You should re-run this with the 2.6 million (30% less) you would have had accumulating at 60/40 as opposed to 90/10.I have $3.6m in my portfolio with estimated annual spending need of $100k. I entered this and my estimated future SS into Firecalc. Here are the high and low estimates over 30 years:
90/10
$3,168,986 to $34,191,689 with an average at the end of $13,314,268
60/40
$2,721,857 to $21,892,664, with an average at the end of $8,383,528
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... Jt8kO8em72
The 60/40 portfolio at 2.6 million has much worse odds and the 3.5 million portfolio accumulated at 90/10 still has the option to be 60/40 at something close to 3.5 million.
There is no historical basis for calling the 90/10 accumulator risky and there is no expected risk basis for the 90/10 to be riskier. We can always bet on a low probability 60/40 accumulation bet - but making that bet is taking extra risk. There is a risk-basis for decumulating at 60/40 over 90/10 but this is separate from accumulation risks.
Statistics: Posted by abc132 — Sat Apr 27, 2024 7:16 pm — Replies 93 — Views 7961