Of course, but the goals shift from max. capital growth to preservation over the years. Thus I‘ll reduce my equities-allocation gradually.
4 Likes
The study above actually discusses preservation, respectively the risk of running out of money in retirement. They found that the lifecycle strategy (gradually shifting to bonds) had a 17% risk vs the all equity strategy with 8%.
Even if this holds for the future an all-equity strategy can bring substantially psychological stress, which might outweigh the potential benefits for many..
2 Likes
Totally!
Hindsight is 20/20 in these so-called studies.["]
I came across the following yesterday in a tweet referenced by Nick Maggiuli – famous for his book “Just Keep Buying” (which I haven’t read, but I already agree with the title) – which illustrates IMO what you might go through with an all equity total return portfolio[σ] without steady cash flows.
“If I put $100 in Bitcoin in 2010 I’d have $2.8B now.”
No.
If you bought $100 of Bitcoin in 2010 and watched it go to:
$1k → $100k → $1.7M
and did nothing
Then watched $1.7M go to $170k
and still did nothing
Then watched $170k go to $110M
and still did nothing
Then watched $110M wither to $18M
and still did nothing
Then watched $18M surge to $390M
and still did nothing
Then watched $390M deteriorate to $85M
Then watched $85M climb to $1.6B
and still did nothing
Then watched $1.6B shrink to $390M
and still did nothingThen watched $390M surge to $2.8B
and then for some reason finally decided to do something…
Then yes, $100 in 2010 would be worth $2.8B today.
(Source)
Not everyone has the @cubanpete_the_swiss nerves of steel (I certainly don’t, especially as long as people are still dependent on me generating reliable cash flow), but of course if this is your cup of tea, feel free to adhere to it … especially when you’re about to retire. 
" The nice forum citizen that Goofy sometimes can be told himself not to put the word studies in quotes. It was tough to overcome this desire, though.
σ Of course the all stock portfolio as less volatiliy than Bitcoin, but you will probably still similar in terms of emotions experienced when withdrawing from that portfolio.
6 Likes
Noob. Obviously he should have:
bought $100 of Bitcoin in 2010 and watched it go to:
$1k → $100k → $1.7M
and then sell everything and
watched it $1.7M go to $170k
and then buy back in
Then watched $1.7M go to $1100M
and then sell it… etc. etc. 
4 Likes
Love the bitcoin example. Thanks! Its so true. At some point nav gets high and even small fluctuations can be stressful for some people. Being comfortable with a strategy and sticking with it whatever happens is the key.
Hindsight is 20/20 in these so-called studies.["]
Sure, but to be fair, all research is done on historical data (hindsight). Interesting is to watch the same methodology being applied to new data over time and see if the theory holds.
I personally prefer scientific theory over intuition and hunches to inform my investment strategy and actions.
1 Like
Lets get back to the topic.
1 Like
Have you sold your ETH for BTC? Having only BTC is the solution to all your questions 
4 Likes
One thing I am curious about is how you are modelling your future income? Are the trajectories in your line of work so clearly defined that it’s fairly straightforward to know how things will develop? If not, what assumptions are you making atm? (Are you being conservative or optimistic?)
1 Like
Plus, I would definitely add at least some form of uncertainty to my future projections.
Not going full Monte Carlo,
But at least something like worst-realistic-best case, with -/+20% “confidence interval” around the realistic one - would already do some mental sim work.
Having a plan/goal is great, but life inevitably happens (both good and bad).
2 Likes
Given these represent 80% of the ETF, I’d say it bodes well for it? I’m actually considering buying some myself, though SLICHA appeals more to me from a construction point of view.
I‘m assuming +5k/year for the next 4 years and +2k/year for the remaining career. I‘m also assuming that I‘ll increase savingsrate by 2/3 of that increase.
1 Like
Are you factoring in to have a family? And potentially child care costs.
This is a huge swing. It can move the deadline easily from 50 to 58-60 in part due to early childcare costs and later financially and psychologically
1 Like
I was initially going to react with a 
emoji but then had 2nd thoughts about whether you were actually being serious.
Without calling into question whether you are serious, how would one even start to financially plan things when taking into account potential future paths at the age of, let’s say, 30 to 40?
Wouldn’t you just always plan with your current best data available?
Otherwise you would have to factor in looming future wars, state property confiscations, etc.
Maybe I misunderstood your interjection. IMO @Cortana is planning things just as one should? I’m confident @Cortana will adjust planning quickly if the facts change.
1 Like
If you intend to have a family, wouldn’t the best data include the costs of that family at the forecasted dates they arrive? I also have costs for my kids to go to uni and contributions for their weddings and they are only 4 and 7 years of age right now
6 Likes
It’s a bit of both.
The point is:
if he plans to have a family, I would encourage Cortana to factor in costs.
If he doesn’t plan or unsure, I would recommend to model it. He might have broken up with gf and think f*** everybody, I will work my ass off and at 50 pull the plug. Reality it might be that in 2 years he finds another beatiful human being, love happens, she want to have a kids and then he is in trouble. Should I stay or should I work longer? And this is where he gets hit financially and emotionally 
5 Likes
If one on the FI/frugal/RE path doesn’t find someone who’s at the very least accepting of the path there’ll be trouble.
Find companion on the path, you must. Master Yoda said.
4 Likes
concerning Sequence of Return risk:
- Sequence of return risk is “just” a problem in the beginning. One likely knows if it strikes within the first few years, i.e. if one enters a serious bear market in the beginning. If so, one can likely adjust and get back into the job market.
- Ben Felix mentions it is actually a sequence (SoR) of withdrawal risk. Returns are out of your control, withdrawals are not. Adjusting your spending to your portfolio performance is the better solution. Glide paths and cash buckets make SoR worse. 100% stocks are still the best given their long-term benefits. [details]
2 Likes
-
Given that your target is still CHF 2.68 M away and 16 years out, how are you stress-testing the plan for income loss, unexpected expenses, or other personal disruptions before 50?
-
If equities and bonds drop together (as in 2022), what’s your strategy to avoid selling at a loss while covering living costs?
-
Is there a defined Plan B, such as returning to work part-time or adjusting spending, if markets underperform for an extended period?
-
How will you handle liquidity if most of your bond and cash reserves are locked in the 2nd/3rd pillar when you need them?
1 Like
It’s very simple: you just predict the future.
To feel good about your prediction you throw in backtesting and events in the past to feel good or bad about it.
Sorry if your questions were meant to be serious, but are they?
2 Likes
It’s true — in the end, every FIRE plan is a prediction exercise. The problem is that reality often refuses to follow our spreadsheets. Backtesting and historical scenarios are useful for perspective, but they’re not a crystal ball.
Here everyone tries to be a fortune teller with their models and projections, but in the end, maybe we should focus a bit more on actually enjoying life along the way.
That’s exactly why my questions were serious: the gap is large, the time horizon is long, and the variables — markets, personal life, health, taxes — can flip the plan upside down. Ignoring that because “past averages worked” is as dangerous as assuming the future will cooperate just because the past sometimes did.
7 Likes