Sequence of Returns Calculator

Sequence of returns risk: same average return, different orders, dramatically different retirement outcomes. 1M with 40k withdrawals annually: bad returns first (-20%, +5%, +25%) leaves you with 747k. Good returns first (+25%, +5%, -20%) leaves you with 859k. Same 3.3% average - 112k difference from luck of timing.

Example: retiree starts with 1M, withdraws 40k/year. Same 3.3% average return over 3 years. Order 1 (bad first): -20%, +5%, +25%. Year 1: (1M - 40k) × 0.80 = 768k. Year 2: (768k - 40k) × 1.05 = 764k. Year 3: (764k - 40k) × 1.25 = 905k. Order 2 (good first): +25%, +5%, -20%. Final: 945k. Same average return, 40k difference.

Why sequence matters in retirement: withdrawing during downturns locks in losses (selling more shares at low prices). Recovery has less capital to regrow. Sequence risk highest first 5-10 years of retirement. Mitigation strategies: (1) Bond tent (higher bond allocation early retirement), (2) Cash reserves (2-3 years expenses), (3) Variable withdrawal (cut spending in down years), (4) Working part-time first 5 years to reduce withdrawal pressure. Accumulation phase: sequence doesn't matter (all years compound equally without withdrawals).

Run it with sensible defaults

Using starting portfolio balance of 1,000,000, annual withdrawal of 40,000, year 1 return of -20%, year 2 return of 5%, the calculation works out to 36,900.00. The defaults are meant as a starting point, not a recommendation.

The levers in this calculation

The inputs — Starting Portfolio Balance, Annual Withdrawal, Year 1 Return %, Year 2 Return %, and Year 3 Return % — do not pull with equal force. Not every input has equal weight. Adjusting one input at a time toward extreme values shows which ones move the result most.

How the math works

Compare ending balance with same returns in different sequences (bad first vs good first).

Why run this

Running the numbers makes the trade-offs concrete. Small changes in the inputs can move the result more than intuition suggests, which is hard to judge without working it out.

What this doesn't capture

Steady-rate math ignores real-world volatility. Actual returns are lumpy; sequence-of-returns risk matters most in drawdown; fees and taxes drag on compound growth; and behaviour changes in drawdowns can reduce outcomes below the projection. The number represents one scenario rather than a forecast.