Retirement Withdrawal Calculator

How to use this in 60 seconds

1. Set your portfolio value, monthly need, and longevity. Use the actual nest egg you'll retire with (not your target), the monthly withdrawal you need in today's dollars (the tool inflation-adjusts forward), and a target age that's actuarially realistic — for a healthy 65-year-old non-smoker, that's 90+ for women and 87+ for men.
2. Watch the verdict card and "Safe withdrawal rate" cell. A 4% SWR is the Trinity Study baseline that historically supported 30-year retirements with a 95%+ success rate. If your monthly need divides into a rate above 4.5%, the model will flag it as risky; above 5% it's at meaningful sequence-of-returns risk in a poor market entry year.
3. Stress-test with the pessimistic scenario. The "if returns are 2% lower" row models a mediocre-returns regime (think the 2000s for US equities). If your portfolio still survives the pessimistic case, your withdrawal rate is genuinely safe. If it depletes in the pessimistic but survives baseline, you have flexibility — but you'll need to cut spending in a bear market early in retirement.

The 4% rule explained honestly

The 4% rule comes from the 1998 Trinity Study and the earlier Bengen research, which backtested every 30-year rolling period from 1926. Verdict: a 4% starting withdrawal rate (adjusted for inflation each year) supported a 50/50 stocks/bonds portfolio for 30 years in 95% of historical sequences. The 5% failures clustered around retirements starting just before major bear markets — 1929, 1966, 1973.

Modern research (Pfau, ERN, Kitces) has refined this. Today's consensus: 4% is still safe for 30 years; for early retirees with 40+ year horizons, 3.25–3.5% is more honest; if you're willing to adjust spending in down markets (5–10% cuts in bad years), 4.5–5% works. Couples often have one passing earlier than expected, which is a hidden flex — portfolio depletion timelines that look tight assume both members spend the full amount for the full horizon.

Math runs locally. We don't store your inputs.

Where this framework breaks

• Sequence-of-returns risk is averaged out. The model uses a constant return assumption. Reality: the first 5–10 years of returns matter dramatically more than later years (you're drawing from a high base, so losses compound). Two retirees with the same average return can have wildly different outcomes if one starts in a bear market. Stress-test with the pessimistic row.
• Social Security and pensions reduce the burden. "Other monthly income" covers this but understates the value — Social Security is inflation-adjusted by CPI-W (close to true CPI) and lasts as long as you do. A $2,500/mo SS check is functionally equivalent to ~$750K of portfolio at a 4% SWR.
• Healthcare cost trajectory. Pre-65 retirees face marketplace premiums of $8–25K/year. Post-65, Medicare + Medigap drops to $4–7K. Long-term care (assisted living, memory care) at age 80+ can run $80K–$150K/year. The model uses a flat monthly need — bake in a late-life spending spike to be honest.
• Tax drag on withdrawals. A $5K/month "need" from a traditional 401(k) requires drawing closer to $6.5K to net $5K after federal + state tax. The model shows pre-tax withdrawals. Roth, taxable brokerage, and HSA each have different treatments — the HSA and Roth vs Trad tools help with the upstream account-type decisions.