davis.money

Monte Carlo Simulator

Inputs

$
$
$

In today's dollars. Withdrawn every year of retirement.

Portfolio
%
%
%

Rebalanced yearly. 33/67 is the all-stock split Cederburg's research found best.

More options
$/yr

In today's dollars. Reduces what you withdraw once it starts.

yrs
yrs

How many consecutive years of history each draw keeps together. 10 matches the research.

Results

Chance your money lasts to 95

90%

From 5,000 simulated lifetimes built from 16 countries' market history, 1871–2020.

Median at 60
$2,304,542
Median at 95
$9,663,811
Bad case (10th percentile)
Runs out at 94

Portfolio by age, in today's dollars

Middle 80% of outcomesMiddle 50%Median

How this simulation works

Instead of assuming a steady return, this calculator replays your plan through 5,000 market histories stitched together from real history in 16 developed countries since 1871. Before retirement, your savings are added each year. After it, your spending (less any Social Security or pension) is withdrawn at the start of each year. A plan succeeds if the money lasts through the age you plan for. Every return is after inflation, so all amounts are in today's dollars.

The research behind it

The method comes from Aizhan Anarkulova, Scott Cederburg, and Michael O'Doherty's “Beyond the Status Quo: A Critical Assessment of Lifecycle Investment Advice” and their earlier “Stocks for the Long Run? Evidence from a Broad Sample of Developed Markets” (Journal of Financial Economics, 2022). Cederburg discussed the work on the Rational Reminder podcast, episodes 284 and 350.

Like their study, this calculator uses a stationary block bootstrap:

Drawing from many countries, not just the US, is the point. The US had one of the best stock markets of the last century, and nothing guarantees a repeat. A US saver's future could look more like Japan after 1990 or Europe through the World Wars. Their research found that a globally diversified all-stock portfolio, about one-third home stocks and two-thirds international, beat the usual stock-and-bond mixes, which is why it's the default here.

How our data differs from theirs

The method is the same, but the data isn't. Their study uses a large commercial database that isn't publicly available. This calculator uses the free Jordà-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database instead, which has some gaps that mostly make results look better than they would with their data:

Their model also goes further, with uncertain income, uncertain lifespans, and Social Security calculated from earnings. Here, spending is a fixed amount each year and the plan runs to a set age. Taxes and fees aren't modeled. Treat the result as a reasonable, somewhat optimistic estimate, not a guarantee.

Data and license

Returns come from the Jordà-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database (release R6): Òscar Jordà, Katharina Knoll, Dmitry Kuvshinov, Moritz Schularick, and Alan M. Taylor, “The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 134(3), 2019; and Òscar Jordà, Moritz Schularick, and Alan M. Taylor, “Macrofinancial History and the New Business Cycle Facts,” NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2016, volume 31. The data are used under the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license, and davis.money's derived returns are shared under the same terms.