Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
goonie
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 7:33 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by goonie »

Tibbitts is correct. You can re-retire when your portfolio reaches a new high water mark and still be adhering to the 4% "rule". For example...

Person A retires in 2015 with a portfolio value of $1.2 million. Using a 4% WR, they start withdrawing $48K/year (let's ignore inflation for the purposes of this example).

Person B retires in 2020 with a portfolio value of $1.5 million. Using a 4% WR, they start withdrawing $60K/year.

Person A's portfolio value in 2020 is now $1.5 million. They increase their withdrawal to $60K/year and are still adhering to the 4% rule.


** The caveat to this is that the more often you re-retire based on a new high water mark, the more likely it is that you're trimming margin for error. You may eventually hit one of those worst case scenario moments that really put the 4% rule to the test.
Last edited by goonie on Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
MiddleOfTheRoad
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 11:19 am

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by MiddleOfTheRoad »

tibbitts wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 8:44 am
RadAudit wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 6:16 am
Scott S wrote: Wed Mar 17, 2021 1:42 pm
tibbitts wrote: Wed Mar 17, 2021 9:43 am
birdog wrote: Sun Mar 14, 2021 5:23 pm
I’m not saying I would retire as soon as I hit 4%. I actually hit that years ago and was willing to keep working because I had the means and capacity to continue to do so. My question was to Scooter57 who asked if someone is still FI after a market drop. And my assertion is that the 4% rule actually assumes that market drop.
Although wording it is more complicated, I believe the rule is actually that once you hit 30 years of retirement life expectancy (on the downslope, obviously), the 4% is based on the highest value your portfolio reaches at any time going forward. Your withdrawals can increase to 4% of the new balance any time your portfolio increases, but never has to be decreased. Even if your portfolio doesn't increase, you can increase your withdrawals based the survival probability over a shorter period of time.
I don't believe that's the case. At least in the Bengen paper, he specifically warns against increasing one's withdrawal rate in the good years, since those gains might be needed to get through bad years later on. The withdrawals are supposed to be an inflation (or deflation) adjusted version of the previous year's withdrawals.
Interesting question. Anyone know of a thread on increasing the SWR+inflation set point in retirement? After a decade long, mostly up, run in the market, the question has come up in casual conversation.
As I said above I don't understand how this cannot be possible/reasonable, but maybe others will disagree.
It is absolutely reasonable. Just know that when you reset your 4% to the new portfolio value, you also reset the sequence of return risk.
User avatar
Scott S
Posts: 1937
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 2:28 am
Location: building my position

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by Scott S »

tibbitts wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:13 amYou may be referring to this:

This is a powerful warning (particularly appropriate for recent retirees) not to increase their rate of withdrawal just because of a few good years early in retirement. Their "excess" early may be needed to balance off weaker returns later.

I'm not suggesting changing the rate of withdrawal from the 4%. The "rule" says that in any year you can retire with up to a 30-year remaining lifespan while spending an inflation-adjusted 4% of your starting portfolio balance each year. By definition, if you can retire at 4% with a 30-year remaining lifespan, you can retire at 4% with a 29/28/27 etc. year remaining lifespan. The source of the original portfolio balance is irrelevant - you could have been employed the year before you start your retirement, or you could have not worked - as in already been retired. There is nothing magical about being employed vs. retired the year before your "retirement" begins for purposes of establishing the starting portfolio balance.

Variable strategies are completely different: the inflation-adjusted dollar amount of your withdrawal can increase or decrease every year. The advantage of the 4% "rule" is that you never have to take less than 4% of the original balance, along with your inflation adjustment.
Again, that is not what the "4% rule" says. By re-baselining per the current portfolio balance each year, you are describing a different approach than what is in the paper. Withdrawing a certain percentage of the portfolio balance (like 5%) each year can work well, but it is definitely considered a variable withdrawal strategy at that point, as the withdrawn amounts can vary dramatically.

If you feel the original paper (or the Trinity Study) talks about "re-retiring each year" please cite where it says so.
Last edited by Scott S on Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Old value investors never die, they just get their fix from rebalancing." -- vineviz
tibbitts
Posts: 23716
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by tibbitts »

Scott S wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:28 am
tibbitts wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:13 amYou may be referring to this:

This is a powerful warning (particularly appropriate for recent retirees) not to increase their rate of withdrawal just because of a few good years early in retirement. Their "excess" early may be needed to balance off weaker returns later.

I'm not suggesting changing the rate of withdrawal from the 4%. The "rule" says that in any year you can retire with up to a 30-year remaining lifespan while spending an inflation-adjusted 4% of your starting portfolio balance each year. By definition, if you can retire at 4% with a 30-year remaining lifespan, you can retire at 4% with a 29/28/27 etc. year remaining lifespan. The source of the original portfolio balance is irrelevant - you could have been employed the year before you start your retirement, or you could have not worked - as in already been retired. There is nothing magical about being employed vs. retired the year before your "retirement" begins for purposes of establishing the starting portfolio balance.

Variable strategies are completely different: the inflation-adjusted dollar amount of your withdrawal can increase or decrease every year. The advantage of the 4% "rule" is that you never have to take less than 4% of the original balance, along with your inflation adjustment.
Again, that is not what the "4% rule" says. By re-baselining per the current portfolio balance each year, you are describing a different approach than what is in the paper. Withdrawing a certain percentage of the portfolio balance (like 5%) each year can work well, but it is definitely considered a variable withdrawal strategy at that point, as the withdrawn amounts can vary dramatically.

If you feel the original paper (or the Trinity Study) talks about "re-retiring each year" please cite where it says so.
You have to dismiss the notion you have of someone already being retired and already withdrawing at an inflation-adjusted 4% of some amount, because once you "re-retire", it isn't relevant - in the paper or elsewhere. The paper addresses retiring at an inflation-adjusted 4% of your portfolio starting today, regardless of how your portfolio got to that point. The fact that you may have been retired before and withdrawing your inflation-adjusted 4% for some time just isn't consequential, so it isn't discussed.

Of course eventually you'll have sufficiently fewer years left to live that you can increase your withdrawals above 4%, but I'm not even considering that. And I'm not considering variable strategies where there is ever any possibility of having to reduce withdrawals beyond an inflation-adjusted 4% of the balance at your most recently established retirement date.
Last edited by tibbitts on Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Scott S
Posts: 1937
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 2:28 am
Location: building my position

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by Scott S »

tibbitts wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 11:56 amYou have to dismiss the notion you have of someone already being retired and already withdrawing at an inflation-adjusted 4% of some amount, because it once you "re-retire", it isn't relevant - in the paper or elsewhere. The paper addresses retiring at an inflation-adjusted 4% of your portfolio starting today, regardless of how your portfolio got to that point. The fact that you may have been retired before and withdrawing your inflation-adjusted 4% for some time just isn't consequential, so it isn't discussed.

Of course eventually you'll have sufficiently fewer years left to live that you can increase your withdrawals above 4%, but I'm not even considering that. And I'm not considering variable strategies where there is ever any possibility of having to reduce withdrawals beyond an inflation-adjusted 4% of the balance at your most recently established retirement date.
Logically, your plan makes sense and ought to succeed, the suggestion just wasn't made explicitly by the authors. That's all I was getting at.
"Old value investors never die, they just get their fix from rebalancing." -- vineviz
hoops777
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm
Location: Behind the 3 point line

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by hoops777 »

It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.
User avatar
birdog
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:35 pm
Location: Anytown, USA

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by birdog »

hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
tibbitts
Posts: 23716
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by tibbitts »

birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I would have thought an annuity or at least fixed income would have been the proposed alternative, certainly not starting a business, which would be far less predictable than the equity markets overall.
User avatar
birdog
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:35 pm
Location: Anytown, USA

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by birdog »

tibbitts wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:06 pm
birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I would have thought an annuity or at least fixed income would have been the proposed alternative, certainly not starting a business, which would be far less predictable than the equity markets overall.
How do you get to have enough with an annuity? That requires money. Where does the money come from? How do you make the money in the first place?
Scooter57
Posts: 2019
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:20 am

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by Scooter57 »

birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
People who FIRE at ages under 50 and don't come up with some kind of business of their own, whether it makes four figures or eight figures are really asking to deteriorate as they get older. There is nothing wrong with traveling, playing golf, putting in a few hours doing volunteer work, and sleeping in every morning, but if that is all you do, by the time you are 60 you are going to be the classic retired bore and there is some evidence that without more intellectual stimulation you will be more likely to age poorly.

My observation over the years is that many people who start doing something that they love, that they assume won't possibly make them a living, often end up making enough to make it unnecessary to draw only on savings for the rest of their lives. If you have followed the path of doing what you are told, being a good little boy and girl and getting good grades in high school, and going to the good college, and getting the good job, without any real idea of who you are, the first couple years you spend after leaving that "good" though often stifling job may be the first time in your life that you have a chance to figure out who you really are and what it is you are meant to be doing with your life.

Even something as simple as volunteering can open up unexpected prospects. Someone I know who started one of those street fridges in a low income urban neighborhood last year in response to the pandemic is now so involved with this effort that they found they were qualified to apply for a paid position in a local organization and had the resume to get it.

So if you are still young and desperately trying to retire because you hate your corporate job, don't write off the possibility that you may end up with a second career in your late 40s, or 50s, or 60s.
sailaway
Posts: 8215
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 1:11 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by sailaway »

There is no evidence that intellectual stimulation and being paid go hand in hand. As a matter of fact, dancing, particularly partner dancing, is one of the activities most highly correlated with aging well, and not something one easily finds a paying gig for.
tibbitts
Posts: 23716
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by tibbitts »

birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:12 pm
tibbitts wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:06 pm
birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I would have thought an annuity or at least fixed income would have been the proposed alternative, certainly not starting a business, which would be far less predictable than the equity markets overall.
How do you get to have enough with an annuity? That requires money. Where does the money come from? How do you make the money in the first place?
Well, you're presenting starting a business as an alternative to investing in the stock market. You'd get the money for the annuity from the same place as you'd get the money for investing in the stock market.
wolf359
Posts: 3207
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by wolf359 »

Tamalak wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:02 am 25x is sufficient imo. Make sure you take into account the cost of health insurance or any other benefits provided by your job.

25x has a failure rate, especially if you retire early. But imo if your retirement plan doesn't have a failure rate, you're being overconservative. Don't magnify the risk of wasted years just to squish the last shred of risk of running out of money.
I know people call it a failure rate, but it really isn't that. If you know that you're going to crash into a brick wall in 20 years, do you think you might make some adjustments? And if you make those adjustments and never crash into the wall, have you failed?

The "failure rate" is really the odds that you might have to make an adjustment. That could be spending less, earning more, or adjusting your investments. And the adjustments themselves aren't that difficult even if you have to cut back. As long as you're not retiring with the minimum expenses barely covered, you have room to get rid of discretionary expenses. A simple $10K reduction one year may do it. Fly coach instead of first class. Or skip a cruise during a bad market year, so you don't have to withdraw so much.

When viewed with that perspective, 25X isn't that risky.
Tamalak
Posts: 1988
Joined: Fri May 06, 2016 2:29 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by Tamalak »

wolf359 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 4:13 pm
Tamalak wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 10:02 am 25x is sufficient imo. Make sure you take into account the cost of health insurance or any other benefits provided by your job.

25x has a failure rate, especially if you retire early. But imo if your retirement plan doesn't have a failure rate, you're being overconservative. Don't magnify the risk of wasted years just to squish the last shred of risk of running out of money.
I know people call it a failure rate, but it really isn't that. If you know that you're going to crash into a brick wall in 20 years, do you think you might make some adjustments? And if you make those adjustments and never crash into the wall, have you failed?
YOU haven't failed, but the plan has. But yes, I agree - I plan to withdraw 4% of my portfolio's current value, at least as long as I am early retired (I plan to retire or semi-retire in early 40s). If the market dips, so will my budget.. and if it dips enough, I'll root around for some work.
hoops777
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm
Location: Behind the 3 point line

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by hoops777 »

birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I never said anything about a business.
My point was having enough money at retirement that you do not need stocks to retire.
I would not retire if I needed stocks to do really well to cover my expenses.
Of course, that is not always an option.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.
goonie
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 7:33 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by goonie »

hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 4:49 pm
birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I never said anything about a business.
My point was having enough money at retirement that you do not need stocks to retire.
I would not retire if I needed stocks to do really well to cover my expenses.
Of course, that is not always an option.
What does this mean? 0% stocks?
hoops777
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm
Location: Behind the 3 point line

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by hoops777 »

goonie wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 5:12 pm
hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 4:49 pm
birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I never said anything about a business.
My point was having enough money at retirement that you do not need stocks to retire.
I would not retire if I needed stocks to do really well to cover my expenses.
Of course, that is not always an option.
What does this mean? 0% stocks?
Nothing new here. Just the basic you won the game quit playing. The money that won the game is not in stocks. Do whatever you want with the extra.
I believe it to be the best way to know you truly hit your number.
I personally cannot see anyone being comfortable knowing that they need a 7,8,9 or 10 pct return from stocks to safely retire.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.
Marseille07
Posts: 16054
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by Marseille07 »

hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:09 pm Nothing new here. Just the basic you won the game quit playing. The money that won the game is not in stocks. Do whatever you want with the extra.
I believe it to be the best way to know you truly hit your number.
I personally cannot see anyone being comfortable knowing that they need a 7,8,9 or 10 pct return from stocks to safely retire.
If you *need* 7,8,9 or 10% then you haven't won the game. Stocks are needed to win for 30 years on 25 years of expenses prepared (25x).
hoops777
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm
Location: Behind the 3 point line

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by hoops777 »

Marseille07 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:14 pm
hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:09 pm Nothing new here. Just the basic you won the game quit playing. The money that won the game is not in stocks. Do whatever you want with the extra.
I believe it to be the best way to know you truly hit your number.
I personally cannot see anyone being comfortable knowing that they need a 7,8,9 or 10 pct return from stocks to safely retire.
If you *need* 7,8,9 or 10% then you haven't won the game. Stocks are needed to win for 30 years on 25 years of expenses prepared (25x).
I never said that
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.
goonie
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 7:33 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by goonie »

hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:09 pm
goonie wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 5:12 pm
hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 4:49 pm
I never said anything about a business.
My point was having enough money at retirement that you do not need stocks to retire.
I would not retire if I needed stocks to do really well to cover my expenses.
Of course, that is not always an option.
What does this mean? 0% stocks?
Nothing new here. Just the basic you won the game quit playing. The money that won the game is not in stocks. Do whatever you want with the extra.
I believe it to be the best way to know you truly hit your number.
I personally cannot see anyone being comfortable knowing that they need a 7,8,9 or 10 pct return from stocks to safely retire.
Sorry but that's a pretty vague answer.

If someone is 65 years old with a $1.6 million portfolio in 60/40 stocks/bonds and they decide they're comfortable withdrawing $64K/year (a 4% WR), have they "won the game"? Have they "quit playing"? Is it acceptable to you to still have 60% in stocks?
hoops777
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:23 pm
Location: Behind the 3 point line

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by hoops777 »

goonie wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 8:02 pm
hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 7:09 pm
goonie wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 5:12 pm
hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 4:49 pm
I never said anything about a business.
My point was having enough money at retirement that you do not need stocks to retire.
I would not retire if I needed stocks to do really well to cover my expenses.
Of course, that is not always an option.
What does this mean? 0% stocks?
Nothing new here. Just the basic you won the game quit playing. The money that won the game is not in stocks. Do whatever you want with the extra.
I believe it to be the best way to know you truly hit your number.
I personally cannot see anyone being comfortable knowing that they need a 7,8,9 or 10 pct return from stocks to safely retire.
Sorry but that's a pretty vague answer.

If someone is 65 years old with a $1.6 million portfolio in 60/40 stocks/bonds and they decide they're comfortable withdrawing $64K/year (a 4% WR), have they "won the game"? Have they "quit playing"? Is it acceptable to you to still have 60% in stocks?
It would take quite a catastrophe for that to fail. They are up 20 at the start of the 4th quarter.

I admit that I have a very conservative outlook. I personally feel better knowing that I can retire securely without needing any stocks.
I also have no problem with stocks unless a good return is necessary to secure an early retirement. I just would not do it if I had a safer option, like working a few more years.
K.I.S.S........so easy to say so difficult to do.
User avatar
birdog
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:35 pm
Location: Anytown, USA

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by birdog »

tibbitts wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 3:10 pm
birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:12 pm
tibbitts wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:06 pm
birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I would have thought an annuity or at least fixed income would have been the proposed alternative, certainly not starting a business, which would be far less predictable than the equity markets overall.
How do you get to have enough with an annuity? That requires money. Where does the money come from? How do you make the money in the first place?
Well, you're presenting starting a business as an alternative to investing in the stock market. You'd get the money for the annuity from the same place as you'd get the money for investing in the stock market.
I said that not everyone can start a business. The average salary invested in a savings account or stored under a mattress typically won’t do the job. So the easiest path for many is to invest in the market in order to combat inflation and grow their wealth. At some point an annuity can be a decent option for some.
Last edited by birdog on Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
goonie
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 7:33 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by goonie »

hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 8:55 pm
goonie wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 8:02 pm
If someone is 65 years old with a $1.6 million portfolio in 60/40 stocks/bonds and they decide they're comfortable withdrawing $64K/year (a 4% WR), have they "won the game"? Have they "quit playing"? Is it acceptable to you to still have 60% in stocks?
It would take quite a catastrophe for that to fail. They are up 20 at the start of the 4th quarter.

I admit that I have a very conservative outlook. I personally feel better knowing that I can retire securely without needing any stocks.
I also have no problem with stocks unless a good return is necessary to secure an early retirement. I just would not do it if I had a safer option, like working a few more years.
Fair enough. :beer
User avatar
birdog
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:35 pm
Location: Anytown, USA

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by birdog »

hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 4:49 pm
birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I never said anything about a business.
My point was having enough money at retirement that you do not need stocks to retire.
I would not retire if I needed stocks to do really well to cover my expenses.
Of course, that is not always an option.
Correct, many can’t get there without the growth that the market provides.
Last edited by birdog on Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 21281
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Re: Hitting your numbers. How to estimate when you have enough.

Post by HomerJ »

goonie wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 5:12 pm
hoops777 wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 4:49 pm
birdog wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 9:00 pm
hoops777 wrote: Thu Mar 18, 2021 1:47 pm It is much easier to estimate with certainty if you do it without relying on the stock market.
Sure, but not everyone in the world can start a business. The stock market has proven to be the single best mechanism for average people to reliably grow their investments over time. The barrier to entry is low. Nothing else even ones close.
I never said anything about a business.
My point was having enough money at retirement that you do not need stocks to retire.
I would not retire if I needed stocks to do really well to cover my expenses.
Of course, that is not always an option.
What does this mean? 0% stocks?
It means (I'm guessing) that you have enough to cover your basic expenses in bonds/CDs/cash.

That's my position. I have enough (barely) to cover all my basic expenses with Social Security and the 60% in bonds/cash/CDs.

I EXPECT my 40% in stocks to do okay, and I'll still be able to travel and buy expensive dinners now and then, but if stocks crash 50% (or even more) and stay down for 10-15 years, I'll still be able to pay property taxes, insurance, utilities, food, etc.
"The best tools available to us are shovels, not scalpels. Don't get carried away." - vanBogle59
Post Reply