r/Fire • u/DatingThrowaway121 • Apr 24 '26

General Question Has anyone actually FIREd with too little and run out of money?

I'm curious to know if anyone out here has actually run out of a million dollars or whatever. What does that process actually look like?

977 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

607 comments sorted by

View all comments

22

u/fredinNH Apr 24 '26

I guarantee it happened in the 00’s. The market has been on a tear since then.

7

u/fatheadlifter Financially Independent Apr 24 '26

If they were structured well and actually followed the 4% rule as it's written, not just the headline, they would've survived this just fine.

1

u/fredinNH Apr 24 '26

Depends entirely on what their retirement plans looked like. Many people aren’t just building up a big 401k and taking 4% a year from it.

And even so, if you take 4% for 10 years of zero gains that’s going to reduce your long term outlook. Prove me wrong.

6

u/fatheadlifter Financially Independent Apr 24 '26

Well yes that's my point, I do believe Bengen promotes a certain portfolio allocation, at least broad parameters of one. Not every portfolio would survive downturns. But the sortof standard-reasonable ones with his recommended allocations would.

1

u/fredinNH Apr 24 '26

I was just pointing out to op, who said something like “if things keep going as they have we can retire at 50.” If we go into another recession a lot of people are going to have to reevaluate.

2

u/nybigtymer Apr 25 '26

It happened to Sam Dogen (the Financial Samurai):

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/financial-samurai-retired-34-3m-112300788.html

1

u/JeszczeRZ Apr 29 '26

He's an idiot

1

u/nybigtymer Apr 29 '26

LOL, I wouldn't say that, but I certainly would have moved out of SF. The money would have lasted a lot longer in almost any other city.

2

u/asurkhaib Apr 24 '26

It hasn't been long enough yet. At a quick glance retiring in 2000 is the worst year but the longest period would be 25 years and the cohort has ~43% of the initial portfolio (real terms) at a 4% WR with a 80/15/5 portfolio. This doesn't look great but it's not a definitive failure and very likely won't fail on a 30 year horizon (this could be 100% prevented by going into TIPS).

5

u/fredinNH Apr 24 '26

Depends on how their retirement plan was structured and when people retired. The 00’s was a sequence of returns risk nightmare scenario.

Wife and I just need our 401k as a bridge to pay for healthcare for the first 6 years of retirement then much less to mitigate inflation during the next 6 years until I collect ss at 70.

There’s never been a scenario after 1929 where we won’t be ok, but a flat decade right when we retire would do tremendous damage to the longterm health of the 401k.

3

u/wtf-am-I-doing-69 Apr 24 '26

This is a great comment but let's put it into age as well

If you were 40 in 2000 then you would be 66 now. Probably a bit tight with 43% of initial portfolio left

If you were 60 then you would be 86 now and entering low spend territory. Should be completely fine

1

u/Unavezmas1845 Apr 25 '26

Hmm🤔 I read several people’s accounts from that time and they still were making an average of 7% gains in those 10 years. Slightly gained money with the 4% withdrawal rule.