i would argue 4.7% for a 30 year return is a draw rate , not a safe withdrawal rate since it has failed already to last enough times to achieve a 90% success rate based on what we already saw in america .
it already failed to last 25 time frames for a mere 80% success rate
while it doesn’t have gold as a component and gold has beaten bonds the last two decades, it hadn’t beaten equities, so this mix below was run at 75% equities , using gold and lowering equites would have done a bit less in gains
FIRECalc Results
Your spending in every year after the first year will be adjusted for inflation, so the spending power is preserved.
FIRECalc looked at the 125 possible 30 year periods in the available data, starting with a portfolio of $1,000,000 and spending your specified amounts each year thereafter.
Here is how your portfolio would have fared in each of the 125 cycles. The lowest and highest portfolio balance at the end of your retirement was $-1,421,295 to $5,045,572, with an average at the end of $1,336,423. (Note: this is looking at all the possible periods; values are in terms of the dollars as of the beginning of the retirement period for each cycle.)
For our purposes, failure means the portfolio was depleted before the end of the 30 years. FIRECalc found that 25 cycles failed, for a success rate of 80.0%.
looking at other time frames will change things but seeing at least a 90% success rate is what one would want to be considered a safe withdrawal rate .
one can take raises in draw over time if they are not a worst case outcome , but one would never know that in advance so planning around less then 90% initially would not be a good idea
