Back to Blog

Is the 4% safe withdrawal rate still valid?

Financial Toolset Team4 min read

Yes, the 4% rule has been validated through multiple market crashes including 1929, 1987, 2000, and 2008, with a 95% success rate over 30-year retirements. While some researchers suggest 3.5% for v...

Is the 4% safe withdrawal rate still valid?

Listen to this article

Browser text-to-speech

Is the 4% Safe Withdrawal Rate Still Valid?

When planning for retirement, one of the most frequently cited guidelines is the 4% rule. Originating from a study by financial advisor William Bengen in 1994, it suggests retirees can withdraw 4% of their retirement savings annually, adjusted for inflation, without running out of money over a 30-year period. However, with changing market conditions and evolving financial models, the question arises: Is the 4% rule still a valid strategy for today’s retirees?

Understanding the 4% Rule and Its Evolution

The 4% rule was based on historical market data, assuming a balanced portfolio of 50%-75% in stocks. This approach has historically weathered several market crashes, offering a 95% success rate over 30-year retirements. However, critics argue that today's lower interest rates and varying market dynamics may require a more cautious approach. Recent studies, such as Morningstar's 2024 research, suggest a baseline withdrawal rate of 3.7%. Meanwhile, Bengen himself has suggested that rates as high as 5.25% to 5.5% might be feasible, reflecting confidence in a robust stock market.

Current Safe Withdrawal Rates

New analyses emphasize the importance of adapting withdrawal strategies to market conditions and personal circumstances. Here's a comparison of different recommended rates:

YearSuggested Rate
20213.3%
20223.8%
20243.7%

These fluctuations highlight the need to remain flexible and adjust your strategy as you move through retirement.

Flexible Spending Approaches

Beyond the static 4% rule, several flexible spending strategies can help optimize withdrawals:

  • Basic Approach: Skipping inflation adjustments in poor market years can support a 4.2% withdrawal rate.
  • Guardrails Approach: Adjusting withdrawals based on portfolio performance can increase the safe rate to 5.1%.

These methods emphasize the importance of adaptability, ensuring retirees can adjust their spending in response to market performance.

Real-World Scenarios

Consider a retiree with $1 million in savings. Under the traditional 4% rule, they would withdraw $40,000 annually. If the market performs poorly and they adopt a "basic approach," they might skip an inflation adjustment, maintaining the $40,000 withdrawal. Alternatively, using the "guardrails approach," they could adjust withdrawals based on portfolio thresholds, possibly withdrawing more in good years and less in bad.

For a retiree with $1.5 million in savings and a $100,000 annual spending need, other income sources like Social Security can significantly adjust withdrawal needs. If Social Security provides $50,000 annually, the required portfolio withdrawal drops to $50,000, or 3.33%, well below the 4% guideline.

Common Mistakes and Considerations

Bottom Line

The 4% rule remains a useful starting point for retirement planning, but it should not be followed rigidly. Modern retirees should consider a range of withdrawal strategies, taking into account market conditions, personal circumstances, and other income sources. Flexibility and periodic review are key to ensuring your retirement funds last as long as you need them. By understanding and applying these insights, you can craft a retirement plan that aligns with your financial goals and lifestyle needs.

Try the Calculator

Ready to take control of your finances?

Calculate your personalized results.

Launch Calculator

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about the Is the 4% safe withdrawal rate still valid?

Yes, the 4% rule has been validated through multiple market crashes including 1929, 1987, 2000, and 2008, with a 95% success rate over 30-year retirements. While some researchers suggest 3.5% for v...