The 4% “Rule” is Wrong for FIRE—Here’s a Better Alternative
01:11:18 Share

We are so excited to be joined by Tyler Gardner again for a follow-up episode. In our last episode, we talked about the psychology of what drives people to retire early and if our current societal work systems are broken. And today we're diving back in with Tyler, a former financial advisor who loves to push back on the sacred tenets of financial independence. 4% rule, not one size fits all. Early retirement, not so fast.

portfolio management, there's a lot more nuance than most FIRE adherents want to admit. We'll get into all of this today. This is a conversation you will not want to miss.

Hello, hello, hello, and welcome to the BiggerPockets Money Podcast. My name is Mindy Jensen, and with me as always is my Swifty co-host, Scott Trench. Thanks, Mindy. Great to be here. We always talk about our song, which is financial freedom here on BiggerPockets. BiggerPockets has a goal of creating one million millionaires. You're in the right place if you want to get your financial house in order, because we truly believe financial freedom is attainable for everyone, no matter when or where you're starting, as long as you plunge headfirst, fearless.

All right. Today we've got Tyler back for part two. Last time we went at it a little bit about some of the fundamental assumptions that we've got around fire. And I think that there's a lot more. I think that both of us

agree or all three of us agree in a long-term kind of rational optimist's world that the things will generally tend to get better. But I was bringing a lot of questions and concerns around, can you really get another job if you're like a high-income earning doctor, for example, that pays anything close to what you're going to be earning today in early retirement? How do we think about those things? And I think it was a great discussion, but I want to translate that today and

And Tyler had some really good pushback on those and some really good thoughts there. But today I want to frame that into how does Tyler's worldview and the beliefs that you bring to FIRE translate to portfolio planning in the context of the real world and early retirement decisions here in 2025?

And I think that the first part of that, Tyler, comes in with asking you, tell us about your viewpoint on the 4% rule and whether it applies in real world financial planning. Sure. First off, it's great to be back. Great to continue the conversation. I appreciate being welcome back.

And when I think about the 4% rule and when we used to think about it with clients, I think that the number one thing we always tried to make clear as early as possible is that there is, I believe, an inherent problem with the word rule just to begin with. That people come to expect that on an annual basis, they should be taking 4% no matter what.

And to an extent, this a kind of ignores the dynamism of humans to begin with, that every single year, you're going to be in a different financial scenario, you're going to have different wants and needs. But additionally, it ignores what the market did this year. And so I think that it's worth and I think we highlighted this and touched on this a little bit last, you know, last time we chatted. But

But it's worth always knowing the origins of the 4% rule, understanding that it came from an attempt by three professors in Texas to basically come up with as formulaic of an outcome as possible for people who would retire. The issue that I feel a lot of people are not looking as closely at now as they should be is income.

it doesn't have to be a rule. It can be incredibly and wonderfully dynamic. If the market crushes it one year, you can take out 10% for all I care. And if the market does not do well, next year might not be a great year to take out even the 4%. So most of the texts that I've seen that have responded really nicely to this encourage us to really think through the dynamic nature of humans and understanding too, that to put any rule in place when we retire is in and of itself potentially problematic.

Awesome. So I think the obvious follow-up question to that is, if there's not—rules is the wrong word—but are there guidelines that you would have for, like, responses? What do you think the logical responses that folks should have who have retired on a 4% rule or close to it in the first few years after early retirement that—

Yeah, absolutely. And I love I love the word guideline that and that honestly, I would welcome the opportunity to have everyone shifted to the 4% guideline. And I think that's a great point.

Because again, the study basically showed that 100% of the time people would be fine over a bunch of different 30-year time horizons if they only withdrew 4%. But I think as we touched on last time too, what ended up happening if you only withdrew 4% was that the median net worth, the median portfolio value at the end of those 30 years, if you were 100% invested in stocks, was 10 million dollars.

And if you were 75 stocks, 25 bonds, it ended up being about $6 million. So as a guideline, I think it is safe to go into retirement with the 4% number in mind, because one of the biggest fears that I have and that most people have, obviously, is running out of money.

No one wants to run out of money. And if you go into retirement with, let's just say, $2 million, and the first year you get particularly greedy and say, and greedy might even be the wrong word, you get particularly excited, and you want to go do a bunch of things in retirement that you've never done, and you take out 9%, and then that year and the year following, we have two big market downturn years. That's called sequence of returns risk.

And it is highly problematic in life if you retire, if you all of a sudden don't have a source of income and the market also happens to take a couple down years in a row. So the guidelines nice to have is let's start conservative and then let's see where we go as we progress throughout retirement, as the markets progress throughout our time doing that. Yeah, I was speaking with Emma Von Weise on the,

Life After Fire video series that we have on our YouTube channel. And she is a CFP. She recommends having two years of cash spent

cash when you retire, starting like if you're within a couple of years of retirement to start saving up cash so that you have two years of spending in cash in maybe a high yield savings account, but it's not in the market. It is liquid cash that you can access at any time, specifically to kind of combat these sequence of returns risks. These down years don't tend to last

And then, of course, if you pull back, you see the Great Depression didn't come back up for until like the 50s. So they can last a while. But her argument is that in recent history, they don't tend to stay down for a super long time. You withdraw from the cash when you need it.

when the markets are down, and then you replenish when the markets are going back up again. She got it. Yep. Yeah, she's awesome. Her wisdom belies her years. Emma's point is spot on. And one of the things that that also allows anyone to do is that by having two years, and you could call it an emergency fund, you could call it cash reserves, but by having those two years, you can also basically give yourself a much more

freedom in investing the rest. So if you have that two year cushion, you can almost be 75 to 100% growth assets and not be as concerned that all of a sudden if the market tanks, you're going to be out of luck.

So it really is nice to have that two-year cushion. That's a great timeline. Is two years enough? I know that we are currently in some market instability right now, and people are saying, oh, this time it's different, this time it's different, which is every time. Every time it's different. But it's also not different because the market, I believe, and we're in the middle of it right now, so I haven't seen it yet, but I believe the market will go back up. Does two years feel like enough to you, or would you...

in your own personal planning, would you go a little bit more? I think this is one of the things that unfortunately it's where the rich get richer. And this is the privilege of wealth.

If you have, let's just say, more than about $3 million, even sequence of returns risk doesn't actually make as big of a difference as people might expect. If you have under $2 million, it's a really big deal, right? So I crunched numbers a while back where, again, I kind of ran my own numbers of starting in 2000, the worst time you ever could have started to retire and draw down 4% or 5%.

And if you start that with a $1 million portfolio, pardon my language, but you end up being basically screwed. Because just remember, again, as we're drawing down, if you have a couple bad market years, you're not taking 4% of a million anymore. You're taking 4% of 500,000. So your spending power gets reduced very, very quickly. For me, two years is plenty if you are relatively well off.

And obviously, I think that's kind of a subjective term. Everybody has their own definition of what is okay to be spending on an annual basis. I'm also very highly risk tolerant. So I get criticized on one end because I'm not fearful enough.

I have an immense faith, as Scott was saying earlier, I'm an optimist with all of this. I don't believe this time is different. I don't believe this is going to be the 10 year period where all of us have no more concept of growth assets anywhere.

So I think a two year safety margin tends to be enough. But any, you know, kind of like you're pointing at, Mindy, it just depends on your risk tolerance, because what is enough for me is not necessarily enough for you is not necessarily enough for Scott. So I think it's what lets you literally I know it's a cliche, but it's what lets you sleep at night saying, I'll be okay.

you know, in any one of my most worst case imagined scenarios.

You ever feel like your IRA is just coasting? It's 2025 and those safe stocks might not be cutting it anymore. Inflation, market swings, and lack of control are real risks. It's time to diversify with something tangible. With a self-directed IRA, you can invest in things that actually make sense to you. Like real estate. Spread your risk and grow your retirement corpus with what you actually understand.

Plus, enjoy tax perks, no capital gains tax, and with a Roth IRA, tax-free withdrawals. You can even pass your wealth to family with little to no tax. If that all sounds good, check out TrustETC.com slash BP money. That's TrustETC.com slash BP money. It's your retirement.

Make it work for you. Landlords, here's a quick tip. A standardized checklist for property inspections can save you time, money, and headaches. Preventative maintenance means fewer expensive surprises later. Want to save even more? RentReady helps you stay on top of rent collection, lease management, and maintenance requests, all in one easy-to-use platform. And right now, you can get six months of RentReady for just $1 with promo code BP2025.

Visit rentready.com. That's R-E-N-T-R-E-D-I dot com and use code BP2025 to get started. What if I told you you could forget everything you know about investment property loans? Because Host Financial is rewriting the rulebook, tossing out those pesky DTI restrictions. They focus on your property's income potential. No tax returns or personal income statements needed. Simple,

efficient, and tailored for investors like you. Imagine a lender that sees the gold mine in your property, not just the numbers on your paycheck. That's the host financial difference. And they're approved in 47 different states. So your next big deal could be just around the corner. Ready to unlock your property's true potential? Visit hostfinancial.com. Don't let old school lending hold you back another day. That's hostfinancial.com.

Welcome back to the show with Tyler Gardner. I just spoke with a couple who have a much higher fire number than most people to specifically account for these unknowns like inflation, you know,

inflation is like the biggest unknown there, the down markets, et cetera. How do you balance not working too long with not working enough, not saving enough? I think that this couple is going to be working two or three times longer than they need to because their FIRE number is so high versus –

you know, getting out of the workforce thinking, oh, well, I have 750,000. It won't take that long to have it grow. I'm just going to leave anyway.

there's risks on both sides. How would you advise somebody to balance that? Oh, I never would even dare risk advise somebody because only because that it was one of the most wonderfully personal components of again, fear based thinking heading into retirement. I don't know if we did touch on this last time, but the

The majority of people with whom I connect these days are people that are close to or are just in retirement. And every single one of them is asking the same question. And this is not the FIRE community, mind you. These are people who have worked until 65, potentially 70, and are still stuck with the identical question you just posed, which is, do I work that one remaining year?

And it's so wonderful to work one more year only because it's a known, it's a known entity. And if we stop working, all of a sudden we're leaving something a little bit more to chance than controlling the own outcome of that year's income.

And so for so many people I know, we choose the work because it's the lesser of two evils. Actually, I'll kind of go to Shakespeare on this one. The reason Hamlet does not take his life is because the life, even though he's not happy in his current life, is known.

And the great unknown of death is what prevents him from wanting to off himself in the play. So there's actually a very similar psychological tendency here of saying, look, I'd rather put up with one more year of work because it's the lesser of two evils. It's the known evil. It's the evil within, however you want to phrase it, right? Whereas the second I stop,

What happens? What happens if I run out of money? What happens if I can't get a job five years from now because of ageism? What happens if we have five down years in a row? The what-ifs will almost always outweigh the, well, I'll just do this for one more year. And I know I'll be guilty. I think I've mentioned this before. I know I'll be guilty of that.

I know that I'm going to probably end up working until I'm 85 years old because I'm just going to go, well, you know, it's one more year of income and I can control it. It's one more year. But when does one more year stop? I have no idea. It doesn't. Yeah.

It does. I'm with you. I have no answer there. I think that that's part of our psychological underpinning is that we consistently go back to this idea of just wanting more just in case. And it's really hard. So there's almost an argument or a potential argument there for saying someone should just force you to retire, that you don't get the choice that at a certain point they say, sorry, you're out and we don't get that choice anymore.

I mean, at 40 or 42, where I am right now, no way. I mean, there's nothing but respect I have for the FIRE community who takes that leap of faith and is able to do it. That's an incredible gift that I do not have. Yeah, my husband's been retired for nine years. He retired when he was 43.

And almost as soon as he retired, he's like, I can't believe that I ever had enough time to have a job. I'm so busy in retirement doing all of these things. But he also, I mean, let's admit, I'm still working. So he's also got nine years of me working.

and covering our expenses. So we didn't need to save any more for retirement. We did because once you start, you can't stop. And now our original FI number is, well, with the recent downturn, I think we're now 5X our original FI number, but we were even more. And at what point

Do you stop one more year syndrome? I don't know, especially when it comes to the two things we haven't quite addressed yet, too, are also health care. Health care comes up with a lot of different people is that there is obviously this gap pre-Medicare, right, of trying to figure out how we fund that. And let's just go back to either the $40,000 or the $80,000 examples. You try funding health care for a family on $80,000 a year.

And additionally, that $80,000 is pre-tax. It's not $80,000. It's at best $60,000. So we're looking at $60,000, then less health care. Now we genuinely are probably looking at close to $40,000. Now the $80,000 person is back to around the $40,000 of disposable income that we actually started with. So $2 million to an extent is

is the number that I would propose to somebody thinking about FIRE if they wanted a genuine margin for error of taxes, of healthcare, of unknown, of putting aside some money in the money markets. That would be kind of my new one million if I were to think about proposing that to anybody, is that once you have kind of double, I hate to say it because I know that's daunting, but double what you think you'd need, then maybe. We did some very precise polling of the BiggerPocketsMoney YouTube audience.

with a four question poll that like four answers, one question poll. And according to them, two and a half million is the new million for exactly the reason you just described. That's the midpoint for what folks believe is necessary for fire inside of our community. Some folks think less, half the folks think more, but that's the midpoint. So I think that's the

what I think is in the minds of most folks, accounting for those things, right? Hey, there's, you know, three, four, 4,000, you know, a year for those kinds of core expenses with basic housing, basic, if one has a paid off home, for example, healthcare and those types of things, plus that extra quality of life spending. And I think that's what a lot of folks are targeting here. Let's go back to a question earlier

Around the portfolio here, I have spent the entire discussion so far assuming that we're talking about a 60, 40, 70, 30 stock bond portfolio. But we've talked nothing about allocation. So that's a complete assumption. What do you what do you advise or how would you build a two and a half million dollar portfolio if you agree with that as the.

the baseline here. I love it. I love it. There you go. We saw eye to eye with a two and a half million. And I'm glad to hear that a lot of the community thinks that's the new million, because even though I don't always love it when people say, oh, you know, why bother saving because of inflation and because of this? But I am glad that two and a half is kind of a new number, because I think that's going to be safer. As far as asset allocation goes,

The only question I ever ask people when we think through how to allocate for retirement, regardless of age, is what's your goal with the money? If you say, I have $2.5 million and my goal is to protect this $2.5 million at all costs and I'm okay living on 4% of that $2.5 million, the

The good news is that there are ample fixed income products, including just playing the asset class of government bonds, that can more often than not accomplish getting you a 4% real return. You could more likely than not do that even in a 100% fixed income portfolio.

Right. However, a lot of people I know kind of, again, back to Mindy's point about like, well, what's enough? You know, is this enough money for me? A lot of people might have the two and a half million, but still be thinking, well, I want to keep up with inflation. Right. Let's just say that on average, that's between two and three percent per year, just historically. And so I do need some growth assets.

So it becomes a, well, what is it that you want to accomplish with this portfolio? So again, if you're just two and a half million, you say, I'm fine with a 4%, you can actually do that relatively low risk as far as bonds and other fixed income products, even I dare say annuities, right? But the second you say, well, look, I'm a little more,

focused on growth, then I would encourage growth assets. And there are countless growth assets out there. For me, I keep it very simple. As I think I'll tell you, I keep it very simple and low cost with different types of index funds going forward. So for me, the ideal would be probably a 90-10, but that's just me because I would always err on the side of growth, particularly if I had a lengthy enough time horizon ahead of me.

because there's no 20-year period in history, I think we've touched on this, where stocks do not beat bonds.

over a rolling 20 years. Is there any price to earnings multiple in the stock portfolio or any yield on bonds high enough or low enough? I'm sorry, low enough or high enough, respectively. Is there any price to earnings multiple that's so preposterously expensive on stocks that that would change your viewpoint on that or any interest rate on bonds that would be so high

that it would change your viewpoint on the returns for stocks that would change that allocation. It's funny you bring that up because a couple of folks just last week were commenting to me. They saw a video of mine where I said I would never invest in bonds. And they said, if you had been alive in the 80s, my friend, you would have been happily invested in bonds. And they were quoting, you know, between 12 and 17 percent returns on bonds.

Scott, I would invest in bonds in a heartbeat if they were giving me 15%. I'd put my entire net worth in bonds if they were giving me 15% on a long enough time horizon, right? If I could lock in to 10 years and out with that type of return, fantastic.

but we can't right now, you know, and right. And we're not in a bad interest rate environment. We're actually still in a very healthy interest rate environment where on risk-free assets, you are getting between four and 5%. And that's fantastic. Maybe a little lower now, but that's fantastic. However, again, if you're looking to spend 4% post-tax, you can't afford to do that at the

very least, you're going to need something that will outpace it, whether it's real estate, whether it's alternative investments beyond real estate, whether it's stocks. You need something that's going to potentially generate between 6% and 10%. Awesome. Yeah. And I just want to call that out because I think that a lot of folks listening, based on polling I've done for the BiggerPockets money community as well, are in this mentality of, I want a portfolio that I just don't have to ever think about or touch again.

And I'm of the belief, I'm starting to come around that that's not ever, that vision will never be achieved in practice here. You know, because at some point, right, bond yields would get so high, you'd obviously change things over. And I think the inverse, at some point, stocks could get so expensive that

that would change things. And I think that's where folks kind of have to, there's a little bit of a brain has to flip on with the portfolio allocation piece a little bit more than I think people have liked to believe over the last 10 years in order to truly sustain retirement. Do you agree with that?

That statement. I love what you just said. I love it. Because keep in mind, too, we're in an era where not only would people like to set it and forget it, but people are now given the best options of all time to set it and forget it in the form of target date retirement funds. A target date retirement fund is the new end all be all for someone who just says, I believe that they will approve

Yeah.

And you need to have a dynamic mindset, understanding that, yes, there will be a time when you look up and the P.E. ratio of the entire S&P 500 is absurdly, absurdly overvalued. And you go, wait a minute. Historically, that's way beyond what it should be and what it has been.

And maybe this is not the best time for me to put my 2.5 million nest egg that I'm relying on for 30 years into that space, right? Especially if that's coordinated with a 5% to 7% bond return. That's fantastic. So I love it. And I agree wholeheartedly that I think the punchline here is always be watching, be looking at it. So then do you agree with the answer that that $2.5 million portfolio, move one is million dollar paid off quadplex? Yeah.

I

Objection leading the witness. I did not prep Tyler on that response, guys. That was all him. That was a wonderful Socratic approach of leading me to a question that if I say no, you go, sorry, I just led you there. And yes, absolutely. But Scott, I've been thinking about this since the last time we talked too, that I, again, like, and I think I left it by saying, if I had the desire to invest in real estate, if I had the time to do it,

Again, as a tax haven, as potential income, it's so obviously a good move and as obviously an alternative asset class that has a non or negatively correlated component with stocks and bonds. But I don't. I have no interest in going to find it, nor this is actually a bigger one that I wanted to bring up with you, nor do I have any concept of expertise in that area.

I know how to value a stock. I know how to look at a company and say, I think I understand what is over undervalued. I don't necessarily know how to value real estate. And so I don't know how I would go about finding a positive cash flowing source that would be a good idea for me. Makes complete sense on that. Tyler, you have said multiple times, alternative investments like real estate. So we have a chat going on this show and I...

typed in all caps, real estate is not an alternative asset class. I think that you can invest in stocks, you can invest in bonds, but those aren't the two only two main ones. I think real estate can absolutely be another main form of investments. I do like what you said. You don't have the inclination to do it. Great. Then don't do it. But are you of the

opinion that it's only stocks and bonds are the investments? Not even close. No way. But I also think that that might be attaching too much weight to what I'm using relatively lightly versus, you know, versus I see exactly where you're going, Mindy. And no part of me is saying real estate's kind of on the peripheral and should be treated as an alternative or an other, right? It is absolutely a major asset class. When I say alternatives to me,

One of the reasons I say alternatives is just that traditionally throughout, I mean, if you look back, and again, our finance history is actually very brief. We don't have that much finance literature in the US. But if you look back over the last 40 or 50 years of traditional portfolio theory, even modern portfolio theory and all this, this was literally kind of invented in the 1950s. We have about 75 years of thinking about modern portfolio theory and asset classes of investing.

And since and from that time, almost all literature that does and including the Trinity study, including the famous Trinity study, it's just stocks and bonds. It literally is just stocks and bonds. So one of the things I try to do with people is help them explore the idea of what are other things that you can invest in and why would you invest in those things? So when I call real estate an alternative investment,

I just look at it as something that is slightly different than the traditional forms of investing that I could go to a brokerage account today on my computer and invest in. That said, even just in the last decade now, we can invest in real estate investment trusts. It's become so democratized to invest passively in real estate that it has become a major form of investing. And now alts, to an extent, are more defined as private credit trusts.

private debt, artwork, right? Commodities. Those are kind of now considered the alternative investments in a formal sense. So yeah, so no part of me is trying to put real estate into a bucket that it doesn't belong in. Here's a fun one. And this is something that wasn't possible a couple of years ago. Go to chat GPT.

or Grok or whatever your favorite AI is, and ask them to do an analysis on portfolio outcomes if you reallocate from stocks and bonds or whatever at various high price points when things are particularly expensive. And some of those asset classes are particularly low yield to an 8% inflation-adjusted

bond, which I'm using as a proxy for real estate, right? Because you throw a dart at the wall in a lot of markets, you can get a four or five cap rental property that'll appreciate a 3.4% a year paid off, right? If you just don't use any leverage at all. And that's roughly what that will be. It won't be perfectly smooth. There'll be ups and downs in that cashflow and appreciation over years, just like any other asset class. But that's a reasonable proxy, I think, for

that. And that's fun to play around with the analysis. You got to double check it and be really careful with it when you're feeding that. But that's a fun little use case for AI. That would have taken me months to really run those kinds of analyses previously. And AI can do that. Not 100% trustworthily, but usefully enough in quick bursts with the right prompt. Yeah, I was going to say, how do you know that those are the right numbers? That's where you got to do. You got to follow up with the research there. But it begins to provide really nice starting points for that research there.

It is such a good resource these days. I don't ever use it for coming up with the exact right number, Mindy, ever. If I'm doing a video and I need to come up with something, obviously I crunch my own numbers there. But as a guide, it has become really helpful with questions like this audience might have. Tell me five benefits of investing in real estate over investing in stocks.

Tell me what the last decade has looked like as far as correlation between government bonds and real estate properties in California. It can find some of this so quickly that even just in a broad sense, it can give you a really nice starting point of what would work for you. Additionally, you can obviously put in all of who you are. You can just, you know, if you have the right prompts and

you can then say, hey, here's who I am. I don't want to go buy this property. I don't want to. I'm not an expert in this. And it will really help you with that. Hey, Grok, what happens when Bitcoin falls below the cost of the cheapest 1% electricity to mine it?

So can Bitcoin sustain a price drop when its price falls below the price required for electricity at two cents a kilowatt hour to mine a Bitcoin? That's a fun one to go in there. And that'll scare some people.

This has been fun here. Let's go back for a second here to something you said earlier with target date retirement funds. Those are pretty bad words in the financial independence or retire early communities here. Not bad words, but they're kind of like poo-pooed is not the optimal approach there. Why do you like this? Do you really like the target date retirement funds? Do you think people should reset their mentality around retirement?

the use of these tools? I will answer that question once you expand on why the FIRE community doesn't like that concept. I'm interested in that. I really don't know why and what. So tell me a little bit more about that. I would say that it's just not brought up. It's not widely used. I've talked to dozens of people, not dozens, I've talked to a thousand people at this point, 600 of which have been on this show about

It's almost never mentioned. It's almost always viewed as a personalized choice between stock and bond portfolios. And overwhelmingly, folks simply seem to put most of their net worth into total market stock index funds. And here on BiggerPocketsMoney, a little bit of real estate allocations on it. So it's just not widely used. Maybe I'm phrasing it improperly as the bad words. Oh, no. No, I'm just interested. Yeah. Yeah. So what...

what number, what is my target retirement date? Is it in five years? Then that's going to put me into a very different allocation than even though I'm 30 and I want to retire at 35 versus I am 30 and I'm going to retire at 65. So I'm going to have a lot more growth opportunities in that larger area.

But it's I'm sorry, in the 35 year time frame, they're going to put me into more growth stocks. If I've got a five year time frame left, they're going to put me into far less growth stocks. It's going to be more wealth preservation. So in our community, we are focused on fast tracking our retirement. That means that we need to be in growth stocks, aggressive growth stocks that we hopefully are understanding that we are trading more of a secure position.

balance for the growth so we can retire early. So I don't know that I know how to use a target date retirement fund. I never have. But what date do you put in? Yeah, let's go through them. I love this. This is a great conversation because going back to where we said, okay, is $2.5 million the new million? And is that enough? Let's just say it is. $2.5 million is enough and someone has established that's enough.

and someone is five years out from retirement, and let's just say they have around $2.1 or $2.2 million. In a situation like that, that is what the target date retirement fund is designed to do very, very well, which is make it more conservative and make it more principal protection as you get closer to a date that you have decided you're going to start drawing out money, let's just say 4% as a guideline.

Because of that, it is a very good idea. I would think that a lot of FIRE community members would want that because if you say, I want $2.5 million in five years is when I want to start drawing, I'm five years away, and I'm going to go 100% into stocks or total stock index, etc.,

I mean, that's me. I love it. By the way, I love the risk. That's who I am as a person. But it is absurdly risky because now you're jeopardizing that five year time frame big time. You have just said, OK, great. You might wind up with three million.

by the time you retire in five years, you also might wind up with 1.8. And if you had a number in mind that could sustain you and your family and your expenses, then the target date retirement fund is actually very well designed to do what we emotionally can't always do, which is actually to make you more conservative. But again,

Now I kind of want to play the other side, which is what I don't like about the target date retirement funds is that they are a one-size-fits-all based on age. And I think that is one of the silliest ways that you could ever invest or think about investing in your life. I am not the same 42-year-old as my 42-year-old neighbor with three kids,

college debt looming over them and a 40 year time horizon ahead of them. Right. So the target date retirement funds specifically is says every single 40 year old is going to be the same risk profile. That to me is highly problematic.

So do I like them? I like them just as much as I like any single financial product in as far as it can be very useful for the right person at the right time for the right goal. But do I like them for my personal scenario? No, I wouldn't use a target date retirement fund. Yeah, I have never used it. I wasn't quite sure how to set it up in the first place. But also, I am just like you. I am very...

very pro-risk and I want my portfolio to grow as big as it can. So I'm going to make choices that somebody who is risk averse would definitely not make. Yep. A hundred percent. And one of the hacks that, that might seem obvious, but it is something that helps a lot of people is let's say that you have that exact mindset, Mindy, but you still don't want to self invest. You still aren't actually comfortable each year saying, well, like, is it 90, 10? Is it 85, 15? Yeah.

that's where you could say, I want to retire in five years, but instead of doing the target date retirement fund that's five years from now, I'm just going to put my money in the target date retirement fund that's set for 20 years from now. Because then all you're doing is just taking on a little more risk within that. But as you begin to go into your retirement years, it will continue to take a little risk off, a little risk off, a little risk off.

And that can be helpful during times of volatility. That can be really helpful. I promise a target date retirement fund did much better over the last month than 100% stock fund. We know that, you know, it just it hedged a little bit, it mitigated the volatility a little bit. And so anyone who was a 6040 over the last month had a much better time than someone who's 100% in stocks.

But that's not the game we're playing, right? We're not playing a game for one day, especially in the FIRE community. You're playing a really long-term game. And there is no long-term game I know that doesn't involve a very high percentage of stocks. And I don't want a computer taking those away from me before I tell it to. We need to take one final ad break, but we'll be right back with more after this.

Okay, so Uncle Sam's knocking at your door, wanting his cut again, but you want more of your money working for you. Well, that's where a 1031 exchange comes in. Instead of paying taxes now, you can reinvest your sale proceeds and let your money grow. Want to level up? You can move into higher value or income generating properties, or even spread your funds across multiple properties to build your portfolio faster. With over 50 years experience, Equity 1031 exchange is a qualified intermediary that makes this process smooth. Make your next property move tax efficient and profitable. Begin your 1031 exchange at get

equity 1031.com slash BP money. That's get equity 1031.com slash BP money. Inspecting your rentals again. Here's a pro tip, a simple checklist to make sure nothing gets overlooked. It

It saves you time and costly repairs down the road. And when it comes to managing your rentals, RentReady makes everything easier. Rent gets paid on time, leases get signed online, and maintenance requests don't get lost in your inbox. And if you're a BiggerPockets Pro member, I've got great news for you. RentReady is already included in your membership for free. Don't leave it sitting on the table. Log in to your BiggerPockets Pro account and start using RentReady today.

Tired of traditional lenders holding you back? Host Financial is here to change the game. They've ditched the DTI restrictions and they zero in on what really matters, your property's income potential. So no more chasing papers for tax returns or personal income statements. Think about it. A lender that values your property's worth over your paycheck?

That's the host financial difference. Approved in 47 states, they are ready to help you make your next big move. Curious if you qualify? Just head over to hostfinancial.com and find out. Stop letting outdated lending practices hold you back. That's hostfinancial.com, where your property's potential meets unlimited financing. Aaron, the ad guy here. Yeah, that's right. I do all the ads for BiggerPockets. And you might be saying to me, Aaron, the ads are too long, or Aaron, there's far too many ads.

You know what? Come get me then. You think you're so tough? If you can tag me while I'm unawares, I will remove every single ad from the BiggerPockets network. You have my word. But you're never going to catch me. You know why? Because I have the SimpliSafe home security system. And I've got multiple locations I can go to with it installed there too. Just try and get past my high-tech sensors that detect break-ins, fires, and floods. Or indoor and outdoor cameras to keep watch day and night. There's no way you're getting past my 24-7 professional monitoring that I only pay like a dollar a day for.

And they even said if I don't like my system that I could get a full refund with SimpliSafe 60-day money-back guarantee, but that'd be crazy because I love it so much. And they love us so much that they're doing 20% off any new SimpliSafe system with Fast Protect Monitoring at simplisafe.com slash pockets. That's simplisafe.com slash pockets. There's no safe like SimpliSafe.

Another safe add in the books. Listen up, business owners. Here's some quick math. Fewer costs equals more profit. The problem? You're spending more than ever on operations, materials, deliveries, software, and more. So why not reduce your costs and headaches with NetSuite by Oracle? NetSuite is the number one cloud financial system, bringing accounting, financial management, inventory, and HR into one platform and one source of truth.

NetSuite lives in the cloud, which means you can reduce IT costs with no hardware required. Cut the cost of maintaining multiple systems because now you've got one unified business management suite. You improve efficiency by bringing all your major business processes into one platform, slashing manual tasks and errors. It makes sense that over 37,000 companies have already made the move to NetSuite.

Don't let rising costs sink your business's growth. By popular demand, NetSuite has extended its one-of-a-kind flexible financing program for a few more weeks. Head to netsuite.com slash bpmoney. That's netsuite.com slash bpmoney. netsuite.com slash bpmoney.

Thanks for sticking with us. Okay, Tyler, other than the sequence of returns risks that we just mentioned, which honestly have not been at the forefront of my mind because we've had such an upswing for so long, what are some other investment or drawdown strategies, drawdown strategies

detriments that the fire community might not be talking about, but should be thinking about? I think one, and this isn't necessarily investment related, but it is fire related. And I've just been thinking about this one for a while, which is, I'm fine with the concept of establishing a portfolio, where you say we have enough money, we're going to be fine for the next 40 years, everything's okay, we've done all the calculations. And

But what I struggle with, not as a criticism, but as a genuine curiosity, is what if in 10 years you decide it's not for you? The amount of times in my life that I've wanted to change jobs or change interests has been plentiful. I'm always kind of trying something new and I've taken a lot of different paths in my life.

And I just wonder if be I wonder if either of you kind of have a textbook response or a communal response to what if in 10 years you decide this was not necessarily the right choice.

But now I've been out of the job market for eight to 10 years and might not be as employable or again, you know, not claiming that ageism is necessarily a thing, but maybe your skills have just softened a little bit based on where the skills are needed right now. How do how do you all talk about that?

Well, that's why I spent so much time fighting you last episode on all your assumptions about being able to continue getting work with that. I think the answer is if you're going to retire early, retirement is used intentionally in the FIRE language here. It means a permanent absence from wage, income, or work.

on a long-term basis. And I think that's why people take this discussion of the 4% rule so seriously, why the math has been so exhaustively discussed, why people still don't trust it and build up huge cash positions on top of it, side businesses, part-time income, and all these contingency plans.

is because that's absolutely the core risk to this lifetime financial goal that we talk about here on BiggerPocketsMoney ad nauseum about. Because the goal is, how do I spend Tuesday for the rest of my life never having to go back to work? And nobody wants to be listening to this podcast, retiring at 40, 50 years old, and then at 70, back at work in the supermarket.

Right. That's the goal. That's the fear, I think, in people's minds about all this. And they're going to work really hard and spend a lot of time, mental energy to make sure that every possible mitigant is employed to to forestall that risk. First, I want to make a comment. Tyler said, well, you know, assuming ageism is a thing.

Let's absolutely assume ageism is a thing because when you are going to, not you, Scott, because I know you would never, but when you are going to hire somebody and you've got two candidates, there's a 20-year-old and a 70-year-old, who are you going to pick?

absolutely, you are going to find a way to choose the 25-year-old over the 70-year-old unless it's like who's got lifelong experience. And I'm not saying I advocate for this. I think it's horrible that this happens, but it absolutely does happen. And it's something that you as the early retiree should have in your mind. The

the concept of enough, a million dollars used to be what we were, were reaching for and in the five community in general. And now it's not, I, I don't hear much million dollar numbers anymore. I hear 2.5. I hear three. And, um,

I wonder what people are going to do should they decide to go back to work. I would hope that they would decide to go back to work near the beginning of their retirement versus the middle or as they are getting into their traditional retirement ages. Traditional retirement is part of early retirement, and you need to make sure that that part of your life is covered. And

I, my husband's been retired for nine years. He has no plans to go back to work. He is, I watch him and I'm like, there's no way he would ever have not, like, we talk about going back to work and he's like, I would never, I would never want to go back to work. Your skill set will atrophy is what's going to happen. Well, not even that. He doesn't want to spend the time in a job, but he has also created a very full life

in retirement. And I'm wondering if Tyler is saying, are you thinking people are going to run out of money or are you thinking people are going to be bored in retirement?

Is that where that question is coming from? Unless you're Carl. Carl has only gotten better at picking stocks the whole time, by the way, on this. So I'm not saying that. But I think that that's the realist. Let's just call it what it is. If you're out of the workforce for 10 years, your skill set is going to atrophy. No question. There's no world where I'm reviewing someone's application for a job and there's a 10-year work history gap and I'm wondering what's going on. The only role that that's appropriate for is podcast host.

But hey, as we all know, that's a pretty good gig.

I guess this is what I'm advocating for. I'm advocating for the lifestyle that the three of us have. I like I say that quasi ingest and quasi not right. Is that part of what and this goes this does go back to part one of our conversation is part of what I think I'm advocating for is that we could think of our financial portfolios in such a philosophical sense of saying, look, fine, you've got your two point five million dollars, but you're not going to be able to

But if you go to zero with your income, as far as anything that's coming in, you've just given so much up to chance versus saying, I know why I want to leave this work. I don't like it. I know what I want my lifestyle to be.

But are there skills? And you bring up the future of AI. Is there a skill set that you can develop over the next 10 to 20 years, especially if you have some more hours now at your disposal, where you can make a type of income? And it doesn't have to be much. It just has to be enough, even just to cover what Emma Von Weise was saying, of that two-year component of risk aversion.

is like if we could have enough to just say, I don't have to touch my assets in a truly down year because I run this really great podcast and I love it. And again, I know we joke that like we could do this until we're 90, but seriously, not only can we do this till we're 90, I think this would be really exciting to do throughout your life and see how your perspectives changed and see how content change. So we're in a world where I don't have as much

I won't say... Again, it's not a criticism. I don't have as much understanding of someone who says, well, I'm just stuck in this toxic job and I have no other options. We have a lot of options right now. There are so many ways to connect with the world and the marketing is free with all of these platforms. And I would just...

that there was a part, and please tell me if there is, because again, I just probably haven't done enough research on different components or niches within the FIRE movement. Is there a group that does say, we want to get to our 2.5 million, but then we're going to kind of slowly head into this space?

And we're going to have a part time gig. So we get the lifestyle we want to an extent, but it doesn't put as much pressure on this perfect portfolio allocation on this standard 4% rule on health care expenses on all of that. Does that exist or is it or no? Yeah, that exists. The contradiction inherent in what we do here at BiggerPocketsMoney is we talk about FIRE.

As is like, what is the portfolio capable of sustaining a permanent state of Tuesday doing whatever you want on your own? And we define that as a 4% rule portfolio, $2.5 million invested in a mixed stock bond portfolio, withdrawing the $100,000 a year and spending all of it.

And nobody does that, right? I get a response every once in a while from people who think they do that. And they're like, oh yeah, I also have like a rental property and I have a $5 million instead of the two and a half that I actually need for this. There's a huge margin to say, or I have four years of cash on top of my portfolio. Everybody, or I'm still working a part-time job or I just fired it, but my wife still works and brings in more income, but a standalone than the entire cost of our lifestyle, our lifestyle.

without the need for my several million dollar portfolio. So everybody has these huge baked emergency. People come in and they'll say, they'll talk about finance writing a little bit. Am I fired? I have two and a half million dollars. Oh, and I also have a pension that brings in $6,000 a month. Oh, well, we didn't mention that previously. So everybody's got some sort of ace in the hole on this. And that's what I keep emphasizing here is the community. These are smart people. These are people who spent a decade, in most cases, at least building up

huge piles of assets obsessing over investment theory and who listened to this podcast about money instead of Taylor Swift in the car on the way to and from work or at the gym for a reason. And none of them actually follow this specific advice. Everyone does something like what you're talking about, Tyler.

Um, and there, in terms of the transition period. You know what? I think that's what the fire community conversation is missing. We talk about, this is what we're gonna do, but we actually do all of that. That Scott just said, um,

My husband has been retired for nine years. I've been working at BiggerPockets for 10. So how did you get up the courage to leave your job? Well, my wife was making enough money that it covered all of our expenses and we already had our fire number met. Mindy, don't you also sell like a house a month on the side? Yeah.

in Colorado and high cost. I'm a real estate agent on top of that. And I have a fairly steady real estate business. That is, I don't consider that a job. So yeah, I think that that is kind of the unspoken, uh,

uh, secret of the five community is yes, you did all this great work to amass a, a net worth that is sitting over here that you're not even spending, or you're only pulling out 1%. And I believe that Bengen, Bengen's original study said that you could, you know, 4% is a safe withdrawal rate. If you went down to 3.5 or 3.25, then there's a 100% rate of success over a 30 year period. Um,

Biggern is saying it's more like 3.25 because the timeline is extended. And we're going to talk to him in a future episode to get his money. Once you get below the 4% rule, I just have a pet peeve of mine. It gets really silly. Like if you say, oh, the safe withdrawal rate is 3.3% for a 30-year withdrawal rate. Well, guess what 3.3 times 30 is?

So you just withdraw 1/30 of your money every year and it just doesn't have to do anything, right, on there. So then of course you're safe for 30 years because you just like put a pile of money in there and index it to inflation and tips and you just withdraw 1/30 of it every year and you don't run out of money. And let's look at two. I mean, thank you for bringing up Bangan because that'll be a really good conversation. But Bangan's study too was based on worst case scenarios period.

Period. Period. And I can't emphasize that enough that this to me, this is my... So Scott has his pet peeve. My pet peeve is anything talking about 4% because it's all fear-based conservative withdrawal rates. And that's fine. If someone wants to go in and say, look, if the worst comes to worst comes to worst, will I be okay? Well, if the worst comes to worst, you're going to die tomorrow and it's completely irrelevant. So there's a spectrum. I'm just saying, but bluntly, right? There's a spectrum of...

It's not about money. It's I mean, we have this expected idea that we're going to live for 30 years and have endless money. That's best case scenario. But best case scenario also has to do with life fulfillment. So best case scenario is also that I figure out what the heck I want to do with this money to begin with. But if we're always driven by this idea of worst case scenario, most conservative I can be 100 percent safety, 100 percent success rate.

I don't know. I think that's a overly conservative way to look at finance. And there's a great saying that, you know, that absolutely not taking on enough risk is one of the riskiest things you can ever do in investing. Absolutely. One of the riskiest things you can do is be overly involved in fixed income products when we have this monster called inflation that eats away at us every single year. So my only...

kind of closing encouragement based on everything you were just reflecting on, Mindy. It's buy real estate. Yeah. Maybe in part three, Scott, maybe, maybe not. But at this point, I think that the way that I would look at it, if I really were thinking that I were going to be involved in a fire movement, let's just say five years from now,

I would make sure, going back to our point about alternative assets, I would label an alternative asset as something I could do skill-wise to generate money.

That's something we do not talk about enough. We talk about stocks, we talk about bonds, we talk about real estate, commodities, etc., cryptocurrency. We don't ever, no financial advisor, no financial textbook will ever put into that little pie chart that 25% of that should be focused on what is the skill you have that can be exchanged for money in

At any time, regardless of ageism, regardless of where you are, that to me would be the dream because it's additional fixed income, it's additional security, and it's additional involvement in life. That to me would be your perfect portfolio. I love it. I love that we are...

Talking about this, I hope that people are listening and start thinking to themselves, what is my unfair advantage? What is my ace in the hole? What is my extra above the 4% rule that I am not accounting for? And what is that going to do to my timeline? Because I think people are working...

There are some people who aren't working long enough, but I think there's a lot of people who are working much longer than they need to at the job that they hate, at the job that they don't feel fulfilled with and aren't focusing on the fact that they do have enough for to make a jump.

And that's the whole reason people are looking at the FI community in the first place is I hate my job. I want to leave my job. Retire early. Yes. How do I do that? And once you get to a certain place, just leave the job that you hate and find something else. Even if it doesn't pay as much as the job that you hate, even if it doesn't,

have as much status? That is a much better answer. Yeah. Like that one, like if you really hate what you're doing, that's it. Like fire, the journey towards fire, you don't have to get to fire to quit your job and do something better. You can just take a pay cut and do something better as you move along that journey and your quality of life may dramatically improve. Fire provides better optionality the whole way through for it.

But once you decide to leave the workforce on a permanent basis, then your skill set does begin to atrophy pretty materially. And like, forget this concept of ageism around it. Like, I'm just not going to bet on my being able to generate income the same way when I'm 75.

as I can today at 34, 34, 30, almost 35. And it's just not going to happen. I'm just not going to be able to do it. I would not be as effective as an entrepreneur at that point, I believe in there. And that's going to be a challenge. And I think that not stating that reality

out there is is is is problematic for folks right like like i think most people take that for granted as an obvious fact of life that that's going to be a challenge at that point in life there's things i could still do absolutely in there but like i don't know if i could perform as ceo at bigger pockets at that age personally like maybe some folks can but like i think that my my

body will begin to give out. My energy will begin to decline at that point. And I think that that's like, we have to factor that in as a risk later in life. I don't think you can count on that in perpetuity. There's a reason social security exists.

Because people don't save for retirement. And because people are unable to generate income after a certain point in their lives. Well, and that's exactly why I am saving for retirement, because I don't anticipate generating income forever. Although as a real estate agent, that's going to be a bit different because, I mean...

There's a lot of older real estate agents out there. You can still show houses. I was going to say, Mindy, that's your ace in the hole. I'm not kidding. I love it. And I love that you brought that up. And I love that language, too. I'm definitely using that language going forward with people because I do think it's important just for everyone to just think whether it's I hate to call a pension or Social Security the ace in the hole.

But, you know, any of these little things that we don't talk about, they're all part of it. And we've got to look at it as one big portfolio. And now so I've just got to start thinking of what what mine is so I can transition wherever I'd like. I do want to do one quick counter argument to my own thing that I just said there. The

But apparently the American people totally disagree with me and have now twice in a row elected folks over the age of 75 to the highest office in the land for the presidency. So maybe that's changing. Maybe there's a new world, new world coming and the world has shifted and changed. And that that is all a different thing. And I should be planning around it. But you can tell, Tyler, I take the I take the pessimistic worst case view, but then I invest in.

You know, I think in a way that I have until February, at least invested in a way that also takes advantage of long term growth trends and assumes inflation and long term growth in the US economy. I guess where I bring up a good I talk about him a little bit of my content sometimes, but my father is 76 years old.

And he's done perfectly fine for himself, but he's the type of person, and I guess this maybe is where my bias comes from here, or my values is a better way to think about it, but he's still working part-time as a part-time doctor. And he enjoys the work so much that the work is actually what keeps him focused, what keeps him going, what keeps him fulfilled.

And that becomes his ace in the hole very easily. I mean, that in and of itself can fund his annual expenses perfectly fine, and then he can invest in whatever the heck he wants to invest in. So when I tell people that he's 100% invested in tech stocks and everyone screams, how the heck is a 76-year-old invested that aggressively? I say, well, because he has the ace in the hole.

Because he's still working and he loves what he does. So he, to an extent, actually, I would even say philosophically that he embodies a lot of what the fire movement is, is that he has found a way to do exactly what he loves doing. And it's not work for him. It genuinely like it's not just a cliche. It really isn't. He would be miserable.

if you took them away from that job and those interactions and those touch points on a daily basis. And I can say that too, like during COVID, those were two of the toughest years of my life. I was a teacher during COVID and the world shut down and we were doing this. We were interacting with each other via Zoom and it was so hard to go from having 100 touch points a day with high energy and...

Lots of positivity and lots of interaction to being behind a screen. That was really difficult to kind of have this glimpse into a void of interacting and finding a way to make money for engaging with the world and solving fulfilling problems. That's the dream, right? Is to be able to do something that you love long, late into life, but never to have to do something.

At that point. And I think that's the fear. Like that's that, like the fear and optimism. There's up, there should be optimistic. You have to be optimistic to be a fire, to be in the fire community at your core. You have to be optimistic that at the end of the day, at the end of the day, there's a, there's a light at the end of the tunnel that leads to perpetual change.

financial freedom in there. And I think there has to be a fear. Almost everyone has a fear of if I pull the trigger and don't do that, well, I'm going to forego options that are very real in my life on there. And the goal is to never have to work again. That's my goal. I like that distinction. All right, Tyler, this was yet another amazing episode. I really appreciate your conversation, your point of view, and the fact that you're taking time out to share your

information and knowledge with us. Where can our listeners find you online? Oh, sure. Well, I mean, just the most fun I'm having right now is the same fun you all are having as the podcast. I, about a month and a half ago, started a podcast and I'm having a great time with that. Yeah. So I'm welcome to your world and it's hard and it's fun and it's exciting and hope I can do that until I'm 76. Where can you find this podcast? It is called Your Money Guide on the Side.

And it is on wherever I believe podcasts probably appear. Your Apple, your Spotify, your Amazon, your iHeart, etc. And then most of my content is through Instagram or TikTok.

And it is under the handle Social Cap Official or Social Cap on TikTok. And in transparency, I'm growing very tired of making 60-second videos about finance because you can't really unpack much in 60 seconds. Absolutely. You're right. You could just touch on a topic and be like, okay, bye. Yeah. Yeah.

Whereas with a podcast, you could just talk forever. I know. I love it. Yeah. Well, I am really looking forward to checking out your podcast. Thank you again so much for your time. And we will talk to you soon. Of course. Thanks, Mindy. Thanks, Scott. Appreciate your time. Thank you, Tyler. All right, Scott, that was yet another amazing conversation with Tyler Gardner. What did you think? I think that the intellectual basis for portfolio theory is

in the FIRE community is sketchy and totally ignored by most. Ooh, I'm going to stick up for all of my FIRE peeps and say, please elaborate. Like you, you're a perfect example. Your portfolio doesn't have any grounding in the intellectual framework of the 4% rule.

you're 100% in stocks and a little bit of real estate. Like there's nothing in it, right? I don't do it. I don't know many people who do it. Most of the people I've talked to who are FIRE continue to maintain largely stock-based portfolios. So there's a huge body of research on portfolio theory that is promptly ignored. And then I also think, Mindy, I think I'm at the point where I'm going to say, if someone comes in

And I ask you the question, is there a price to earnings ratio for stocks? Is there any price at which stocks are so absurdly expensive that it would force you to reconsider? Or any bond yield high enough that it would force you to reconsider reallocating to bonds? And the answer is no. I think you're out of your mind.

I think there's an insanity point if people would take those to such extremes that they would totally set it and forget it and not ever tweak or modify their portfolio. And I love the way he answered that question. He said, of course, I'd account for it. JL Collins, of course, I'd account for it.

he'll be coming out in a few weeks. So spoiler alert on that one. But I think that that's the big takeaway on this. And I think there's a lot of work to do to go and explore this. And it comes down to what's going to help you sleep at night. And to Tyler's point, a personalized approach for everyone with the best defense being income generation by the person in perpetuity, kind of antithetical to fire. But I think that's the frustrating takeaway from today's episode and the conversation for the last two. What do you think? I think

I think that today's episode was kind of eye-opening, or I hope it's eye-opening for some of the listeners who are, and I don't mean this in a bad way, but blindly following the 4% rule in theory. And it's just like me. I am blindly following, not blindly, but following the 4% rule in theory, but not in actuality. Like you said, I don't have a 60-40 stock.

portfolio, stock bond portfolio. I have a 100% stock portfolio and I have some real estate, but more and more of my portfolio is pushing towards more stock heavy. It used to be 50-50 and now I want to say it's 70% in stocks. I don't have the numbers in front of me

right now. And who knows with the ups and downs of the market lately, what it even is. Maybe I'm back to 50-50. Look, here's a fun one, Mindy. On this, people regularly miss, like, not only do they ignore the portfolio theory, they totally, like, they don't even understand it in here.

This is a great one. I pulled the BiggerPocketsMoney community, our community, with this after I've been discussing this over and over again. And I said, true or false, JL Collins, author of The Simple Path to Wealth, invests in a portfolio that is 100% in broad-based equities via low-cost index funds and recommends the same for everyone from those just getting started to...

to those in traditional early retirement. 62% of the BiggerPocketsMoney audience said true to this. It's unequivocally false. And at the 200-vote mark, I posted in there the answer that it was false.

And people still continue to vote with the true false spread on this one without reading after reading the comments on it. So it's like it's like people don't understand this portfolio theory in the in the fire community is is totally ignored, misunderstood in most places. And the actual research that is grounded in basis, like people are defending the all stock portfolio allocation. Sent me a link to a study that came out a few weeks ago. We should definitely get these people on the podcast, by the way.

And they're like, yeah, see, 100% stock portfolios are actually the safest when you account for inflation risk. Well, yeah, those portfolios are generally 100% allocated, not 100% allocated to domestic, specifically U.S. stocks. They have heavy concentrations international. In fact, most of the allocation is international in those portfolios. And when the stock market is priced at its current relative price to earnings level, the top quintile, the portfolio recommends that allocation to bonds.

I'm in there. And it also recommends an allocation to cash in the first couple of years facing retirement. So, again, this portfolio theory stuff like I'm going down the rabbit hole big time. Everybody's got a freaking different answer to it. And the answers that are actually widely established in research, like the 4 percent rule, are totally ignored and work.

that are our gospel in the FIRE community, like the simple path to wealth that are treated as like the Bible for early financial freedom for a lot of folks and how to invest specifically say the opposite of what people state they say. He does not state you should be in 100% index funds on there. He says that for people getting started in the beginning of the journey.

in there, but he does not say that that is the case for someone about to or at retirement. Sorry, this rant continues week to week. I have continued to be in 100% stocks because there's what the growth is. Once I retire, Carl and I have talked about putting money into more into bonds. It's not 40%, but maybe 10. It's just a different...

place that we are coming from now, as opposed to I have a job that covers all of our expenses. I don't need to think about bonds yet. My job is my bond. Yeah, absolutely. All right, Scott, should we get out of here? Let's do it. That wraps up this episode of the BiggerPocketsMoney podcast. He is Scott Trench. I am Mindy Jensen saying toodaloo, kangaroo.