I've been reading Bob Clyatt's book "Work Less, Live More" with great interest -- especially where he describes the work done by Keith Marbach on the "95% rule and the 4% SWR".
One item that's unclear to me is the table on page 196 where he compares a "Standard" withdrawal with the "95% rule". For withdrawal rates above 4%, the "Standard" method shows higher survivability than the "95% rule". For example, for a 30-year pay out and 4.5% withdrawal, the standard method had a 93.9% success rate, while the "95% rule" only shows a 91.8% success rate. Since the 95% rule dictates withdrawing less money in years where the market is down, it doesn't make sense that it would result in diminshed success.
Has anyone else noticed this, or perhaps the question has already been answered?
intercst
One item that's unclear to me is the table on page 196 where he compares a "Standard" withdrawal with the "95% rule". For withdrawal rates above 4%, the "Standard" method shows higher survivability than the "95% rule". For example, for a 30-year pay out and 4.5% withdrawal, the standard method had a 93.9% success rate, while the "95% rule" only shows a 91.8% success rate. Since the 95% rule dictates withdrawing less money in years where the market is down, it doesn't make sense that it would result in diminshed success.
Has anyone else noticed this, or perhaps the question has already been answered?
intercst