The period cited 1966-1982 did not produce 2.48% returns. "It" in this case refers to the 1966-1982 period, not to the recent 2.48% 30-year period that was originally being discussed.How is 2.48% “largely negative”? Surely that’s more like “slightly positive”?Yes, it is not 30 years.
But it is CATASTROPHICALLY a worse scenario due to the sequence and the fact that returns were largely negative after inflation - because that sequence failed a standard 4% withdrawal rate.
Statistics: Posted by tibbitts — Sun Jun 02, 2024 1:35 am — Replies 17 — Views 1607