good coastFI calculator

[Anne]

It’s funny that people are only just now realizing that they’re so far beyond prepared for retirement that they think the calculator is wrong… lol

I don’t think the people who have raised concerns about the calculator being wrong are behind on being financially prepared for retirement. They are likely over prepared financially. I’m not in their heads but I think they are concerned about making assumptions regarding the future. This often comes from a baseline level of money worries that is probably a combo of nature + nurture in origin, and having lived through some excrement and also having studied Robert Burns poetry in school and taking it (perhaps a bit too much) to heart. They will likely die with multimillions.

edited to say never mind, we are saying the same thing…beyond vs behind

[Dont_know_mind]

I've been interested in coastFI ever since my wife got sick, and while she's not here to celebrate it looks like I hit my number already as long as I'm willing to work 1 day/week until 65. Im obviously going to work a little more and save more right now while I can, but comforting to know I really never ever have to take call again. Or stay at a shitty job.
Here's the calculator I used in case anyone wants to run their numbers https://walletburst.com/tools/coast-...0oBdCirjULcF5M

Congrats on reaching coastfire!

[StarTrekDoc]

We like to use Personal Capital for their FI/retirement calculations and budgeting scenarios and stress tests to see if we're truly on track through the different parts of FI.

What's crazy is what majority of folk in this forum budgeted 150-250k annual post retirement --- so for 200k, on average that means ~$5M in retirement investment to support that to get through most MonteCarlo scenarios.

That also translates into a good chance that surviving kin will have a bunch of inheritance too.

[Tim]

I think the SWR is what you feel comfortable withdrawing.

So if you feel safe taking out 4% a year, you’ll need 25X expenses. But if you only feel safe withdrawing 2% a year, you’ll need 50X to retire.

The calculator is not speaking to the feasibility of your SWR. It’s just reporting how much you’d need to save to achieve the SWR you specify.

This completely destroys the reliability of statistics and the usefulness based on a “button”.
If you “feel comfortable” withdrawing a higher percentage, then you only need half as much. Right? My point is feasibility is statistical result, not a judgement. The purpose of calculators is assess feasibility.

[Lordosis]

I think most of us are going to over save and work too long or too hard. This is just another reminder to cut back early.

[SpacemanSpiff12]

This completely destroys the reliability of statistics and the usefulness based on a “button”.
If you “feel comfortable” withdrawing a higher percentage, then you only need half as much. Right? My point is feasibility is statistical result, not a judgement. The purpose of calculators is assess feasibility.

I think we need to differentiate between calculators and models / simulations.

Billy linked to a calculator. It provides an easier means of doing math. Nothing more. So I provide the inputs and it does calculations more efficiently than I could do with a pen and paper. The calculator is not going to tell you whether 2% or 4% or 6% is the right SWR for you. (And for what it’s worth, I think it’s easy to imagine scenarios where all of these choices are reasonable.)

Here is a link to a Monte Carlo simulator at Vanguard:
https://retirementplans.vanguard.com...estEggCalc.jsf

This is a different type of tool. You provide the inputs, and it simulates 100,000 different hypothetical market conditions and tells you how frequently you’ll run out of money during retirement. In some ways it’s more helpful than the calculator we’ve been discussing, in some was less helpful. I think this is the type of model you’re looking for though…

[SpacemanSpiff12]

I think most of us are going to over save and work too long or too hard. This is just another reminder to cut back early.

Totally agree.

Even the rare situations in which models show you running out of money are misleading. It assumes that in a nightmare scenario you just keep plodding along with your original spending plans, oblivious to the investing catastrophe that’s happening around you.

In reality, if you’re hit with the 0.01% worst-case scenario and prospects look terrible, most people would adjust their spending, downsize their house, cut travel plans, etc.

[Hatton]

The vanguard calculator does not account for taxes.

[Tim]

The vanguard calculator does not account for taxes.

The Fidelity calculator requires an input tax rate.
Makes it difficult for during and after with strategies managing tax rates. They “used” to attempt to use income and retirement income to approximate the federal income taxes.

[Turf Doc]

Plus, if you're using the default 4% withdrawal rate, I think it's too conservative. I would bet the type of people who accumulate 25x (or even more), who are therefore preparing for essentially the worst case retirement scenario in history, are not going to take 4% and adjust for inflation during insane times of inflation or market crashes no matter what. And even if they did, youre as likely to end up with nothing as you are to end up with something like 8x your starting principle. Plus, how many people here completely ignore social security???

[Hank]

Totally agree.

Even the rare situations in which models show you running out of money are misleading. It assumes that in a nightmare scenario you just keep plodding along with your original spending plans, oblivious to the investing catastrophe that’s happening around you.

In reality, if you’re hit with the 0.01% worst-case scenario and prospects look terrible, most people would adjust their spending, downsize their house, cut travel plans, etc.

Yep, if the economy takes a downturn we might do more domestic travel instead of foreign travel. (Or look for real bargains for foreign travel.) More steaks on the grill at home and fewer steakhouse dinners. Or burgers or lunch out instead of dinner. Three buck Chuck more frequently, Stags Leap less frequently.

There’s plenty of opportunities for substitute goods and arbitrage for shoulder season travel and travel hacks. Camping is fun and there are more good books at the library than I’m likely to be able to read in the decades I have remaining. Not every trip needs to be flying first class and staying at the Four Seasons to have a good time.

[dayman]

Plus, if you're using the default 4% withdrawal rate, I think it's too conservative. I would bet the type of people who accumulate 25x (or even more), who are therefore preparing for essentially the worst case retirement scenario in history, are not going to take 4% and adjust for inflation during insane times of inflation or market crashes no matter what. And even if they did, youre as likely to end up with nothing as you are to end up with something like 8x your starting principle. Plus, how many people here completely ignore social security???

Yes, most posters on this site are likely to die with multiple millions left over. I think this is pretty obvious.

The bigger question is - why? These are obviously intelligent people who are capable of doing the same math I am. Are they just wired differently? Or am I going to feel that same sense of "it's not enough yet" when I'm in my 40s or 50s?

[StarTrekDoc]

Forum members here track quite conservatively as a whole. I would safely say most of us will pass on millions instead of die broke because of the fear of SORR and want to be on the 99% certainty of all those MC calculations--- which translates to millions left over on a $200,000 annual budget based on the averages.

We realize this and now that I broke 50, finally started the glidepath with going 0.89 cFTE -- first time not full time in career. the horrors!

[Hatton]

Forum members here track quite conservatively as a whole. I would safely say most of us will pass on millions instead of die broke because of the fear of SORR and want to be on the 99% certainty of all those MC calculations--- which translates to millions left over on a $200,000 annual budget based on the averages.

We realize this and now that I broke 50, finally started the glidepath with going 0.89 cFTE -- first time not full time in career. the horrors!

Proud of you easing into working less and spending more.

[SpacemanSpiff12]

Yes, most posters on this site are likely to die with multiple millions left over. I think this is pretty obvious.

The bigger question is - why? These are obviously intelligent people who are capable of doing the same math I am. Are they just wired differently? Or am I going to feel that same sense of "it's not enough yet" when I'm in my 40s or 50s?

True story, Word of Honor:
Joseph Heller, an important and funny writer
now dead,
and I were at a party given by a billionaire
on Shelter Island.

I said, “Joe, how does it make you feel
to know that our host only yesterday
may have made more money
than your novel ‘Catch-22’
has earned in its entire history?”
And Joe said, “I’ve got something he can never have.”
And I said, “What on earth could that be, Joe?”
And Joe said, “The knowledge that I’ve got enough.”
Not bad! Rest in peace!

-Kurt Vonnegut


I agree with StarTrekDoc that most forum members are financially conservative - we'd rather have 99% certainty of retirement success than 95%, which leads to a bigger nest egg.

Most of us probably have above-average financial education and decision-making - which also yields bigger savings.

But I also get the sense that many of us are comfortable with "enough". We get paid well for what we do, it only takes a fraction of that income to buy security and happiness, and so there's often a lot leftover. What a blessing.

I think conservative finances are only a problem when they keep you from your greater goals - decreasing your FTE, taking that wild vacation you've always dreamed of, pursuing an expensive hobby like flying, donating more to charity, giving to your children when you're still alive to see them appreciate the funds, etc. That's when thriftiness becomes pathologic - saving for savings' sake.