4% was born in 1994
Bill Bengen’s paper picked 4% after testing the worst U.S. start year (1966) for a 30-year retirement.
We compound monthly using your annual return and inflation. For the classic 4% rule, the first year’s withdrawal equals
WR% × starting portfolio. At each anniversary, the withdrawal is increased by your inflation input (COLA). The
Flat nominal mode keeps withdrawals fixed in £ terms (no COLA). The Custom % mode withdraws a percentage of the current portfolio each year, so spending self-adjusts to market performance.
The “4% rule” is a simple rule of thumb for drawdowns in retirement. It says that in the first year you retire, you withdraw 4% of your starting portfolio. In later years, you raise that pound amount by the rate of inflation so your spending keeps the same purchasing power. For example, if you begin with £1,000,000, your first-year withdrawal is £40,000; if inflation is 3% the next year, you withdraw £41,200, and so on. Our simulator models this classic approach, along with alternatives like a flat nominal amount or a percentage of the current portfolio each year.
Retirement income planning faces two main uncertainties: market returns and longevity. The 4% guideline aims to strike a balance between spending enough to enjoy retirement and keeping a high probability that your portfolio lasts through a typical 25–30 year horizon. It’s not a guarantee or a law of nature—just a practical starting point for conversation and what-if analysis.
Treat outputs as estimates to guide discussion, not predictions. Run multiple scenarios: lower/higher returns, different inflation, and alternative withdrawal styles. Watch how early bad years or a tighter real-return gap (return − inflation) change sustainability. Consider coordinating with pensions, annuities, part-time work, and a cash buffer for near-term spending to reduce the pressure on the portfolio.
Educational content only—not financial advice. Your situation is unique; consider professional guidance for tax, fee, and investment specifics.
Bill Bengen’s paper picked 4% after testing the worst U.S. start year (1966) for a 30-year retirement.
Two portfolios with the same average return can diverge: early losses plus late gains can fail while steady gains succeed.
Jonathan Guyton’s early-2000s “guardrails” flex withdrawals when portfolios drift—an early dynamic rule still used today.
6% returns with 4% inflation (2% real) are riskier than 4% returns with 1% inflation (3% real). It’s the gap that matters.
Cutting withdrawals ~10% after a bad year can improve sustainability more than assuming +1% higher returns.