Step 1: Enter the assumptions that best match your situation rather than aiming for false precision.

Step 2: Review the output as a planning scenario, not a guaranteed future outcome.

Step 3: Change one or two variables at a time so you can see which assumptions drive the result.

The model starts with a first-year withdrawal amount or rate, then raises spending over time to reflect inflation rather than keeping withdrawals artificially flat.

It compares that drawdown path against a steady return assumption and tracks whether the corpus survives the planned horizon.

Many visitors use it to compare a comfortable spending target against a more conservative fallback number.

Retirees or near-retirees thinking about income sustainability, not just corpus size.

FIRE planners who want a second view after estimating a target corpus.

People stress-testing how much inflation or spending flexibility matters to their plan.

This page is for educational and informational use only and should not be treated as personal financial advice.

Outputs depend heavily on your assumptions. Small changes to return, inflation, cost, tax, or time-horizon inputs can change the result materially.

A constant-return model smooths reality. Actual market sequences can be harsher, especially early in retirement.

Medical costs, one-time big expenses, and tax impacts can make a plan less stable than a clean model suggests.

A high first-year withdrawal may look manageable on paper but still leave little margin for bad sequences.