May have found bug when entering Soc Sec

[link]

In the process of running scenarios for myself, I noticed that the result for 'Given a success rate, determine spending level for a set portfolio" for a 100% success was NOT the same result as when I manually adjusted the 'Spending' amount on the 'Start Here' tab to achieve a 100% success value. I thought you might want to know. Below is a random example demonstrating what I did. The only clue I have the two approaches MATCHED when I didn't have any Social Security earnings added, then DIDN'T match when I did add in Social Security earnings. I hope you find this helpful.

First, here is a random example where I kept changing the 'Spending' field until the 100% success value was teetering on the edge. Just $50 more and it goes below 100%. The spending is $87600.
https://www.firecalc.com/index.php?w...lcVersion=3.0&

Next, if I don't change any entry fields, but go to the 'Investigate Tab' and select the 'Spending Level' button and select 100%, the result should be the same (it worked when I didn't have Social Security income). However, it is not. It is in fact quite a bit different ($71,198 vs $87,600).

I would love to hear if I was just misunderstanding the calculator of if I indeed found a bug.

[Dtail]

Interesting results. I reproduced your inputs and ended up with the same results. Looking at it further.

[SecondCor521]

I think I have come across this same bug. I would love to see it fixed, and would contribute a six pack of whatever to the fixer, just let me know.

[Dtail]

Okay further update.
IMHO, the issue might be with the "Not Retired" screen. When I input my own numbers which includes 2 SS inputs including one in the future, but with 2018 as the retirement year, the 100% max spending on investigation is similar to using that max number on the Spending input on the first screen to achieve 100% success.
Thus perhaps when the retirement is in the future and/or savings are expected in future years, the bug shows up when there are SS inputs. Strange though.....

[SecondCor521]

My inputs when I saw the problem were for one future SS stream. I leave the "Not Retired" screen with default values (because I'm retired). I also have two off chart spending reductions that start in future years.

[link]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dtail Okay further update. IMHO, the issue might be with the "Not Retired" screen. When I input my own numbers which includes 2 SS inputs including one in the future, but with 2018 as the retirement year, the 100% max spending on investigation is similar to using that max number on the Spending input on the first screen to achieve 100% success. Thus perhaps when the retirement is in the future and/or savings are expected in future years, the bug shows up when there are SS inputs. Strange though.....

Thank you for the response and the check. Hopefully an admin of Firecalc will see this and look into it.

[whaleknives]

Quote:

Originally Posted by link Thank you for the response and the check. Hopefully an admin of Firecalc will see this and look into it.

Instead of just hoping, you can send a report to the FIRECalc contact email, "dory36 at capn-bill dot com": https://www.firecalc.com/contact.php

[link]

Quote:

Originally Posted by whaleknives Instead of just hoping, you can send a report to the FIRECalc contact email, "dory36 at capn-bill dot com": https://www.firecalc.com/contact.php

Yeah, I actually did that first. I transcribed that into email, but Dory36's email address didn't work. I got a mailer daemon notification. That's what brought me to the forum actually. 😁