Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-18-2018, 08:49 PM   #41
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 555
I know what "pulling someones leg" means...I just am not getting your point or I'm missing the humor in it...anyway...yeah..was at 100% and market increase has buffered that as well
FREE866 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 01-18-2018, 09:37 PM   #42
Full time employment: Posting here.
cooch96's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Lakewood
Posts: 902
80% and I would sleep very easily. If fate started to pull me down the unfortunate 20%, all I’d have to do is slash discretionary spending and perhaps try to monetize a hobby. Weather the storm for a few years, perhaps even a decade, and then proceed with my prodigal ways.
__________________
Why be normal when you can be yourself?
cooch96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 06:02 AM   #43
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Golden sunsets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintnational View Post
If I include pensions and SS (which we are currently not taking) in firecalc, we are at less than a 2% WR. So, something north of 100%, hopefully.

Ditto for DH and I.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum
__________________
"Luck favors the prepared mind"
Pasteur
Golden sunsets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 06:45 AM   #44
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 870
I would assume that 200% in FIRECALC means that they could double their net living expenses amount and still see 0 cycles of failure. That is a normal way to estimate where you are for all other calculators that I have used. RIP does not give a percentage of success or cycles, just the age at where you would run out of money, for instance. So if you project age 95, and are not negative in net worth, than you are at 100%. Make it 110, and it shows all savings gone. What percent success rate is that?

As mentioned by others, it is really only more useful for those that have to live entirely off of paper investments due to no pension and RE so early that SS is a minor amount in the budget. I would gather from reading this forum that the FIRE posters that pulled the trigger in their 40s and early 50s and no pension HAD to figure based on no SS, at the time because there was none and the amount that would be “guaranteed “ was pretty unknown when figuring 15-20+ years down the road.

In many ways, for many it is totally academic. If I had to, and DW was dead, and all my savings were gone, I could still LIVE easily on just my pension and SS, just not at the level I desired and used for the calculators. But if someone can’t live decently on $86k a year, with reduced taxes and no FICA/MED deductions then the problem is with them. Plenty of people live their whole life, with families, never making that much. So while I could technically say my current success rate is infinite, that is based on lots of black swan scenarios not occuring, none of which are covered by any calculator.

My BIL, a retired LEO at 53, retired 4 years ago, and never did a calculation in his entire life. He just knew/assumed that he could easily live on his pension forever, and when SS kicked in, that was more insurance. He barely scratches his savings, which are super conservatively invested, for a new truck or boat, only beating inflation because of the bull. He wouldn’t know how to invest nor does he care.
Perryinva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 10:00 AM   #45
Recycles dryer sheets
ikubak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ready View Post
I'm at 200% and it still makes me nervous, but I worry a lot.


Once I hit 100% I quit checking.
__________________
Retire date Jan. 10, 2018
ikubak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 10:30 AM   #46
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 23,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooch96 View Post
80% and I would sleep very easily. If fate started to pull me down the unfortunate 20%, all I’d have to do is slash discretionary spending and perhaps try to monetize a hobby. Weather the storm for a few years, perhaps even a decade, and then proceed with my prodigal ways.
Have you ever actually modeled that in FIRECalc?

I have, and I think you'll find it takes really deep cuts for a very long time to make much difference. For a very rough view, consider that if we have a market crash of 50%, cutting spending from 5% to 2% is almost noise in that kind of a drop.

It might be hard to monetize a hobby in the midst of a recession/depression.

None of that means I think you are "wrong" for using an 80% number. Odds are in your favor, so if the 20% scenarios do not come to pass, the more conservative among us will kind of look like suckers. As long as you have a plan and understand the risks, it might be 100% the correct approach for you.

A lot of it boils down to what each of us calls 'discretionary'. I live a comfortable, but IMO, not an extravagant life style. I don't like to think of any of it as 'discretionary' - I don't want to cut anything. But if the stuff hits the fan, I'll find a way to be happy spending far less - the only other choice is to be a grumpy (grumpier?) old man.

-ERD50
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 02:46 PM   #47
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Teacher Terry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 5,427
We didn't use a calculator. We have 2 pensions. We will get tiny SS in the future (WEP). I still work p.t. not because I have too. We have plenty of discretionary expenses we could cut if necessary.
Teacher Terry is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 03:37 PM   #48
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
GravitySucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Syracuse
Posts: 3,043
Mega Corp announced incentivized RIF.
I found FireCalc and first run through said 83% or so.
RIP said I might run out of money at about 86 years old.
I called my manager and said if he needs to drop someone I would be willing to take the hit.

Turned out I had under estimated SS so FireCalc bumped to 90% success on second iteration. (That was to 84 years old.)
__________________
“No, not rich. I am a poor man with money, which is not the same thing"
GravitySucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 03:48 PM   #49
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikubak View Post
Once I hit 100% I quit checking.
Yep. Once I hit the ER button I moved on to the next adventure. If/when the investment balance drops I'll review and adjust.
__________________
Took SS at 62 and hope I live long enough to regret the decision.
foxfirev5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 07:10 PM   #50
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Car-Guy View Post
100%, well actually more than that but the FIRECal speedometer was pegged....
ditto

now in retirement and at under 2.5% WR ( mostly under 2%) [and not yet pulling SS, so WR might go lower]


in my long planning (started before 2000), I’d looked at possibilities of low returns (sub 2%real) and even (short term) negative returns as part of the plan
like others, assumed very low returns, no COLA’s and still found it worked
the only failure mode was for extended higher (5+%) inflation , which caused problems— but i also didn’t model increased bond returns as a partial offset (which might have made it pass for the whole timeframe examined)
FI_RElater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 02:12 PM   #51
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 596
I never have understood the point of FireCalc. Ok, I plug my numbers in and get a bunch of runs for data from the past. But, everything I see says future markets will probably have less returns than past markets. So, what is the point of knowing what would of happened if I had retired a bunch of years ago, using data that may not apply any more?
camfused is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 02:53 PM   #52
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: St. Charles
Posts: 2,960
Quote:
Originally Posted by camfused View Post
I never have understood the point of FireCalc. Ok, I plug my numbers in and get a bunch of runs for data from the past. But, everything I see says future markets will probably have less returns than past markets. So, what is the point of knowing what would of happened if I had retired a bunch of years ago, using data that may not apply any more?
Be careful assuming today's prognosticators actually have data to back them up (or a crystal ball). Everyone is just guessing. Or worse, they have an agenda. In the early 1980's it was "conventional wisdom" that home mortgage rates would never fall below 10% again.

That being said, no one should take Firecalc results as gospel. It is not a prediction. It is a historical analysis. But I find it to be a pretty good test of your possibility of a successful FIRE.
__________________
If your not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Never slow down, never grow old!
CardsFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 03:37 PM   #53
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
flintnational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Atlanta Suburb
Posts: 1,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by camfused View Post
I never have understood the point of FireCalc. Ok, I plug my numbers in and get a bunch of runs for data from the past. But, everything I see says future markets will probably have less returns than past markets. So, what is the point of knowing what would of happened if I had retired a bunch of years ago, using data that may not apply any more?
Also, Firecalc is looking at historical survival rates for the worst historical periods not an average. Therefore, future returns could in fact be lower than historical average returns and Firecalc would still have value. The bet is that the future is no worse than the worst historical withdrawal periods.
__________________
"Oh, twice as much ain't twice as good
And can't sustain like one half could
It's wanting more that's gonna send me to my knees" - John Mayer
flintnational is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 03:58 PM   #54
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
USGrant1962's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: DC area
Posts: 1,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by camfused View Post
I never have understood the point of FireCalc. Ok, I plug my numbers in and get a bunch of runs for data from the past. But, everything I see says future markets will probably have less returns than past markets. So, what is the point of knowing what would of happened if I had retired a bunch of years ago, using data that may not apply any more?
By looking at the bottom lines on the FIRECalc graph you can see how your portfolio would have behaved, with your planned withdrawals, in the worst markets in U.S. history.

Do you think we are headed for returns worse than the Great Depression or 1965-1975? FYI, annualized real return for the S&P 500 in the decade from January 1965 to December 1974 was -4.27% with dividends reinvested. This case is included in FIRECalc. You can see the returns for yourself here https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/

If you think we are headed for worse than these two cases you may want plan for worse than FIRCalc. I wouldn't recommend it though.
__________________
FI and Semi-ER March 24, 2017
Consulting to stay engaged

"All models are wrong, some are useful." - George Box
There is always a well-known solution to every human problem: neat, plausible, and wrong.” - H.L. Mencken
USGrant1962 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 04:21 PM   #55
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 17,340
I run Firecalc with three scenarios

1) Pensions and social security only, with no portfolio at all
2) Current portfolio only, with no social security or pensions
3) Pensions and social security get cut by 50% tomorrow and portfolio loses 50% tomorrow.

Every case gives 100% success.

I ignore the value of our house (which is about 20% of our net worth) and I assume no economizing (although we could probably reduce our spending by 20% fairly easily).

That's what it takes for me.
__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 04:54 PM   #56
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 596
Re: FireCalc

Ok, y'all, I sit corrected. Thanks for making this straight for me. I always pull 100% when I run it, so looking good I guess.
camfused is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 05:29 PM   #57
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,052
Most of the calculators I use show around 90% to 95%. But, if I lower my annual spend by just $5K - $10K, they all jump to 100%. I've probably have around $30K in expenses that I could cut. If you have expenses that can be cut if needed, I'd think anything above 80-90% would be fine.
PatrickA5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2018, 05:50 PM   #58
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 8,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardsFan View Post
Be careful assuming today's prognosticators actually have data to back them up (or a crystal ball). Everyone is just guessing. Or worse, they have an agenda. In the early 1980's it was "conventional wisdom" that home mortgage rates would never fall below 10% again.
Truly. I don't think most of those forecasters are taking into account the jump in productivity and economic well being that will occur with the invention of usable jet cars, warp drive, and teleportation.
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Anonymous (not Will Rogers or Sam Clemens)
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 06:56 AM   #59
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Utrecht
Posts: 2,650
Quote:
Originally Posted by camfused View Post
I never have understood the point of FireCalc. Ok, I plug my numbers in and get a bunch of runs for data from the past. But, everything I see says future markets will probably have less returns than past markets. So, what is the point of knowing what would of happened if I had retired a bunch of years ago, using data that may not apply any more?
From the site:
Quote:
How can FIRECalc predict future returns from past performance? It can't. And it doesn't try. In fact, it tries to predict what will not happen. This might sound confusing, but it's really simple.
Consider an analogy: Suppose you are building a house in Honolulu. No one could predict the temperature for any given future date during the decades the house will be used. But if you know that it has never been under 52° in that location in all of recorded history, you could make an intelligent judgment about how much heating capacity is enough.
Planning for an Anchorage-style winter would be a true waste of money that could be better used elsewhere.



Now, if you think climate will change temperatures, factor it in your estimate. Simple as that.
Totoro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2018, 07:33 AM   #60
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickA5 View Post
Most of the calculators I use show around 90% to 95%. But, if I lower my annual spend by just $5K - $10K, they all jump to 100%. I've probably have around $30K in expenses that I could cut. If you have expenses that can be cut if needed, I'd think anything above 80-90% would be fine.
The question is "When do I cut expenses?". Remember the greater survival rates of the lower spending assumes that you cut expenses in your very first year.

I'm not saying this is a bad idea, just that you have to be ready to implement the cut very quickly.
Independent 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
Chart of Withdrawal Rate - Success Rate - Yrs Retired Midpack FIRE and Money 28 10-05-2013 11:02 AM
Happiness leads to success vs Success leads to happiness Midpack Other topics 4 02-06-2012 08:59 AM
100% success at 7% initial withdrawal rate Sam FIRE and Money 30 03-20-2006 10:02 PM
Firecalc success rate. PJ03 FIRE and Money 20 12-15-2005 09:45 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:33 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.