Safe Withdrawal Rates

General Discussion on the Permanent Portfolio Strategy

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
Vil
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:16 am

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by Vil » Sat Dec 18, 2021 3:17 am

Worth reading, a recent article from Morningstar - What's a Safe Retirement Spending Rate for the Decades Ahead?

In short they are suggesting SWRs in the future to be more in the low 3% range than something in the 4-5% range. But of course all is data available in hindsight and the rest are brain exercises for the future. There are some flawed statements as well, like:
"A starting safe withdrawal percentage in the low-3% range might seem demoralizing for new retirees, but a countervailing force is that most retirement savers' balances are appreciably higher than they were a decade ago, provided they had ample exposure to the rallying stock market."

I do not really see the point in it - whether you have made the amount on which you will rely for retirement from part-investing or your full contributions were from your job... its a sort of irrelevant for the pain you may possibly suffer if your WR is higher than what the future market returns may replenish ..
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Sat Dec 18, 2021 4:48 am

Draw rates are based more on sequences of returns then returns .

4% is already so low because it is based on awful sequence and returns so you really won’t know until it’s your time in the barrel .

The most dangerous points are the ten years leading up to retirement and the first ten years in to retirement .

That is one you are likely still at your highest portfolio range and big hits equal big dollar changes .

After you clear that red zone where you want to bring equity level down , even 100% equities would be little problem except mentally.

A very good article by kitces on that red zone

https://www.kitces.com/blog/managing-po ... -red-zone/
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sat Dec 18, 2021 9:15 am

The SOR risk is one of the reasons I think it's a good idea to have at least 10 years of expenses in the PP. He talks about a V shaped stock allocation, which I guess could work for people with a normal life trajectory. I discovered ERE and MMM pretty early in life, so I got to retirement level fast, and I established a PP bucket earlier in life than most people. But whatever works.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
Vil
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:16 am

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by Vil » Sat Dec 18, 2021 2:04 pm

Krieg, what all those TLAs that you discovered mean - ERE, MMM ? I wish to discover them too ..

MJ, thanks for sharing this article. I can't understand how with the bond tent and V-shaped stock allocation, portfolio continues its almost exponential growth - maybe higher annual contributions done by the prospective retiree..?
Kitces indeed did a good job to sum up the things. And that's why I am always amazed how easily people advice "go 100% stock" to other people they do not have any clue about ... (definitely not pinpointing you) - for example the numbers on Kitce graphics are not relevant to me (luckily the amounts on the graphics are shifted left by at least 15 years for me :) )
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sat Dec 18, 2021 8:28 pm

Vil wrote:
Sat Dec 18, 2021 2:04 pm
Krieg, what all those TLAs that you discovered mean - ERE, MMM ? I wish to discover them too ..
Early Retirement Extreme and Mr. Money Mustache.
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
User avatar
Vil
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:16 am

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by Vil » Sun Dec 19, 2021 5:59 am

The MMM I know (always thought its some Canadian Boggleheads version), ERE - completely ignorant about, will check it. Thanks for those.

EDIT: Had a glance over couple of topics on the ERE site and the suggested reads ("How I found freedom in unfree world" being one of those). A bit too extreme for my taste, looks like more of 'how to drastically reduce your living costs' than anything else..
Last edited by Vil on Sun Dec 19, 2021 6:34 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Sun Dec 19, 2021 6:06 am

The reality is like water , money tends to seek its own level …we see what we have. To work with in retirement and then build a life around what we have .

Mentally we don’t want to spend like a robot when returns are poor so we tend to cut back even if a safe withdrawal rate says we do not have to cut back .

We use bob clyatts 95/5 draw method ..it is variable and rewards us when we do well but doesn’t cut us badly when markets are not so good .

So raises and inflation adjusting are all built in .

By the way , firecalc has a tab for calculating using it.

It is very simple …Dec 31 we set aside 4% of the balance of our portfolio and throw it in the bank …

If markets are down you take the HIGHER OF 4% of the balance or 5% less then you took the prior year ….it is very simple , it is dynamic and rewards you immediately
User avatar
StrategyDriven
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2020 5:58 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by StrategyDriven » Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:06 pm

I recently did a deep dive into withdrawal rates on my strategies. I see D1984 earlier in this thread talking about using Simba's annual numbers to test going back in time. One thing I would like to caution with this approach is that you do not see the extent of the drawdowns throughout the year, only if it is a pass/fail on meeting the returns for the year. As we all know, drawdowns are tough, I have to imagine it is doubly tough once you begin living off of your retirement nest egg without the ability to keep building it up with additions each month.

In the model I put together to test withdrawal rates, I used the same base methodology that Tyler from PortfolioCharts does, I have monthly returns for all of my strategies from 1980 forward, so I looked at 1980, 1981, 1982, etc. up through the year 2011 and ran them all forward looking at withdrawal rates. That gave a maximum time frame of 41 years and a minimum time frame of 10 years. Now because I have monthly and not annual data, this drawdown really stuck out like a sore thumb. Strategies like Permanent Portfolio, All Weather, Golden Butterfly, my Triad, etc all do exceptionally well supporting reasonably high withdrawal rates and only experiencing minimum drawdowns.

For example, if I have 100% in Triad, and assume a 1% slippage from tracked historical returns, it supports a 6.18% perpetual withdrawal rate with a maxDD of only 23.1%. Now when I saw it has a maxDD, I am speaking of the inflated original balance compared to the running balance of the account. So if the portfolio began with $2,000,000 and the inflation rate is 6% annual, then for the next month, the balance being compared to against actual is $2,000,000 + (1/12) * 6% = $2,010,000. Just want to be clear that I am not looking at a maxDD compared to the original balance, but an inflation adjusted target balance.

Here are my Perpetual Withdrawal Rates for some strategies:

Triad 6.18% with 23.1% drawdown from inflated target balance
All Weather 5.63% and 27.5%
Permanent Portfolio 4.25% and 26.9%
Total US Market 5.28% and 70.4%
60/40 4.2% and 51.7%

Not only do PP, All Weather, and Triad all support higher withdrawal rates than 60/40 and most are also higher than 100% in the Total US Market, they all do so with significantly lower maximum drawdowns.

These withdrawal rates are based on monthly withdrawals, I can also look at annual but that decreases your withdrawal rate. And I realized that I want to be able to reduce the inflation rate for those of us who own our homes (and I would argue it also holds if you still have a mortgage on your home because your mortgage payment is fixed and doesn't go up with rent.) So I have an option to reduce the CPI-U inflation rate by the amount that the index allocates to mortgage payments, it is about a 15% reduction in the inflation rate.

Other strategies, if I look at my The Russell OG strategy, it supports an 11% permanent withdrawal rate, however that goes along with a 50.4% max drawdown of actual balance compared to the inflated target balance. I also have the ability to get the withdrawal rate by limiting the maxDD to 33.3%, and with this filter enabled, The Russel OG supports 8.09%, significantly higher than the other All Weather type strategies mentioned above.

In running through a lot of data a few things, which may possibly sound obvious, stuck out to me:
  • A person would be much safer to not maximize the withdrawal rate, take out a bit less than maximum and allow for the balance to build up, and or create a buffer for a negative sequence of returns.
  • Having more money in your account than you think you may need also helps to create a buffer.
  • Wise to have a safety buffer of money outside of investments to cover shortfalls if there is a negative sequence of returns.
  • Taking higher risk with a small percentage of the allocation can really pay huge dividends.
  • My model can also do fixed dollar withdrawals (inflated over time) instead of a percent, but it became quite apparent that this method creates major drawdowns with a bad sequence of returns, taking a percentage helps significantly.

To the first bullet about taking out a little less than the maximum supported withdrawal rate:

100% Triad supports a 6.18% Perpetual Withdrawal Rate, PWR, with 23.1% maxDD, the ending balance, for all years evaluated from 1980 to 2011 up through 2021 the average ending balance was 130% of the Inflated Target Balance, ITB, and on a $2,000,000 starting balance the average annual withdrawal (withdrawn monthly) was $137,936. NOTE: All annual withdrawal numbers have been deflated back to time 0 so that they are comparable apples to apples.

Now if I take 5.5% instead of 6.18%, the maxDD decreases to just 18.7%, the ending balance goes up to 158% of ITB, and the average annual withdrawal is $135,309; bigger buffers and larger balances without much change to the money withdrawn.


To the point about adding some more risk:

Instead of 100% Triad, I'll go 80% Triad, 10% The Russell OG, and 10% The Russell. The PWR goes up significantly to 8.13% with a maxDD of 31.8%, average annual withdrawals of $164,977.

Instead of 100% Triad, I'll go 80% Triad, 10% The Russell, and 10% MAX PAIN. The PWR goes up significantly to 10.00% with a maxDD of 38.7%, average annual withdrawals of $205,399.

If I filter that last allocation to a maxDD of 33.3%: it supports 8.95% PWR, 33.3% maxDD, annual withdrawals of S212,734. Note this is actually higher than the previous with higher PWR, this is because by limiting the maxDD by reducing the PWR, it allows or the balance to grow larger over time. The average ending balance of this allocation filtered to 33.3% maxDD is 167% of the ITB, but only 126% for the unfiltered run.

I've charts and annual data that I can view when looking at different scenarios which really helped me to get a grip on this, this exercise really helped get my head wrapped around all of this.

Image

Image

Cheers
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:25 pm

The term safe withdrawal rate rates means something very specific …

It is what it took to get through the worst outcomes we have had to date for a retirement period .

It specifically pertains to 1907 , 1929 , 1937 , 1965 ,1966 .

It took around 3.60% inflation adjusted to squeak through

Today we look at it as percentage of time frames succeeding at 4% ….a 90% success rate is considered a safe withdrawal rate getting through those worst time frames

We have had nothing like those time frames since.

What you have with other time frames is just a draw rate ..unless it clears the worst time frames to date it is not considered a safe withdrawal rate.

If we want to not count those those time frames then a 6-1/2% draw rate would be the average draw for the 121 rolling 30 year periods .
Last edited by mathjak107 on Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
StrategyDriven
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2020 5:58 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by StrategyDriven » Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:35 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:25 pm
The term safe withdrawal rate rates means something very specific …

It is what it took to get through the worst outcomes we have had to date for a retirement period .

It specifically pertains to 1907 , 1929 , 1937 , 1965 ,1966 .

We have had nothing like those time frames since.

What you have with other time frames is just a draw rate ..unless it clears the worst time frames to date it is not considered a safe withdrawal rate.

If we want to discount those time frames then a 6-1/2% draw rate would be the average draw for the 121 rolling 30 year periods
I would love to back further in time on my strategies, but I don't have data pre-1980. I understand that the worst of times were previous, however, there were also some pretty rough times from 1980 forward. I know somebody who does some real tortured Monte Carlo but he would argue far better analysis on strategies - his rates are far lower of course because they look at sequenced returns which have never happened to date, and for this reason I discount it a bit. My personal goal is to withdraw significantly lower than my max perpetual (the balance stays always as a legacy, I'm not looking at 25, 30, 40 years etc.). This builds up a huge buffer quickly, and later you can increase the rate once reaching higher levels in the account.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4393
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by Xan » Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:39 pm

Thanks for the analysis, StrategyDriven. It prominently involves "Triad", which is not defined. I tried searching for it and the closest thing looks like an investment management company. What is the asset allocation of "Triad"?
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:41 pm

StrategyDriven wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:35 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:25 pm
The term safe withdrawal rate rates means something very specific …

It is what it took to get through the worst outcomes we have had to date for a retirement period .

It specifically pertains to 1907 , 1929 , 1937 , 1965 ,1966 .

We have had nothing like those time frames since.

What you have with other time frames is just a draw rate ..unless it clears the worst time frames to date it is not considered a safe withdrawal rate.

If we want to discount those time frames then a 6-1/2% draw rate would be the average draw for the 121 rolling 30 year periods
I would love to back further in time on my strategies, but I don't have data pre-1980. I understand that the worst of times were previous, however, there were also some pretty rough times from 1980 forward. I know somebody who does some real tortured Monte Carlo but he would argue far better analysis on strategies - his rates are far lower of course because they look at sequenced returns which have never happened to date, and for this reason I discount it a bit. My personal goal is to withdraw significantly lower than my max perpetual (the balance stays always as a legacy, I'm not looking at 25, 30, 40 years etc.). This builds up a huge buffer quickly, and later you can increase the rate once reaching higher levels in the account.
1980 on were really not in the same league .

The 2000 retiree is on par with the lower end of successful time frames and 2008 retirees were really no different then any other time frame that was fine .

The other time frames since 1966 were not even a blip on the bad retirement scale

Kitces looked in to this

https://www.kitces.com/blog/how-has-the ... al-crisis/
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:44 pm

Kitces summary of worst time frames

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The 4% rule has been much maligned lately, as recent market woes of the past 15 years – from the tech crash of 2000 to the global financial crisis of 2008 – have pressured both market returns and the portfolios of retirees.

Yet a deeper look reveals that if a 2008 or even a 2000 retiree had been following the 4% rule since retirement, their portfolios would be no worse off than any of the other "terrible" historical market scenarios that created the 4% rule from retirement years like 1929, 1937, and 1966. To some extent, the portfolio of the modern retiree is buoyed by the (only) modest inflation that has been occurring in recent years, yet even after adjusting for inflation, today’s retirees are not doing any materially worse than other historical bad-market scenarios where the 4% rule worked.

Ultimately, this doesn’t necessarily mean that the coming years won’t turn out to be even worse or that the 4% rule is “sacred”, but it does emphasize just how bad the historical market returns were that created it and just how conservative the 4% rule actually is, and that recent market events like the financial crisis are not an example of the failings of the 4% rule but how robustly it succeeds!
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:48 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:41 pm
StrategyDriven wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:35 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:25 pm
The term safe withdrawal rate rates means something very specific …

It is what it took to get through the worst outcomes we have had to date for a retirement period .

It specifically pertains to 1907 , 1929 , 1937 , 1965 ,1966 .

We have had nothing like those time frames since.

What you have with other time frames is just a draw rate ..unless it clears the worst time frames to date it is not considered a safe withdrawal rate.

If we want to discount those time frames then a 6-1/2% draw rate would be the average draw for the 121 rolling 30 year periods
I would love to back further in time on my strategies, but I don't have data pre-1980. I understand that the worst of times were previous, however, there were also some pretty rough times from 1980 forward. I know somebody who does some real tortured Monte Carlo but he would argue far better analysis on strategies - his rates are far lower of course because they look at sequenced returns which have never happened to date, and for this reason I discount it a bit. My personal goal is to withdraw significantly lower than my max perpetual (the balance stays always as a legacy, I'm not looking at 25, 30, 40 years etc.). This builds up a huge buffer quickly, and later you can increase the rate once reaching higher levels in the account.
1980 on were really not in the same league .

The 2000 retiree is on par with the lower end of successful time frames and 2008 retirees were really no different then any other time frame that was fine .

The other time frames since 1966 were not even a blip on the bad retirement scale

Kitces looked in to this

https://www.kitces.com/blog/how-has-the ... al-crisis/
What I wanted to add is it was the first 15 years of the 30 year retirement that did all time frames in ..the 30 year time frames looked not so bad ..but in all cases the first 15 years were so bad that even the best bull markets couldn’t save them .

So you cant look at the 30 year period to see why it’s so bad
D1984
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 730
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by D1984 » Wed Dec 22, 2021 6:15 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:25 pm
The term safe withdrawal rate rates means something very specific …

It is what it took to get through the worst outcomes we have had to date for a retirement period .

It specifically pertains to 1907 , 1929 , 1937 , 1965 ,1966 .

It took around 3.60% inflation adjusted to squeak through

Today we look at it as percentage of time frames succeeding at 4% ….a 90% success rate is considered a safe withdrawal rate getting through those worst time frames

We have had nothing like those time frames since.

What you have with other time frames is just a draw rate ..unless it clears the worst time frames to date it is not considered a safe withdrawal rate.

If we want to not count those those time frames then a 6-1/2% draw rate would be the average draw for the 121 rolling 30 year periods .
That's because the sequence that starts on 1-1-2022 hasn't had its 30 years to run yet....<<insert evil-sounding maniacal laugh>>

In all seriousness, though, given elevated US equity valuations across the board, and given some of the lowest real yields (and lowest expected 10 and 15 year real forward annual returns) on a US bond portfolio I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that the 2022 or 2023 portfolio--assuming its is 100% in US stocks and US bonds--ends up having a SWR of less than 4%. I hope not, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if it did.

PS - Unrelated to the above (but related to my recent PM to you) I still haven't found a way to make the "started taking withdrawals on 1-1-1937" 60/40 or 50/50 or 65/35 US stock/US bond portfolio run out before the end of 30 years. I tried it with the bond portion in LTTs, in ITTs, in simulated TBM, etc....it still lasted thirty years or more no matter what the bond allocation was made out of. It also didn't matter whether I used S&P 500 or TSM for the stock portion; in no case did the portfolio deplete before thirty years when it started with a 4% withdrawal and adjusted said withdraw for inflation each year. Heck, I even tried adding some developed int'l stock (a simulated quasi-EAFE) to the stock portion and while that didn't exactly help things--after all, this meant adding German, Japanese, and Italian stocks which were decimated during WWII to the portfolio which would've hurt its overall returns for the period 1938-1949 albeit helping in certain years like 1937, 1940, 1941, 1953, and 1956 to 1961 and then 1968 to the early 70s--the portfolio still managed to make it a bit past 30 years.

What am I doing wrong? Any ideas (mathjak--or anyone else--please feel free to answer this one)?
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Wed Dec 22, 2021 6:21 pm

Math ain’t my strong point. Lol
User avatar
StrategyDriven
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2020 5:58 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by StrategyDriven » Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:51 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:41 pm
StrategyDriven wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:35 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:25 pm
The term safe withdrawal rate rates means something very specific …

It is what it took to get through the worst outcomes we have had to date for a retirement period .

It specifically pertains to 1907 , 1929 , 1937 , 1965 ,1966 .

We have had nothing like those time frames since.

What you have with other time frames is just a draw rate ..unless it clears the worst time frames to date it is not considered a safe withdrawal rate.

If we want to discount those time frames then a 6-1/2% draw rate would be the average draw for the 121 rolling 30 year periods
I would love to back further in time on my strategies, but I don't have data pre-1980. I understand that the worst of times were previous, however, there were also some pretty rough times from 1980 forward. I know somebody who does some real tortured Monte Carlo but he would argue far better analysis on strategies - his rates are far lower of course because they look at sequenced returns which have never happened to date, and for this reason I discount it a bit. My personal goal is to withdraw significantly lower than my max perpetual (the balance stays always as a legacy, I'm not looking at 25, 30, 40 years etc.). This builds up a huge buffer quickly, and later you can increase the rate once reaching higher levels in the account.
1980 on were really not in the same league .

The 2000 retiree is on par with the lower end of successful time frames and 2008 retirees were really no different then any other time frame that was fine .

The other time frames since 1966 were not even a blip on the bad retirement scale

Kitces looked in to this

https://www.kitces.com/blog/how-has-the ... al-crisis/

Maybe I gave the impression that I feel those rates are absolute golden for the future, I do not, they are over the time period evaluated and give relative information about different strategies and their drawdowns.
User avatar
StrategyDriven
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2020 5:58 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by StrategyDriven » Wed Dec 22, 2021 11:12 pm

Xan wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:39 pm
Thanks for the analysis, StrategyDriven. It prominently involves "Triad", which is not defined. I tried searching for it and the closest thing looks like an investment management company. What is the asset allocation of "Triad"?
https://dualmomentumsystems.com/?post=a-look-at-triad

https://dualmomentumsystems.com/?post=p ... o-vs-triad
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Dec 23, 2021 3:46 am

StrategyDriven wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:51 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:41 pm
StrategyDriven wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:35 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Wed Dec 22, 2021 5:25 pm
The term safe withdrawal rate rates means something very specific …

It is what it took to get through the worst outcomes we have had to date for a retirement period .

It specifically pertains to 1907 , 1929 , 1937 , 1965 ,1966 .

We have had nothing like those time frames since.

What you have with other time frames is just a draw rate ..unless it clears the worst time frames to date it is not considered a safe withdrawal rate.

If we want to discount those time frames then a 6-1/2% draw rate would be the average draw for the 121 rolling 30 year periods
I would love to back further in time on my strategies, but I don't have data pre-1980. I understand that the worst of times were previous, however, there were also some pretty rough times from 1980 forward. I know somebody who does some real tortured Monte Carlo but he would argue far better analysis on strategies - his rates are far lower of course because they look at sequenced returns which have never happened to date, and for this reason I discount it a bit. My personal goal is to withdraw significantly lower than my max perpetual (the balance stays always as a legacy, I'm not looking at 25, 30, 40 years etc.). This builds up a huge buffer quickly, and later you can increase the rate once reaching higher levels in the account.
1980 on were really not in the same league .

The 2000 retiree is on par with the lower end of successful time frames and 2008 retirees were really no different then any other time frame that was fine .

The other time frames since 1966 were not even a blip on the bad retirement scale

Kitces looked in to this




Maybe I gave the impression that I feel those rates are absolute golden for the future, I do not, they are over the time period evaluated and give relative information about different strategies and their drawdowns.

I just wanted to clarify that it cannot be called a safe withdrawal rate by definition of what a safe withdrawal references ….

It is just a draw rate by definition since it has nothing to do with the worst outcome dates the swr is based on.

Here is what the safe without rate is actually based on

https://www.kitces.com/blog/what-return ... ased-upon/
User avatar
Vil
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 10:16 am

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by Vil » Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:00 am

This is the one you invented, right ? Though there is still a mystery behind it:

Triad splits the portfolio into 1/3rds. Based on the lookback methodology (which I am not divulging at this time)

Do you plan starting a paid subscription service for it ?
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:04 am

what caused the failures were real returns being poor the first 15 years because of inflation


Overall looking at the 30 year time frame things look actually pretty normal …this is where those who try to use other time frames get fouled up because when spending down it was the poor first 15 years that did them in


30 year outcomes , are fairly decent

1907 stocks returned 7.77% -- bonds 4.250-- rebalanced portfolio 7.02- - inflation 1.64--

1929 stocks 8.19% - - bonds 1.74%-- rebalanced portfolio 6.28-- inflation 1.69--

1937 stocks 10.12 - - bonds 2.13 - rebalanced portfolio -- 7.24 inflation-- 2.82

1966 stocks 10.23 - -bonds 7.85 -- rebalanced portfolio 9.56- - inflation 5.38

for comparison the 140 year average's were: stocks 8.39--bonds 2.85%--rebalanced portfolio 6.17% inflation 2.23%
..


so what made those time frames the worst ? what made them the worst is the fact in every single retirement time frame the outcome of that 30 year period was determined not by what happened over the 30 years but the entire outcome was decided in the first 15 years.
..


so lets look at the first 15 years in those time frames determined to be the worst we ever had.
..

1907--- stocks minus 1.47%---- bonds minus .39%-- rebalanced minus .70% ---inflation 1.64%
.

1929---stocks 1.07%---bonds 1.79%---rebalanced 2.29%--inflation 1.69%
.

1937---stocks -- 3.45%---bonds minus 3.07%-- rebalanced 1.23%--inflation 2.82%
.

1966-stocks minus .13%--bonds 1.08%--rebalanced .64%-- inflation 5.38% it is those 15 year horrible time frames that the 4% safe withdrawal rate was born out of since you had to reduce from what could have been 6.50% as a swr down to just 4% to get through those worst of times.
User avatar
StrategyDriven
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2020 5:58 pm

Re: Safe Withdrawal Rates

Post by StrategyDriven » Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:43 am

Vil wrote:
Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:00 am
This is the one you invented, right ? Though there is still a mystery behind it:

Triad splits the portfolio into 1/3rds. Based on the lookback methodology (which I am not divulging at this time)

Do you plan starting a paid subscription service for it ?
I put out monthly reporting decks on all the strategies, look for them at the website, completely free for personal investors.
Post Reply