In my example, €50k was drawn down in year 1 and the same amount (not a % of the portfolio balance at that time), adjusted for inflation, was drawn down in each subsequent year.
Obviously with a fixed percentage (such as 5%) of a variable amount, drawdowns would be, well, variable! And would never completely exhaust the portfolio.
In my example, €50k was drawn down in year 1 and the same amount (not a % of the portfolio balance at that time), adjusted for inflation, was drawn down in each subsequent year.
Obviously with a fixed percentage (such as 5%) of a variable amount, drawdowns would be, well, variable! And would never completely exhaust the portfolio.
The answer depends on your financial position.
If you have exactly enough money to last your retirement (no more, no less) then you can make an argument that you can't afford to risk any losses and moving the majority of your money to cash is the safe bet.
If you have significantly less than you need, then you need to max your contributions and take as much risk as you can bear on the equity side.
If you have significantly more than you need then it makes sense to take a balanced approach with 25 to 50% in cash the rest in equities.
If you have exactly enough money to last your retirement (no more, no less) then you can make an argument that you can't afford to risk any losses and moving the majority of your money to cash is the safe bet.
Of course you can. It's just not guaranteed. If you don't have enough money for retirement, your guaranteed to not have enough money for retirement. You may however, end up with enough by loading up on equities, if things go well. But it is a gamble.
Probably what most people end up doing but I would argue a better way is to extend your time to retirement. This also gives you more time for your gamble to work out.