Spending Strategies

Safe Withdrawal Rate (4% Rule)

TL;DR

The 4% rule says you can withdraw 4% of your starting portfolio each year (adjusted for inflation) and likely not run out of money over 30 years. It's the most widely cited retirement spending benchmark — but modern research suggests dynamic strategies that adapt to markets perform significantly better.

The safe withdrawal rate — commonly known as the 4% rule — is one of the most widely cited guidelines in retirement planning. It suggests that a retiree can withdraw 4% of their initial portfolio balance in the first year of retirement, then adjust that dollar amount for inflation each subsequent year, with a high probability of not running out of money over a 30-year period.

How It Works

The rule was derived by financial planner William Bengen in his landmark 1994 study. Bengen tested every possible 30-year retirement period using historical U.S. stock and bond returns (dating back to 1926) and found that a 4% initial withdrawal rate survived even the worst historical periods — including the Great Depression and the stagflation of the 1970s.

The mechanics are simple:

  1. Multiply your starting portfolio by 4% to determine your first-year withdrawal
  2. Each subsequent year, increase the withdrawal amount by the rate of inflation
  3. The withdrawal amount is fixed in real (inflation-adjusted) terms, regardless of portfolio performance

For example, with a $1,000,000 portfolio:

  • Year 1: withdraw $40,000
  • Year 2 (with 3% inflation): withdraw $41,200
  • Year 3 (with 2.5% inflation): withdraw $42,230

Why It Matters

The 4% rule provides a critical benchmark — it answers the fundamental question: "How much can I safely spend each year without running out of money?" It also implies a savings target: you need 25 times your annual expenses to retire (the inverse of 4%).

However, the 4% rule has significant limitations:

  • Based on U.S. historical data: international markets have historically delivered lower returns, potentially requiring a lower safe withdrawal rate (3%–3.5%)
  • Assumes a fixed 30-year horizon: early retirees (FIRE) or those planning for longevity beyond 30 years may need a lower rate
  • Ignores taxes and fees: real-world withdrawals are reduced by tax obligations and investment costs
  • Static strategy: it does not adapt to market conditions — you withdraw the same real amount whether markets are booming or crashing

Interactive chart: withdrawal-rate-success

Success rate vs. initial withdrawal rate over a 30-year retirement

Coming soon

Monte Carlo vs Historical Backtesting

Bengen's original study used historical backtesting — testing every actual 30-year sequence of returns. Monte Carlo simulation takes a different approach: it generates thousands of synthetic return sequences from a probability distribution. This allows testing scenarios that have never occurred historically but are statistically plausible.

When tested with fat-tail distributions that capture the true frequency of market crashes, the 4% rule's success rate can drop from ~95% to 85% or lower — a meaningful difference for retirement security.

Dynamic Alternatives

Modern retirement research has moved beyond the static 4% rule toward dynamic spending strategies that adjust withdrawals based on portfolio performance:

These strategies trade income stability for dramatically improved portfolio survival rates.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the 4% rule still valid in 2026?
The 4% rule remains a useful starting benchmark, but most modern research suggests it may be too aggressive for non-U.S. markets, early retirees with 40+ year horizons, or periods following historically high valuations. Many planners now recommend 3.3–3.5% as a safer starting point, or using dynamic spending strategies that adjust with market conditions.
What is the 25x rule for retirement?
The 25x rule is the inverse of the 4% withdrawal rate: you need 25 times your annual expenses saved to retire. If you spend $60,000 per year, you need a $1,500,000 portfolio. This is a rough target — your actual number depends on time horizon, asset allocation, and other income sources.
Should I use the 4% rule or a dynamic spending strategy?
Dynamic strategies like Guyton-Klinger or floor-and-ceiling are generally superior because they adapt to market conditions, dramatically improving portfolio survival rates. The trade-off is variable income. The 4% rule is simpler but riskier because it ignores portfolio performance entirely.