This is a guest post from David Graham, MD where he provides a case study – including visual representations – on the Trinity Study, safe withdrawal rate, and sequence of returns risk. It is a fantastic post that might really get your gears turning.
Dr. Graham is a practicing infectious disease physician who works as a flat, Fee-only financial advisor in his spare time. He passed the CFP exam, but doesn’t plan on pursuing the CFP marks. His goal is to help other physicians find financial independence, and he runs the site FI Physician. We have no financial relationship at this time. Take it away Dr. Graham!
What is a Safe Withdrawal Rate? A Case Study on The 4% Rule
Let’s get right to it. So much is written about the 4% rule that I assume you know the basics.
You have $1 million dollars and 30 years left to spend it. A sounds good, and you select a 60/40 stock/bond asset allocation. You have $400,000 in a brokerage account, $400,000 in a 401k, and a Roth IRA worth $100,000.
- Brokerage: $100,000 in US Stock, $200,000 International Stock, $200,000 US bonds
- 401k: $200,000 in US Stock and $200,000 US Bonds
- Roth $100,000 in US Stock
The Safe Withdrawal Rate with a Moderate Portfolio
Figure 1 demonstrates the 4% withdrawal rate from a moderate 60/40 portfolio over time. You start taking $40,000 the first year, and increase that dollar amount by inflation each year. Since inflation is assumed to be 2% in this scenario, the second year you would take out $40,800, and so on.
Note that although you start at 4%, because your portfolio has investment returns, the withdrawal percentage only very slowly goes up over time. The maximum withdrawal rate is about 7.5% of your portfolio a year at year 30.
What if you changed your asset allocation to a much more aggressive 90/10 asset allocation?
The Safe Withdrawal Rate with an Aggressive Portfolio
In figure 2, note how the withdrawal percentage actually decreases overtime as your 90/10 portfolio earns more than you take out each year. This is despite of inflation and the 2% increase in the dollar amount you withdrawal every year. In order for the withdrawal percentage to decrease, you must be making more in your portfolio than you are taking out.
Figure 2 (90/10 portfolio)
How much does your portfolio grow each year? Well, to know that, you need a crystal ball.
Assumptions of Future Returns
Instead of a crystal ball, let’s assume that Vanguard’s recent assumptions hold true. They have released an Infographic and a PDF with the following assumptions for 10 year returns: US equities 4-6%, US bonds 2.5-4.5%, International equities 7.5-9.5%.
To keep things simple, for this example we will use 5%, 3.5%, and 8.5% returns, respectively.
Comparison of the 90/10 and 60/40 Portfolios
Above we see the Monte Carlo success percentages and final balances of the 90/10 (left) and 60/40 (right) portfolios. Note the chance of success given the return assumptions from above is 90% for the more aggressive portfolio compared to 68% for the balanced portfolio. There is a lot more money left after 30 years as well.
So why would you ever use a less aggressive portfolio? The answer to that question is Sequence of Return Risk.
Sequence of Return Risk
When you are drawing down on your portfolio, negative returns of the stock market cause you to reverse dollar cost average. This rapid initial depletion of your portfolio can cause long term failure after just a few negative years. Sequence of Return Risk (SORR) describes the failure of your portfolio determined by the returns before and after you start withdrawing from your portfolio.
How does SORR affect a 90/10 portfolio?
SORR and an Aggressive Portfolio
Figure 4 shows the same 90/10 portfolio we saw above, only we are using the actual returns from 2000-2010 instead of the assumed Vanguard returns. As you can see, the withdrawal percentage rapidly increases to unsustainable levels, and the portfolio runs out of money at age 84.
Let’s compare the drawdown of the 90/10 and the 60/40 portfolio using the actual returns from 2000-2010.
Above, we can see the 90/10 portfolio in dark green and the 60/40 portfolio in light green. With the more aggressive portfolio we see large losses during the negative years which are not made up for during the positive years. The aggressive portfolio runs out, whereas the moderate portfolio just makes in to the end of the plan.
The 4% Rule Revisited
So, what is a retiree supposed to do?
If you plan on a 30 year retirement, the 4% rule is safe if you take SORR into account in your asset allocation. Use a moderate portfolio 5 years before to 10 years after your retire. Before and after these times when you are most susceptible to SORR, you can take more risk with an aggressive portfolio.
Some Parting Thoughts on the 4% Rule
The 4% rule is a hallmark of FIRE. This Safe Withdrawal Rate calculates your FI number: 25x your annual expenses. There are many good and bad blogs about the 4% rule, but I will leave you with the following thoughts:
- US historical returns are considerably better than other countries’ returns
- 30 years is the general limit of the 4% rule
- SWR ignores social security and other income sources
- William Bengen’s original research used a 50/50 portfolio with 5 year treasury bonds
- The Trinity Study compared different withdrawal rates to different stock/bond portfolios.
- The Trinity Study used higher volatility corporate bonds rather than treasury bonds
- 4% is only used the first year to get the withdrawal dollar amount
- Subsequent years, the dollar amount is increased by the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
So, when it is your time to retire, will you use the 4% rule? It’s probably a good place to start, but flexibility is the key. Investor, know what you control. Behavior is key to investing and to a safe withdrawal rate.
What do you think? Do you plan to follow the 25X rule to financial independence and withdrawal 4% in retirement? Does this post make you second guess your asset allocation? Leave a comment below.
Editor: Please, take some time and visit FIPhysician for more great posts like the one above.