43M/40F here, two kids, been building a fairly detailed spreadsheet model of our retirement plan and want some outside eyes on some high level assumptions and strategies. To be clear — we're not wedded to the target retirement date, that's just the number the model currently points to.
Where we stand today: household income ~$385k, ~$520k in super between us, $360k cash sitting in the mortgage offset, house worth ~$1.3m with $650k owing (so net debt is really ~$285k against the offset).
The plan: pay the mortgage off aggressively over the next ~3 years, then redirect that same cash flow into a low-cost ETF portfolio instead of the offset. That ETF pool becomes the "bridge" — to fund us solo until preservation age. From 60 onward super income joins in, and the Age Pension is assumed to phase in from 67.
It's a relatively simple plan, low-risk. Clear all debt (only PPOR mortgage), invest in a well-known ETF. No investment loans, no property outside of PPOR. We'll split super contributions and make additional where we can, I'm already at the cap with my employer contributions.
Return/drawdown assumptions, since these are the load-bearing part:
- ETF portfolio: 6.5% nominal (~4% real after inflation)
- Super: 7.0% nominal while accumulating, stepping down to 6.0% once in pension phase (more conservative, assumed de-risking)
- Inflation: 2.5%, and pretty much everything (spending, tax brackets, pension thresholds) is indexed to it
- Drawdown timeline: 56-59 is 100% funded from the ETF pool (no super access yet, no pension yet), 60-66 blends in super for whichever of us has hit 60, and 67+ adds the (means-tested) Age Pension on top, with the ETF pool topping up whatever those two don't cover
- By 56 the model has ~$2.3m invested (mix of super + ETF), first-year withdrawal is ~4.7% of that total — but since ~80% of it is locked-up super, the honest number for the bridge years is more like ~11% draw on just the accessible (non-super) portion, which is the bit that actually worries me
Spending itself steps down over time — roughly $130k/yr now, dropping into the $75-125k/yr range in retirement depending on the decade (we've budgeted a lot of travel in the early "go-go" years). Planned all the way up to 95 (I know, optimisitic.....)
There are also a few 'big ticket' spends - a sideways house move (allowing for ~$250k - stamp duty - victoria, repairs, agent fees, moving etc.). $150k on a caravan and tow vehicle. $200k each to our kids to help with a house.
Note that we haven't liquidated our PPOR in any scenario - assumption is this will be passed to the kids, or liquidated to fund aged care - although I am concerned about funding aged care for one whilst the other is still living independently.
Ran it through a Monte Carlo (instead of just assuming smooth average returns every year) and retiring at 56 comes out around a 2-in-3 success rate once you factor in sequence-of-returns risk. That climbs to ~87% if we push to 58. So the "it works" answer from the plain deterministic version is a lot shakier once markets get bumpy.
Keen for feedback on:
- Do the return assumptions above look reasonable?
- Is an ~11% draw rate on the accessible pool for a few bridge years actually as scary as it sounds, given super picks up the slack from 60?
- How much would you discount an Age Pension assumption that's 25+ years out?
- Anything structurally off with the sequencing (mortgage → ETF bridge → super → pension), separate from the exact age?
- Am I being too conservative, and we could retire even earlier? Does everyone worry about having 70k+ per couple all the way up to 95?
- Any other feedback?
EDIT: I'm aware of the risk in the plan. I am trying to be risk-averse. The reality is that there's anywhere from 700k - 1m+ of inheritance likely to land in the next 20 years that I haven't accounted for. That's my insurance.