NoFeeBoards.com!

No Fees! No Ads! No Spam!

Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index

Good work by jwr1945

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index » FIRE Board
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ataloss
**** Heavy Hitter


Joined: 25 Nov 2002
Posts: 559

PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:36 am    Post subject: Good work by jwr1945 Reply with quote

I was a little concerned by this statement:
Quote:
I strongly recommend using the years after 1920 for projecting safe withdrawal rates. We live in an era with the Federal Reserve and without a gold standard. That is sufficient to favor the later time period.


http://nofeeboards.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=8929#8929

but I see that in more recent posts jwr1945 has been using the full data set from 1871. Excluding data that isn't "well behaved" seems undesirable to me so I am glad to see this development.



_________________
Have fun.

Ataloss
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
*** Veteran


Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 363
Location: anytown, usa

PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm still trobled by his use of phrases like "we know" "we've proven" wrt safe withdrawal rates and the mean, standard deviation, etc. of the 'true' SWR at any given point in time. Is he still using those phrases? 3 or 4 non-overlapping data points don't constitute much 'proof' in a data-mining exercise like this, IMO.



_________________
regards,

wanderer

The field has eyes / the wood has ears / I will see / be silent and hear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peteyperson
**** Heavy Hitter


Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 525

PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to agree with you, wanderer. I too have been troubled with this. Financial writers tend to put forward their own ideas and conclusions based on their research but rarely do they state categorically. It is usually up to the reader to determine their beliefs and investment approach based on what they have read and accepted as fact, rather than what has been proclaimed by the writer as such. It's not a science with many right or wrong answers, once you're in the right ballpark opinions vary dramatically. (I think JWR gets egged on by hocus and gets over excited as they run energetically down a blind alley leading nowhere).

As a fixed swr analysis seems fundamentally flawed. Everyone has a different asset mix and behaviour during downturns that a standard consistent approach. Psychology, fear of further losses, acting in favor of short-term losses vs long-term greater returns by holding on etc affect portfolio management during FIRE. A fixed approach & w.d. rate for all seems to be trying to bang a nail into the wrong hole. To stretch the analogy out further, I'm not even sure there is a correct hole.

I recently posted a thread discussing portfolios structured from the position of protection and funding living standards during a downmarket vs. aggressively into equities & growth ignoring the risks of a long drawn out downmarket, but sadly no one joined in.

http://nofeeboards.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1588

Petey
wanderer wrote:
I'm still troubled by his use of phrases like "we know" "we've proven" wrt safe withdrawal rates and the mean, standard deviation, etc. of the 'true' SWR at any given point in time. Is he still using those phrases? 3 or 4 non-overlapping data points don't constitute much 'proof' in a data-mining exercise like this, IMO.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
*** Veteran


Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 363
Location: anytown, usa

PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think JWR gets egged on by hocus

I agree. I'm sticking with the retired math prof.



_________________
regards,

wanderer

The field has eyes / the wood has ears / I will see / be silent and hear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ataloss
**** Heavy Hitter


Joined: 25 Nov 2002
Posts: 559

PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So you are saying that jwr has developed an approach based on past data that would have worked had we known about it?

I notice that jwr is careful not to call this a swr (since it is based on past data and might not be a "swr as swr is defined for the purposes of swr analysis")

still I am happy that he isn't excluding the data that didn't fit so well



_________________
Have fun.

Ataloss
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wanderer
*** Veteran


Joined: 26 Nov 2002
Posts: 363
Location: anytown, usa

PostPosted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's real hard to conduct an out of sample test when each data point requires 30 years of data. It may not be as difficult after the year 3200 AD/CE.



_________________
regards,

wanderer

The field has eyes / the wood has ears / I will see / be silent and hear
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
raddr
*** Veteran


Joined: 25 Nov 2002
Posts: 265

PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 4:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wanderer wrote:
It's real hard to conduct an out of sample test when each data point requires 30 years of data. It may not be as difficult after the year 3200 AD/CE.


Exactly. That's why some sort of simulation technique seems almost mandatory to fine tune the process and serve as a reality check. 130 years of data (the first 50-60 of which are of questionable quality) from an "index" which was not even in existence till the late 50's is pitifully little to work with. Very few people seem to grasp this concept, at least at the REHP. We're a bit more enlightened over here. Wink


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NoFeeBoards.com! Forum Index » FIRE Board All times are GMT - 9 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
Designed for Trushkin.net | Styles Database