pacificoast wrote: ↑Wed Jan 10, 2024 3:28 pm
I was planning to keep all my historical information right in the planner. That is why I asked to fix my retirement year, or starting year of the simulation. I'm assuming I can just adjust each year that passes with actuals and have the planner recalculate the future years. Do you see any issues with using your software in that way?
Hi Nick, congratulations on retiring. I'm getting closer and closer... anywhere from 8 - 26 months away. When is a decision that hasn't been made.
So I thought about this exact topic, using FRP in retirement, and then I reealized... you have to keep tracking information on the side. Here's why:
Let's assume you use the 60/40 portfolio, just for making an argument. 60/40 had some down years, of course... the worst single year since 1970 was 2008 which was -18%. So if you just update FRP with actuals on January 1 2009, and if you intended to just use the new spending number you'd be looking at a severe budget cut in the range of -18%. It would be ameliorated somewhat by the fact you'd be one year closer to your end-of-plan...
But having whipsaws in spending like that kind of defeat the point of this type of planning; tying spending in a "mark-to-market" sense to a 60/40 or even 40/60 isn't a fun way to live. I will be using Conservative in retirement, which holds back the COLA if the prior year was a down year in real terms, and the portfolio hasn't grown in real terms since the start-of-plan. In order to make that determination, you have to keep records... not frequent ones, just annual actual portfolio values, and your allowable spending limits for each year.
The hard question to answer is... if you use separate records to drive your annual budgeting, are you at risk of driving off a cliff because when you get down to it, Monte Carlo cannot predict the actual future. The actual future could be bust a 95% confidence interval.
One thing I really want to do is run the Bob Clyatt 95% rule alongside FRP. It's very simple... you get to spend the greater of 4% of your portfolio or 95% of what you were allowed to spend last year. Clyatt designed this for early retirees, to basically help the portfolio last not 20-30 years, but indefinitely. The difference is that this annual budget could actually be cut by 5% a year, so 60/40 has had a few cases in history with back-to-back down years, so potentially 10% budget cut in nominal terms, and more in real terms. If inflation is 3%, then two years of 5% budget cuts and 3% inflation put the retiree down 16%. That's a steep cut if the original budget wasn't flush. But for me Clyatt is confusing because I will have many gap years before Social Security at 70 - I haven't settled on how to run it in that case.
I think I will kick-off retirement with an FRP Conservative plan (Flexible is the same for me, oddly), keep track of whether I get a COLA separately, then definitely at 70 when SocSec begins reassess and start running Clyatt for a different opinion. I would also reassess at major life junctures (widowhood, divorce, marriage, selling a house, buying a house, etc).
There is one way to avoid this, though, and keep using FRP solo, without a side spreadheet... but I don't know how to do it, though I have an idea.
After a large bear market... future returns are always better. That's just math. "Buy when others are fearful". So if there is a 2008-2009 event, you'd have to know by how much to boost portfolio future returns in FRP, this would keep you from cutting your budget severely. I suppose you could use FRP to ask the question, "what future return is required to allow me to keep spending intact for the next decade?" And then you could look at history in PortfolioVisualizer as ask yourself if that added return requirement is justified or just a pipe dream.
example
2009-2010 CAGR for 60/40 was 9.35% 2009 was a down year
2000-2009 CAGR for 60/40 was 2.91% 2000 was a peak year
These concerns are why people do buy annuities. I bought a QLAC as longevity insurance. After 82, my SocSec and QLAC will be a reasonably nice income even if my portfolio is exhausted. The QLAC and my home equity are off the books, not in FRP. They're insurance.
Great question though, I think about it all the time.
Afterthought - you know what would probably be really safe? Set the initial budget with Stable, but run it with Conservative rules. If Stable is 95% probable, then flipping the switch to Conservative ups that to 99%. That's pretty darned safe.