I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
Post Reply
Topic Author
iamblessed
Posts: 1808
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:52 am
Location: St. Louis

I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by iamblessed »

I always wondered about this. Anybody know?
MarkRoulo
Posts: 1198
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 10:25 am

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by MarkRoulo »

iamblessed wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:05 am I always wondered about this. Anybody know?
See here to start: viewtopic.php?t=330393
dbr
Posts: 46181
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:50 am

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by dbr »

MarkRoulo wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:18 am
iamblessed wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:05 am I always wondered about this. Anybody know?
See here to start: viewtopic.php?t=330393
Yes, but that same result occurs in FireCalc for a generic 60/40 asset allocation. As in the above reference zero failures occur if the withdrawal rate is reduced to 3.6%. I doubt there is much difference between Wellington and any variety of other portfolio choices about that bad time to retire. Maybe Wellington is worse than some.
FactualFran
Posts: 2776
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 1:29 pm

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by FactualFran »

dbr wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:24 am Yes, but that same result occurs in FireCalc for a generic 60/40 asset allocation. As in the above reference zero failures occur if the withdrawal rate is reduced to 3.6%. I doubt there is much difference between Wellington and any variety of other portfolio choices about that bad time to retire. Maybe Wellington is worse than some.
Wellington was worse than other balanced funds with a return history back to at least 1966. Here is a table of initial withdrawal rate (IWR), rounded down to 1/10 of a percent, for which those balanced funds supported 30 years of inflation-adjusted withdrawals with 1966 as the starting year.

Code: Select all

IWR   Fund
3.9%  Dodge&Cox Balanced
5.0%  Fidelity Puritan
4.1%  Mairs&Powers Balanced
3.9%  T. Rowe Price Balanced
3.4%  Wellington
dbr
Posts: 46181
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:50 am

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by dbr »

FactualFran wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:26 pm
dbr wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:24 am Yes, but that same result occurs in FireCalc for a generic 60/40 asset allocation. As in the above reference zero failures occur if the withdrawal rate is reduced to 3.6%. I doubt there is much difference between Wellington and any variety of other portfolio choices about that bad time to retire. Maybe Wellington is worse than some.
Wellington was worse than other balanced funds with a return history back to at least 1966. Here is a table of initial withdrawal rate (IWR), rounded down to 1/10 of a percent, for which those balanced funds supported 30 years of inflation-adjusted withdrawals with 1966 as the starting year.

Code: Select all

IWR   Fund
3.9%  Dodge&Cox Balanced
5.0%  Fidelity Puritan
4.1%  Mairs&Powers Balanced
3.9%  T. Rowe Price Balanced
3.4%  Wellington
Interesting. That is a pretty good range.
User avatar
nisiprius
Advisory Board
Posts: 52211
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:33 am
Location: The terrestrial, globular, planetary hunk of matter, flattened at the poles, is my abode.--O. Henry

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by nisiprius »

MarkRoulo wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:18 am
iamblessed wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:05 am I always wondered about this. Anybody know?
See here to start: viewtopic.php?t=330393
Improved version: "4% rule" withdrawals from real mutual funds

I give a number of examples, Wellington being among them. Wellington didn't have any special magic. If you are asking, did Wellington dodge the 1966 bullet by means of active management, the answer is "no."

And there's a specific issue with Wellington. This is a topic where you have to be aware that John C. Bogle is a highly interested party, but he never pointed fingers... anyway, according to Bogle, the Wellington Fund experienced a "rise," (1929-1966), a "fall" (1967-1978), and a "resurrection" (1979-date). The shortfall period is not the same as the "fall" period, but the fall may have extended it.

Image
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.
Topic Author
iamblessed
Posts: 1808
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:52 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by iamblessed »

I know Wellesley started in 1970. I wonder did a fund like Wellesley survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?
Topic Author
iamblessed
Posts: 1808
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:52 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by iamblessed »

Bumping for a fund like Wellesley.
Topic Author
iamblessed
Posts: 1808
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:52 am
Location: St. Louis

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by iamblessed »

Bumping
tibbitts
Posts: 23716
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: I wonder did Wellington survive a 4% withdrawal if you retired in 1966?

Post by tibbitts »

iamblessed wrote: Wed Oct 27, 2021 10:54 pmBumping
Nobody is responding because (besides the fact that bumping is frowned upon on Bogleheads), as you pointed out, Wellesley didn't exist during the entire period. You're now asking about another an active fund with manager risk. Since you already know the answer for a generic combination of an equity and bond index, I assume the active component is what you're interested in. What you seem to be intending to ask is "which active balanced funds available today and throughout the period survived a 30-year 4% WR beginning in 1966?" Of course the management responsible would have long since moved on, and the fund mandates might have changed, so I'm still not sure how knowing that would help with investment choices today.
Post Reply