We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
If an SWR is just that, how come time of retirement can make so much difference?
Comments
-
Don't forget to adjust for duration.......when you calculated the SWR last October, you may have assumed eg. 30 years........this October you'd now need to calculate for 29 years, since delaying drawdown will not increase your lifespan.
In any case, what your issue really shows is that SWR is something of a misnomer.....instead of Safe Withdrawal Rate, it's probably best to view it as Starting Withdrawal Rate, since there is no real way to know what will be "safe" in the future - all we know is what was safe in the past.
Last October, your plan would have been hit by an early poor sequence of returns......which is probably the biggest risk to most SWR based plans......0 -
MK62 said:Don't forget to adjust for duration.......when you calculated the SWR last October, you may have assumed eg. 30 years........this October you'd now need to calculate for 29 years, since delaying drawdown will not increase your lifespan.0
-
NedS said:Given many global equity funds are yielding around 2% (e.g, VEVE), and 4-4.5% is available from gilts, a balanced portfolio may give you much of the income you need from yield and you may only need to realise a small proportion of income from selling units. If 3% of your 3.5% SWR is coming from yield, you shouldn't need to sell much.
Abraham Okusanya backtested this approach with UK data (the results are at https://finalytiq.co.uk/natural-yield-totally-bonkers-retirement-income-strategy/). While I disagree with his use of the word 'bonkers' since the income from natural yield is no more variable than that for any other percentage of portfolio approach, it would require a retiree to have a significant amount of their essential spending covered by guaranteed income such as the state pension, DB pension and/or RPI-linked annuity or, as he says, to have a sufficiently large portfolio such that even in the lean years it still provides sufficient income to live off.
1 -
Both scenarios were run with 0% failure risk (based on historic actuals obviously) to age 95 - I think once you go over 30 years adding or subtracting one year makes very little difference to the SWR.
I wonder for a US investor who has potentially seen a 25% fall in their pension pot if invested in US shares and bonds and almost 10% inflation whether this might be one of the worst one year performance hits ever, the point being that the historic data set is limited and the economy has been far from 'steady state' in the period so it is not really surprising that we will see 'out of range' events in the future.I think....0 -
So here is a very good answer using empirical data and suggesting that:
1) The 'fix and forget' SWR should take into account the current level of the market (specifically the CAPE)
2) A more complex strategy using an annually adjusted withdrawal rate that includes the CAPE in each years' recalculation will give a higher overall withdrawal with lower volatility than a fixed percentage of pot rule, or the same rule that does not adjust for the CAPE
The 4% Rule Works Again! An Update on Dynamic Withdrawal Rates based on the Shiller CAPE – SWR Series Part 54 – Early Retirement Now
I think....0 -
Vanguard researched this and developed some rules they call "Dynamic Spending" similar to the Guyton Guardrails, may be worth a look:
Four steps to a successful retirement: How to safeguard your retirement spending| Vanguard UK Investor (vanguardinvestor.co.uk)
1 -
GazzaBloom said:Vanguard researched this and developed some rules they call "Dynamic Spending" similar to the Guyton Guardrails, may be worth a look:
Four steps to a successful retirement: How to safeguard your retirement spending| Vanguard UK Investor (vanguardinvestor.co.uk)
(Also interesting their examples, I model 0 percent failure historically over a 40+ year time horizon, 85% over 30 years is not acceptable to me!!!)I think....0 -
michaels said:I wonder for a US investor who has potentially seen a 25% fall in their pension pot if invested in US shares and bonds and almost 10% inflation whether this might be one of the worst one year performance hits ever, the point being that the historic data set is limited and the economy has been far from 'steady state' in the period so it is not really surprising that we will see 'out of range' events in the future.
Does anyone drawing a DC pension sleep soundly at night?1 -
GazzaBloom said:michaels said:I wonder for a US investor who has potentially seen a 25% fall in their pension pot if invested in US shares and bonds and almost 10% inflation whether this might be one of the worst one year performance hits ever, the point being that the historic data set is limited and the economy has been far from 'steady state' in the period so it is not really surprising that we will see 'out of range' events in the future.
Does anyone drawing a DC pension sleep soundly at night?
Seriously though, I suppose anyone drawing their income from investments will have varying degrees of concern over inflation and investment returns at this time.....my concern is not at a level where any sleep will be lost, at least not yet anyway, but that might change if this level of inflation and returns persists for several years. Yes, I can reduce spending in the future, and therefore withdrawals, but I won't pretend I'd be particularly happy about it tbh.
3 -
GazzaBloom said:michaels said:I wonder for a US investor who has potentially seen a 25% fall in their pension pot if invested in US shares and bonds and almost 10% inflation whether this might be one of the worst one year performance hits ever, the point being that the historic data set is limited and the economy has been far from 'steady state' in the period so it is not really surprising that we will see 'out of range' events in the future.
Does anyone drawing a DC pension sleep soundly at night?I'm using an income approach, so in theory I shouldn't care what the value of my pot is doing (was up, now down atm) as it's all just noise as long as the dividends keep rolling in. Doesn't stop me looking though!What helps me sleep better at night is the knowledge that much of my income needs are met from other sources (SP/DB) so I am not dependent upon the performance of my DC pot.1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 253K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.4K Spending & Discounts
- 243.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.7K Life & Family
- 256.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards