UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (43) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread
Author: rkmacdonald Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 75885  
Subject: Re: Allocating for retirement? Date: 4/27/2004 11:08 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Author: freakydeac wrote:
I meant, if you need $50k per annum, you need approx $1.25 mil [50000/ .04], if you intend to use all the gain. But if you intend to use only about 4/7, as in your example, you need either to increase risk to gain 7%, or defer retirement till you have about $2.18 mil, living on 4/7 of the gain, or the same $50k.

Maybe you don't understand that you simply cannot spend the full average total return. Here is an example:

Assume a stock has an average total return of 7% per year for 4 years.

Assume $1,000,000 in initial stock value.

Assume you need 7% ($70,000) per year to live on.

Consider this scenario of 7% arithmetic average total returns (I'm using arithmetic averages here for simplicity, while CAGR would normally be used):

YEAR, TOTAL RETURN, ENDING AMOUNT
Year 1, -60%, $330000
Year 2, -60%, $62000
Year 3, +58%, $27960
Year 4, +90%, -$16,876

Average total return: 7%

Even though the average return over these four years was 7%, you would run out of money if you counted on that fact and spent the full 7% of the original value each year.

Granted, this is an EXTREME and unrealistic example just to make a point. It shows that you cannot depend on spending a yearly amount that is equal to the average total return of a portfolio. Note that if the +58% and +90% years had occured before the two -60% years, the portfolio would have survived just fine. So, the point is that the amount you can take from a portfolio, with a reasonable chance of long term survival, is highly dependent on how volatile the portfolio is and the order of the yearly returns.

This is why economists equate volatility with risk!!

The purpose of adding bonds or REITs to a portfolio is to reduce volatility and smooth out the returns, while retaining as much growth as possible, in order to increase the safe withdrawal rate.

As I said, the maximum that you can expect to withdraw from a properly balanced portfolio is about 4% (initial amount, indexed upward each year for inflation) and possibly 4.5% if REITs are added. In other words, even though the portfolio returns 7%, you can only take 4% (initial amount, indexed upward yearly with inflation) or the portfolio will become exhausted.

Russ
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (43) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Prev | Next | Next Thread

Announcements

The Retire Early Home Page
Discussion on accelerating retirement day.
Pencils of Promise - Back to School Drive
"Pencils of Promise works with communities across the globe to build schools and create programs that provide education opportunities for children."
Managing Your Wealth
Our own TMFHockeypop from Rule Your Retirement fame on the TV show Managing Your Wealth.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Post of the Day:
Value Hounds

My Big Fat Greek Splat
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement