question the OP asked...
 
Thanks to EVERYONE for your comments.

rbmrtn said:
There was a recent thread here on similar subject. There were links to info that discuss whether the "safe" is too safe. Basically the 4% is for the worst case scenario and you could in theory withdraw more and still survive.

[URL]http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/article-on-safe-withdrawal-rates-63477.html[/URL]
Click to expand...


Sorry I had not seen this thread before. VERY interesting. thx.

The dialog/analysis regarding inflation as perhaps more dangerous than stock market fluctuations made me think - how best to hedge against that? Precious metals are the popular play (not in my portfolio presently - should they be?). Real estate also historically tracks very closely to inflation over time -- so maybe keeping a larger home for potential Plan B downsizing is a good approach?


rescueme said:
Should we (as a couple, in our personal situation) adhere to that 4% WR come h*ll or high water at our age (mid-60's)? Heck no. We enjoy retirement and spend a lot at this age. Assuming I/we live till our 90's (financial plan is to age 100 - but that's another story), we don't want to have regrets that "we should have, at an earlier age" (even if that earlier age is in our 6th decade :cool: ).

Just our way of looking at the question the OP asked...
Click to expand...


That's somewhat how I feel about it. While much of my career has been very fulfilling - I want to be able to have time and energy to do things while still young enough to really dive in completely. An extra year of freedom in my 50's seems much more valuable than some extra cash in my 80's.

I should also point out that included in my projected 5% SWR are "reserve" accounts -- i.e. money to pay for a new roof, new driveway, bath and kitchen remodels, etc. etc. I ammortized these costs into a monthly/annual number in my budget. These reserves amount to roughly 0.75%. So my actual "current expenses" budget would only consume roughly 4.25% SWR or less. (I don't know how others handle budgeting "reserves").

As someone pointed out, a real key is recognizing quickly if there is going to be a problem and then adjusting promptly. It seems unlikely that a FIREcalc "failure" would happen all at once - evidence should become clear in advance. If there's a catastrophic stock market in the early years of FIRE, then I would clearly have to adjust spending to avoid "failure".

DW has also indicated she would gladly work part-time if necessary to maintain the freedom of spending on small luxury incidentals. So there's that option.

Regarding using the house as a potential Plan B down the road, my initial thinking was that this was NOT a great approach, mostly because even if the value kept pace with inflation, it would not "exceed" inflation and therefore the assets would better placed somewhere where real returns could be earned. But given the inflation potential and the damage it can do, maybe having diversification in real estate makes sense. It would, no doubt, drive maintenance costs higher.

Thanks again!!:)
 
Richard4444 said:
Obgyn: I believe you are basically all in CDs and deferred annuities and when you FIRE then will be in annuities. If that is accurate, how do you plan your 3.5 % ??
Click to expand...

Good question. When I do a fixed income, 40 year run in FIRECALC, I'm coming up with SWRs of 2.2% or less.

-ERD50
 
Hello Richard - you are correct. I am mostly in CDs and this year i have begun to buy deferred annuities.

My planned initial withdrawal is about $85k after tax, which is about SWR = 3 to 3.5% in my case. My spreadsheet shows that I can start with a higher withdrawal, I.e. $100k the first year, if I factor annuities in.

How do you plan your SWR?

Edit 1- I have planned my annual withdrawals in such a way that my monthly checking account balance does not go below zero.

edit 2- I have found that using deferred annuities at an early age (e.g. 45 years) and SPIAs at a much later age (e.g. 80) really increases my annual maximum withdrawal. Again, not everyone will agree.

Richard4444 said:
Obgyn: I believe you are basically all in CDs and deferred annuities and when you FIRE then will be in annuities. If that is accurate, how do you plan your 3.5 % ??
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
obgyn65 said:
Hello Richard - you are correct. I am mostly in CDs and this year i have begun to buy deferred annuities.

My planned initial withdrawal is about $85k after tax, which is about SWR = 3 to 3.5% in my case. My spreadsheet shows that I can start with a higher withdrawal, I.e. $100k the first year, if I factor annuities in.
Click to expand...

So, if I understand you correctly ... you will begin with your annuities yielding 3 to 3.5 % and then add annually an inflation amount ? I ask as I am considering SPIAs at 65 or so. My thinking is to have a 'base' from annuities and then add an inflation or similar amount annually from a fund for such purpose as well as any emergencies.
 
Last edited:
My first deferred annuity pays out when I reach 62, in 15 years' time. Payout= 12%, as mentioned in other threads.

My plan includes laddered SPIAs from mid 60 to 90 years, in the unlikely event I reach that age.

The inflation rate I use is low. Again, I am not a financial planner so my plan may be a bit off whack :)

I like the idea of having a 'base' from annuities.


Richard4444 said:
So, if I understand you correctly ... you will begin with your annuities yielding 3 to 3.5 % and then add annually an inflation amount ? I ask as I am considering SPIAs at 65 or so. My thinking is to have a 'base' from annuities and then add an inflation or similar amount annually from a fund for such purpose as well as any emergencies.
Click to expand...
 
obgyn65 said:
My first deferred annuity pays out when I reach 62, in 15 years' time. Payout= 12%, as mentioned in other threads.

My plan includes laddered SPIAs from mid 60 to 90 years, in the unlikely event I reach that age.

The inflation rate I use is low. Again, I am not a financial planner so my plan may be a bit off whack :)

I like the idea of having a 'base' from annuities.
Click to expand...

Using a low estimate of future inflation rates is quite risky. Given how conservative you seem to be on the investment side, I'm surprised you'd take the risky route on the budget side.

If your annuities are not COLA'd and you're assuming a low inflation rate, that's a fairly daring position to put yourself into.
 
I agree the approach is risky, but please remember that I will continue to do part time hours at a couple of clinics during my semi-retirement.

I am also ok with reducing my annual expenditures if inflation is too high.

youbet said:
Using a low estimate of future inflation rates is quite risky. Given how conservative you seem to be on the investment side, I'm surprised you'd take the risky route on the budget side.

If your annuities are not COLA'd and you're assuming a low inflation rate, that's a fairly daring position to put yourself into.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Brian99 said:
...I should also point out that included in my projected 5% SWR are "reserve" accounts -- i.e. money to pay for a new roof, new driveway, bath and kitchen remodels, etc. etc. I ammortized these costs into a monthly/annual number in my budget. These reserves amount to roughly 0.75%. So my actual "current expenses" budget would only consume roughly 4.25% SWR or less. (I don't know how others handle budgeting "reserves")......
Click to expand...

I think the more relevant WR is the projected WR once one's pension and SS are on-line. I know my WR from ER to 60 is higher than when I start drawing on my pension and it falls again once I start SS. As long as the projected WR once I start SS is less than 4%, I'm comfortable.

For cars, boats, etc. I simply include depreciation in my projected living expense recognizing that the actual expense will be lumpy compared to what I have provided for.

For more non-routine withdrawals that I expect to occur over the next couple years (DS college, DD's wedding if either of those happen) I just reduce my retirement assets as if I pay for them now and those assets are now gone.
 
pb4uski said:
I think the more relevant WR is the projected WR once one's pension and SS are on-line. I know my WR from ER to 60 is higher than when I start drawing on my pension and it falls again once I start SS. As long as the projected WR once I start SS is less than 4%, I'm comfortable.
Click to expand...

+1

In the four years of retirement prior to SS kicking in our WR averaged 7+%. Now that both DW and I are drawing SS it has dropped to under 4%.
 
REWahoo said:
+1

In the four years of retirement prior to SS kicking in our WR averaged 7+%. Now that both DW and I are drawing SS it has dropped to under 4%.
Click to expand...

OK, I built another spreadsheet and did more modelling. Of course there are many variables, but I seem to come up models that show: 4.8% WR for 8 years, then 3.8% WR for 6 years, then down to 3.2% WR after that.

That would put me into the class of 2015 (early 2015 ;)). If I can hold out that long... if not, we may end up in a cheaper house in a less expensive part of the country, which might be just fine.
 
Last edited:
Another thing to consider is how important a fixed rate of spending is to you.

Our budget contains a number of items that are "nice to have", but we could certainly do without. So when the inevitable market down years happen, we'll cut back on things like travel.

Of course we'll see how well we stick to that - we've had two up years since we retired two years ago with me at 49 and DW at 58.
 
mpeirce said:
Our budget contains a number of items that are "nice to have", but we could certainly do without. So when the inevitable market down years happen, we'll cut back on things like travel.
Click to expand...
Just my $.02 cents on the "nice to have" or wants vs. needs way of budgeting while in retirement.

I/DW have always taken the position of not giving something up just because the market says we should.

That being the case, our retirement budget (we're both retired) does not break down by things we can give up if things get bad.

How do we do that? Simply by having enough cash (in our case, 3-4 years of gross - includes taxes due on withdrawls) to overcome any down years in the market. BTW, when I retired (age 59), we both had 4-5 years in cash; however since we're close to additonal income sources (two small pensions and SS in less than a year), we've reduced our cash holdings.

I know a lot of folks on this forum budget in a "two phase" manner. We've taken the position of not having to do so, by ensuring a constant revenue stream over an extended period, regardless of what happens in the market.

Just an alternative way of doing things, from our POV.
 
You should read Guyton's paper on decision rules & maximum initial withdrawal rates.
http://cornerstonewealthadvisors.com/files/08-06_WebsiteArticle.pdf

From my experience
- you need to be flexible in your spending. We ER'd for the first time in May 2008. You can figure out what happened next.
- you should be ready to go back to work if needed as soon as you see a larger than expected drop in your portfolio. Hoping & waiting could make the situation irreversible.
- Have a lot of confidence in your baseline expense. I would recommend downsizing the house now so you know exactly what your new expense base is.
- Find out how much health insurance will cost. An insurance agent will be happy to help. (Can't remember if this is an issue for you)
- Remember - if you've won the game, there is no reason to keep playing. Stay conservative in your portfolio as long as it meets the assumptions used in your SWR methodology.
- Subtract 1 to 1.5 years of spending from your portfolio value before calculating your SWR. This can be your emergency fund for those years where you need to go over your budget. Of course, you could just reduce your SWR to account for this too.

All the best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Lump Sum & Invest Vs SWR
Replies
21
Views
1K
perez99
P
N
Retiring two years earlier than planned
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
Koolau
Koolau
J
49 and 6 years to go in TX
Replies
5
Views
303
bloom2708
B
N
59.5 And Sitting On The Fence
Replies
20
Views
1K
pacergal
P
S
Asking for a friend...can he retire before 50?
Replies
15
Views
1K
anothercog
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom