LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
Post Reply
Topic Author
bb
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:04 pm

LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Post by bb »

So if scenario #1 is 3 fund portfolio, 2% would cover needs, 3% would allow for some discretionary spending and 4% would allow for a lot more discretionary spending at say age 50 would the implications scenario #2 with LMP covering needs result in potentially working much longer or accepting a much lower standard of living?
bikechuck
Posts: 861
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:22 pm

Re: LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Post by bikechuck »

What in heaven's name is LMP?
longinvest
Posts: 4535
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 8:44 am

Re: LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Post by longinvest »

Safe Withdrawal Rate (SWR) is not meant as a withdrawal method, but as a tool to answer the question "How much do I need to retire at age 65?"

For actual portfolio withdrawal, during retirement, there exist flexible methods such as variable-percentage withdrawal (VPW) or constant-percentage withdrawal (CPW). These methods are best combined with stable non-portfolio income like Social Security, a pension (if any), and, if strictly necessary, an inflation-indexed Single Premium Immediate Annuity (inflation-indexed SPIA).
Bogleheads investment philosophy | One-ETF global balanced index portfolio | VPW
longinvest
Posts: 4535
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 8:44 am

Re: LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Post by longinvest »

bikechuck wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 4:56 pm What in heaven's name is LMP?
I guess that it means "Liability Matching Portfolio".
Bogleheads investment philosophy | One-ETF global balanced index portfolio | VPW
Topic Author
bb
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:04 pm

Re: LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Post by bb »

LMP - Liability Matching Portfolio.

I realize SWR is a guideline - but for those of us retiring with our own investments we all have to eat. So there is an assumed floor that one cannot go below. If you read between the lines I have suggested a flexible withdrawal strategy.
AlohaJoe
Posts: 5665
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 2:00 pm
Location: Saigon, Vietnam

Re: LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Post by AlohaJoe »

bb wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 4:53 pmwould the implications scenario #2 with LMP covering needs result in potentially working much longer or accepting a much lower standard of living?
Yes, in general an LMP approach is more expensive than a systematic withdrawal plan. But if you push the withdrawal rate too low then undo much of that efficiency.

I'm not sure what you mean by "implication". You can just do the math. A LMP from age 50 to age 95 requires 45 years of expenses. 1/45 = 2.22%. How does that compare to the alternatives?
sharukh
Posts: 306
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:19 am

Re: LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Post by sharukh »

AlohaJoe wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 7:03 pm
bb wrote: Fri May 04, 2018 4:53 pmwould the implications scenario #2 with LMP covering needs result in potentially working much longer or accepting a much lower standard of living?
Yes, in general an LMP approach is more expensive than a systematic withdrawal plan. But if you push the withdrawal rate too low then undo much of that efficiency.

I'm not sure what you mean by "implication". You can just do the math. A LMP from age 50 to age 95 requires 45 years of expenses. 1/45 = 2.22%. How does that compare to the alternatives?
You don't need 45 years of expenses for lmp of age 50 to 95.

You need around 30 years of expenses worth of tips ladder assuming 45 year tips exist. Because the funds earmarked for later years pay interest for current year expenses.

Search for tips ladder Excel sheet.

I like lmp once I reach retirement age
stlutz
Posts: 5576
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:08 am

Re: LMP vs 3-Fund SWR

Post by stlutz »

Liability matching portfolios really weren't designed for people retiring at 50. Yes, you could buy an annuity with a COLA adjustment, but few would recommend that strategy.

Now, some people are rich enough that they can invest very conservatively at age 50 if they wanted to, but they type of people who get that rich by then aren't really the low risk type either.

It doesn't sound like you're in the ultra-rich category, so you'll need to take/accept some market risk.
Post Reply