And a few minor tweaks of the programmer's MC terms and/or algorithms will change that. So when is it 'right'?
What if M-C was less pessimistic than history? Would it be 'wrong'? Sounds like you are still using history as a base-line. Why not use history, plus a comfortable safety factor? I think MC is just a fancy, convoluted, complicated, circular means to that end.
'But a computer came up with this answer!'
Agreed, but since we can't predict the future, I thinks it's all we got. At some point, most of us just need to go with our decision, or work until we die.
I feel reasonable, going with 100% and ~ 45 years (before you start dropping off bad cycles), knowing that my portfolio should survive the worst of anything we've seen in history, plus a little fudge factor for safety. Just because we may have some future cycles that are unrepresented in history does not mean they will be worse than the worst ever thrown at us. And if they do, I've got some buffer. and will need to adjust - probably like everyone else, regardless what tool they used to determine their CWR (
Comfortable
Withdraw
Rate).
-ERD50