Eeek!
Some incredible numbers-crunching & analysis.
- Did anyone mention that staying healthy for as long as possible is an "investment" - and one you have a great deal more control over than stock and bond market gyrations? I'm talking about not smoking, limiting alcohol intake, lots of fruit & veggies, daily workouts, etc. Those medical bills for in-home care will kill you. Poor health will rob you of the ability to enjoy the fruits of your investments. And, if your health deteriorates to the point you can no longer manage your own finances, what good is Monte Carlo or any of this other mumbo-jumbo?
- Has anyone mentioned that investments which appreciate the most during inflationary periods might offer the best protection in retirement? The current low inflation environment may favor bonds and equities. However, the underperforming (typically "hard") assets in today's economy are precisely the ones which should outperform during periods of high inflation. So, investing for current growth may be different than buying future inflation protection. The worst thing about inflation is that prices compound in the same manner that money does. At 10% annual inflation, a $2 loaf of bread today will cost you $3.22 five years from now and about $5.20 in ten years. A new car selling for $20,000 today would "inflate" to $32,210 in five years and $51,875 in ten years. Apply the same rate of increase to insurance premiums, property taxes, medical expenses, and you've got a serious problem that - I'm afraid - few retiring today even contemplate.
- Anyone who has ever constructed a household budget in retirement knows that while income tends to remain fairly static and mostly beyond our control, the expense side is much more flexible and allows for considerable control. Small steps like driving an older vehicle an extra 5 years, cutting out one vacation a year or doing more of your own home maintenance can all have a positive impact on the bottom line.
This is not intended to be comprehensive - just some other factors that may have been overlooked in the preceding deliberations.

Hi Dex,
For your convenience, I’ll repeat them here. I did 12 simulations in about 5 minutes with a $13K drawdown schedule. I did 6 cases for a 185K initial portfolio value. My baseline was a 7% average annual return with parametric standard deviations of 10%, 14%, and 18%. I repeated the same standard deviations for a 6% annual portfolio return rate. Portfolio survival rates were atrocious.

In the 185K value - the total value should have been the 51,888 and 185,000 plus some contingency amount at least - you pick the number.
The amount should never be 185K alone and the 51K should be in near cash - treasury bond ladder or a short term bond fund.
So, it doesn't look as if the simulator was modeling what I wrote. Same for the $350K example there needs to be the 'near cash' aspect also.
"$12,972 to be funded
$51,888 in near cash for 4 years of expenses - this is ride out market (bond & stock downturns.
$185,143 earning 7% to get to 12,972/year expenses to be funded
$100,000 to 150,000 contingency money, if wanted, earning ???
$337,031 to 357,031 total excluding house"

FYI: (Scroll & Click Download)
Regards,
Ted
http://www.moneylifeshow.com/highlights.asp
M* Snapshot EVGBX: http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/EVGBX/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot EVGBX: http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Fund/EVGBX?countrycode=US
EVGBX Is Ranked #141 In The (WS) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/world-stock/evermore-global-value-fund/evgbx
Ticker Discussion: ING, VOYA, NNGPF, FCC, VIVHY; during "Hold It or Fold It:" CHEUY, CRESY, SAN, FMX, DD
EVGBX Fact Sheet: http://www.evermoreglobal.com/pdfs/GlobalValueFund_FS.pdf

i tried JOMIX at Fidelity and got told I needed a min of 25k to invest. at the moment, i only have 15k. if someone wants to lend me 10k, ha ha, i'll see if the order goes through, ha ha. i tried JOMMX and was told it wasn't available

Argent Capital Management News & Commentaries
/Favorable Odds
Weekly Investor February-17-2015/
Danaher Corp. (DHR), headquartered in Washington, D.C., is a designer, manufacturer and marketer of medical, industrial, professional and consumer products. DHR was founded in 1969 and was previously known as DMG, Inc., but later took the Danaher name in 1984. The company produces a broad range of products including electronic calibration equipment, retail/commercial petroleum products such as underground storage tank leak detection systems, high-precision optical systems for the analysis of microstructures and aerospace defense articles, among others. DHR’s primary product lines are sold in North America, Europe and Asia.
DHR has a long history of delivering consistent earnings growth through continual development of its own businesses and by acquiring businesses that are fast growing and have high returns. Over the years, the company’s management team has demonstrated skill and discipline in selecting and integrating its many purchases. A more recent purchase included an expansion in the water treatment industry. This industry has strong growth potential and now DHR is a key beneficiary of this trend. Economic uncertainties have depressed DHR’s multiples, and as a result we have been presented with this buying opportunity. In the long-term, we expect DHR to outperform its peers and the market.
http://argentcapital.com/weeklyinvestor/weekly-investor-february-17-2015/
Recent: This newsletter presents selected recommendations from portfolio managers of Argent Capital Management LLC
Electronic Arts, Inc. 5.7%
Google, Inc. 5.0%
Skyworks Solutions 4.4%
Teva Pharmaceutical 4.3%
CBS Corporation 3.9%
Broadcom Corporation 3.9%
Danaher Corp. 3.8%
ON Semiconductors 3.7%
Post Holdings, Inc. 3.6%
Lincoln National 3.6%
Opinions reflect the portfolio manager’s judgment on the date above and are subject to change. A list of stocks recommended by Argent is available upon request. You should not assume that these recommendations are or will be profitable. In the course of it’s business, Argent’s client accounts may be buying and selling these stocks.
http://argentcapital.com/weeklyinvestor/weekly-investor-may-18-2015/

"Over forty years, though, those ups and downs will be smoothed to some sort of a long-term performance."
Since we are talking about retirement, forty years should be taken as the upper limit of possible scenarios if one starts at age 60. Perhaps this is the issue as time is constrained. What is the least amount of time a spreadsheet or analysis can be trusted over? Or, maybe it is a period of market cycles?
May you and everyone here live to be 100 years old.
BTW, Warriors take the first game. I hope they go all the way. It's been a long time.

This is the message I received with the test trade of JOMIX in my Fidelity retirement account:
"Error: (000967) The mutual fund you entered is not authorized to be traded in your state. Please review your order or call a Fidelity representative a 1-800-544-6666."
JOMMX is the target (prospectus net ER 1.54%) as it is slightly less expensive than JOMIX (net ER of 1.64%).
Kevin

Hi Dex, Hi Old Joe.
I’ll try to be succinct and reply to both your recent posts.
Dex, sorry I missed your post requesting my input data to the Monte Carlo analysis I did. Regardless, I actually answered your question in my original submittal of the Monte Carlo results that I reported.
For your convenience, I’ll repeat them here. I did 12 simulations in about 5 minutes with a $13K drawdown schedule. I did 6 cases for a 185K initial portfolio value. My baseline was a 7% average annual return with parametric standard deviations of 10%, 14%, and 18%. I repeated the same standard deviations for a 6% annual portfolio return rate. Portfolio survival rates were atrocious.
So I repeated the same return/standard deviation 6 sequence series using a composite portfolio that included all your reserves. For that series, the initial portfolio value was $350K. with the same withdrawal rate. Survival rates improved remarkably, but still never made a high of 80%. That’s a much better outcome, but still represents a not too attractive survival prospect.
I did the analysis using the Monte Carlo tool on the Portfolio Vizualizer.com website. There are better simulators accessible on the web, so don’t interpret my usage as an endorsement. It was available and easy to input.
Old Joe, sorry for the delay. Your response still misses the main thrust of my question. Allow me to rephrase the question.
As you worked down your Spreadsheet on a line-by-line (equivalent to a year-by-year set of entries) basis, annual returns for your various investments were required. What inputs did you make? Did they go up and down each year to reflect the schizophrenic nature of market annual returns?
Your response implies that you used some sort of compounding formula. Specifically, you said: “It started with the amount then available in the cash/bond/equity baskets, and merely projected forward on a compounding basis, year by year, for forty years.”
Your reply suggests that a simple compound return rate was postulated. If so, what was the assumed rate? Was it changed during the 40 year projection period? If so, how were the rate change decisions made? How were the annual investment return variabilities handled?
These are all complex issues because of return’s variability. That’s the specific area whereby Monte Carlo analysis struts its stuff. Random selections are automatically made within the guts of the code that are unbiased and reflect whatever statistics the user wants to explore.
If my question is still too vague, please advise me so and I’ll try again. The guesstimated annual portfolio return on a yearly basis is the crux of the problem. Without multiple Monte Carlo simulations as a tool to model the annual reward variability, portfolio survival prospects are likely to be overstated. A compound rate approach does not capture the wild vicissitudes of market returns.
Thank you for this exchange, but you have not answered my question. Perhaps other MFO members could reframe my question to make it clearer to you.
Best Wishes to both you guys.

Mike, great find !
Mr. Brewer managed the fund from 12/31/1997-4/29/2008, and during this period, DREGX crushed the EM equity category, and outperformed the top funds in the space as shown HERE.
I just test traded JOMMX and JOMIX in my retirement accounts, and these classes are not available for my purchase at Fidelity, TDAmeritrade, Scottrade and Firstrade. And at Wellstrade, I get the all to familiar "The security entered cannot currently be traded online." Please let me know where you can buy these share classes.
Kevin

@icyone Regarding long term care, I seem to remember that a while back msf (I think) said that LTC is part of the Obamacare legislation. It's just that it has not yet been implemented. If I don't have it right, please let me know.

It was originally suspended (as you wrote). It was repealed in 2013. Here's a pretty good one page summary of what it was, costs, benefits, and history:
http://www.rollcall.com/news/long_term_care_provisions_would_be_repealed_in_fiscal_cliff_bill-220447-1.html
Edit: And a fine, much more extensive briefing from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, prior to its repeal, including the budget challenges and possible responses.
http://healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief_pdfs/healthpolicybrief_46.pdf

I've very much enjoyed this thread and the previous thread on social security. Being 61 years old myself and contemplating retirement, I think about all these comments daily.

You post is an example of why I do not think early retirement or even a comfortable retirement is possible for many - the younger the less likely.
Not enough savings, no pension, SS pushed out, investing properly (whatever saving they have).
Then add into the equation that eventually we will have something like a VAT, increasing expenses over the years.

The Barron's article on ECL in February was very positive and there was a nice entry point at that time. Good choice. I'll check out DHR.

Thanks.
Ecolab works for me for a play on water (they said in the last CC that they were seeing benefit from helping customers with the drought situation in California), but I think the core sanitation/hygiene business is highly appealing as I tend to look for businesses that provide/serve a need. It is a dividend aristocrat.
As for Danaher, I think this article provides a very detailed history and background:
http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2007-02-18/a-dynamo-called-danaher
Also interesting:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/b/e0c5cdaa-c493-4d8e-818f-8d9f7701cc8c

I've very much enjoyed this thread and the previous thread on social security. Being 61 years old myself and contemplating retirement, I think about all these comments daily.
I once thought early retirement sounded so wonderful and that it seemed by simple compounding on a spreadsheet that it was "easily" doable. 55 was my goal. All the numbers seemed to work. Hell, my portfolio in the 90's, having no idea what I was doing investment wise, was making 10-15% a year. My wife and I would have a million dollars by age 56. Then came the great recession. A wake up call.
I'll offer my thoughts to what I think I've learned while contemplating retirement. This is just my experience - my 2cents FWIW:
- Pay special attention to life expectancy charts. Yes, you likely will live longer then you ever imagined. What do you think those biotech stocks many here invest in are working on - making you live forever, so to speak. LTC and HC will cost even more then today.
- Early retirement in foresight was a pipe dream of the baby boomers. It was based on "things are different now - we are a special generation" - "this isn't your fathers Oldsmobile". Guess what? If it wasn't good for your father or grandfather, it probably isn't good for you. The government made 65 retirement age for a reason - statistically.
- I did much of my spreadsheet work using 8% as a return on retirement investments. Why not. It was the average return of a balanced portfolio. Another pipe dream. Any calculation you make going forward, use a realistic returns number. I would suggest 6% would be on the aggressive side. More realistic, use 5-5.5% in your calculations. Hey, BobC who I highly respect has said the same in many of his posts.
- Monte Carlo software programs are absolutely a great tool to show you where you stand. Are they the beat all-end all? No, of course not. There are way too many variables in life. But I believe in probability. Yes, history repeats itself, especially in arithmetic. Throw real (conservative) numbers into these programs. If the truth hurts - pay attention - it's your future. It's math, not voodoo. The results are a guide. Not the absolute.
- And lastly, I believe fixed annuities have a place for many retirees, very much so. If only in having the piece of mind that you will be able to pay your bills in any economy, it could be worth a look. Blasphemy on this board? Maybe, but I believe a pension, either purchased or through work is very important.
Good luck to all in this journey.

I have gone with ECL (Ecolab) and Danaher (DHR), both of which are diversified companies that have some exposure to water. Bill Gates owns over 10% of the former and the latter is breaking up (likely next year.)
I have considered water rights plays, but unfortunately there's really not a pure play in that regard. Nestle does have water rights, infamously. Limonera (LMNR) and JG Boswell (BWEL) also sit on water rights.

Water plays seem to me the ultimate story stocks. It's an easy story to understand given our droughts, warming climate, and probable competition for a valuable resource; however, the 4 ETFs (PHO +51%; CGW +73%; PIO +52%; and FIW (65%) investing in the water theme have all underperformed SPY (+91%) over the last five years. Granted, several of the holdings of the funds are foreign stocks which have underperformed as a group during that time period. I lost money on Flexible Solutions (FSI), maybe the ultimate sucker's story stock: the company has a product that sits on the surface of reservoirs or swimming pools and retards evaporation. Good stories don't always translate into good returns. Maybe water stocks will have their day in the sun, if the metaphor doesn't pain you.

@Dex, Agree on that. Each person develops their own answer. There is not one set figure or style for everyone.

I have a pension that covers 45% of my budget. Then my interest income could cover 100% of my budget.

Hi Old Joe,,
Your reply still does not explain how you made your inputs. I'm still puzzled. I'm not as smart as you claim I think I am.
Please give us a sample input for a couple of years. For example, what would be your estimated equity input for 2016, for 2017, and for 2018? How were they specifically determined on a year-by-year basis?
My replies to your insidious and continuing charges are purely defensive. I merely react; I never initiate. That's a major distinction between our actions.
Best Wishes.

@Dex, The number that jumped out at me was the 4 years of cash for expenses. Isn't the general consensus calling for 18 months to 2 years? 4 years seems high to me and could be a drag on your portfolio.

That depends upon your comfort level - 4 would cover many downturns. Also, not 'cash' near cash - short term investments - you could ladder treasury bonds.

@Dex, The number that jumped out at me was the 4 years of cash for expenses. Isn't the general consensus calling for 18 months to 2 years? 4 years seems high to me and could be a drag on your portfolio.

That depends upon your comfort level - 4 would cover many downturns.

@Dex, The number that jumped out at me was the 4 years of cash for expenses. Isn't the general consensus calling for 18 months to 2 years? 4 years seems high to me and could be a drag on your portfolio.
In general, these types of questions are hard to answer due to all the variables and the unknown future expenses. While some here discredit the Monte Carlo calculators, I find them worthwhile as a confirmation tool. In these important decision making processes, it is better to use all the tools available.