A $750,000 Portfolio With 5% Withdrawals Can Last 20 Years. Here’s What Happens When Returns Turn Negative

It should go without saying that most people walking away from decades of work with $750,000 in the bank by the time they turn 65 should feel pretty good about things. If they are thinking about pulling out around 5% annually to live on alongside Social Security, the math looks pretty good, at least it does on paper.

The problem is that the 5% withdrawal rate doesn’t factor in how the market performs every year, and since we can’t predict the market any better than we can predict winning lottery numbers, we have to understand what kind of impact a 5% annual withdrawal can have for a retiree.

The Withdrawal Rate Matters More Than the Balance

If you think about the 4% annual withdrawal rate, the most popular figure right now for retirees, it would produce around $30,000 in annual income from a $750,000 portfolio. Even as you factor in average market returns and normal inflation, there is every reason to believe this money should and will hold up for around 30 years.

The math gets even better if you believe you can live off 3% annual withdrawals, because this number would likely allow a portfolio to grow, as returns would outpace withdrawals. This definitely won’t be a comfortable position for everyone, though, as living on $22,500 before Social Security isn’t realistic for most people.

It’s when you get to 5% that the math can really start to get uncomfortable as even under normal market conditions, this $750,000 portfolio is likely to run out in around 20 years, or just as a retiree hits their mid-80s. The thing to remember is that this isn’t even a worst-case scenario, it’s just how the numbers play out if everything goes according to plan.

Bad Timing Does More Damage Than Bad Averages

The average-return math asks people to make an assumption they don’t often think about in that the markets will behave consistently from year to year. The problem is that market behavior is wildly inconsistent and a portfolio that averages 7% over 20 years could still lose 30% in year and year two and for someone who isn’t retired, this might be an inconvenience they could recover from.

For someone who is now forced to sell shares at depressed prices to fund their daily lifestyle, locking in losses often forces the math to show that they can never fully recover from this, as those shares are now gone. The portfolio climbs back from a smaller base while still carrying the same withdrawal burden, which is a gap that almost never closes.

If you look at two retirees with identical balances and identical long-term averages, they can end up in completely different financial situations based entirely on when they happened to retire. This is what’s known as the sequence-of-returns risk, and it’s part of retirement math that doesn’t get nearly enough attention.

Inflation Is the Slow Problem

It shouldn’t come as any surprise that when inflation hits, it doesn’t announce itself, which is part of why people are often underestimating it. Having $37,500 every year covers a specific set of expenses in the first year, but by year 10, this same number is currently projected to cover 22% less at an annual 2% inflation rate.

Of course, healthcare costs tend to run well above 2% inflation, so the real erosion in spending power is likely going to happen even faster than most retirees expect.

What projections like this one also miss is that retirees don’t spend evenly across a 20 or 30-year retirement. The early years are almost always the most expensive, as it’s when people are the healthiest to travel and active enough to actually spend the money.

If the highest spending years also overlap with a market downturn, which can and does happen, both problems hitting at once is going to be significantly more damaging than either one on its own.

The Levers That Actually Move the Needle

There are far too many people who ignore the reality that waiting to claim Social Security until they turn 70 is one of the most underused tools for increasing their overall finances during retirement. Waiting until the last possible year to claim benefits allows for a substantial monthly benefit increase, especially one that is guaranteed, and it also accounts for inflation every year for the rest of a retiree’s life. Every dollar of this guaranteed income is a dollar the portfolio isn’t responsible for producing, which lowers the effective withdrawal rate without lowering the standard of living.

Another thing to consider is keeping one or two years of expenses in cash, which changes the math during downturns in a meaningful way. A retiree who can draw from cash reserves instead of selling equities in a bad year will give the portfolio the opportunity to recover before selling more shares. It won’t eliminate the sequence-of-returns problem completely, but it creates some necessary breathing room and avoids taking the worst of the portfolio damage.

Spending flexibility might be a hard sell, but it is a lever that can and should be pulled. If a retiree has to pull back on discretionary spending for a year or two when markets are struggling, it can give a retirement plan the room it needs to find stability. The fixed withdrawal assumption built into most projections doesn’t often account for this, and it could be exactly what separates a plan from one that works from one that doesn’t.

The $750,000 question doesn’t have a definitive right answer, as the sequence of returns, Social Security timing, spending habits, and a retiree’s willingness to spend less can all shape the outcome as much as the starting balance. The math is clear in that a 5% withdrawal rate doesn’t leave a lot of room for the market to have a bad year, something we know that will happen. The whole point of doing these exercises, though, is to figure out how to handle bad years so they don’t impact everything.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.