Are You Lucky or Good?

A few days out, the avalanche report didn’t look promising. We had a big storm mid-week. High winds were forecasted to follow the storm. I watched avalanche reports closely and with concern.

We decided to at least ski in about 3 miles to a friend’s cabin on Saturday. After digging everything out, we built a big fire and shared an amazing meal. On Sunday, we woke early to a beautiful bluebird sky and a favorable avalanche report. The snowpack stabilized considerably over the prior two days.

We got out early and traversed in about another half mile before climbing several thousand feet to an isolated peak. We continued to assess the situation as we approached and climbed. Eventually, we arrived at the summit with untouched snow as far as the eye could see.

We had an amazing ski run through knee-deep powder. Then we skinned back up for another run before deciding to call it a day, an incredible one at that. Even so, I questioned our decision making. 

• Were we lucky or good?
• If the avalanche report or our observations weren’t favorable, would we have been smart and turned back? Or would we have forged ahead given our sunk costs of time and effort applied, plus the appeal of that deep untouched snow under a sunny clear sky?

This kind of post hoc analysis is common among my outdoor mentors. It’s something I do after each day out in the mountains.

Post Hoc Analysis

This type of analysis is not exclusive to mountaineers, climbers, and other outdoor adventurers. Poker players are another group that frequently have to make consequential decisions in the face of uncertainty.

Professional poker player Annie Duke has written extensively about evaluating decisions made in such circumstances in an effort to improve future decision making. She points out that we all have biases that tend to color our evaluations, whether of our own decisions or those of others.

She uses the term “resulting” to describe the way most people analyze decisions based on outcomes. As Duke describes this process we tend to think if we had a desirable result it means we made a good decision. To the contrary, if we didn’t have the outcome we desired it is often attributed to bad luck. 

This process leads to a lack of learning and thus not making better decisions moving forward. Instead, she recommends assessing whether you made a quality decision based on the probability and consequences of a particular outcome given the information available at the time the decision was made.

Are You Resulting?

When I interact with readers and advise clients, I sense there is a lot of resulting going on among investors and retirees right now. Many people think they are better investors than they probably are. They don’t seem to fully understand the risks of different investments and the role luck has played on recent investment returns and retirement outcomes.

A Good Year or a Sustainable Strategy?

Here is one comment I recently received. “I spent $130K last year and my nest egg is only down $25K…. I think I’ll be okay. I continue to be data-driven and not fall prey to fear about market crashes, health-care costs, and all the things I’m constantly told might ruin or kill me.”

This feels like resulting. Last year, the US total market was up 26%. If you included international stocks in your portfolio, they were up about 15.5.%. Total bond funds returned nearly 6%. Speculative investments did well. Gold was up about 13% while Bitcoin more than doubled in price. After an extended period of low interest rates, even cash again provided a significant return. 

Was this individual lucky or good? We don’t have enough information based on what was shared to know. There are things we do know.

It was hard not to make money in 2023. Seeing a portfolio go down in value last year would mean spending at a relatively high rate that is highly unlikely to be sustainable for long periods of time.

That may be appropriate for the individual writing the comment depending on their specific circumstances. It is likely not sustainable for most people reading this.

A Lucky Decade or a Repeatable Result?

Another reader recently wrote the following. “Seriously, my only regret with retiring at 58 was why I didn’t do it earlier?…. We do not live frugally or frivolously, but we have much more coming in than we spend…. Yes I had more financial concerns when I was 58 than I do now at 68.”

I don’t know the specifics of this individual. Again, this feels like resulting. Ten years ago was 2014. I ran a few backtests on Portfolio Visualizer.

Over the past decade, a 60% stock/ 40% bond portfolio could have sustained a 4% initial withdrawal adjusted for inflation and still grown by 3.95% annually (1.13% when adjusted for inflation). A $1 million portfolio would have grown to nearly $1.5 million ($1.12 million inflation adjusted).

A 100% allocation to US stocks would have done much better. Even after taking a 4% annual withdrawal, that portfolio would have grown by 8.13% annually (5.20% adjusted for inflation). A $1 million portfolio would have grown to nearly $2.2 million ($1.66 million inflation adjusted).

If you retired at 58 and a decade later had a larger portfolio than you started with while also having Social Security benefits coming online, you should indeed feel very good.

But was that a result of good planning and investing? Or was it largely good luck? We don’t have enough information to know for this particular individual.

Testing Different Periods

We do know these same portfolio and drawdown scenarios in the previous decade, 2004-2013, were generally OK, but not as favorable for either the balanced or stock portfolio when compared to the most recent decade. 

Switching the start and end dates to 2000-2009 paints a very different picture for any portfolio with stocks. However, more bond heavy portfolios held up better.

I encourage you to do your own backtests. Use tools like those provided at Portfolio Visualizer or Portfolio Charts.

Consider longer time frames, different time periods, and a variety of asset allocations. Observe the role that luck plays and how differently the same strategy can play out under different circumstances.

Two Things Can Be True

It is true that many natural savers and planners (i.e. many if not most of you reading this blog) tend to be conservative, sometimes to a fault. Retirement calculators tend to reinforce that conservatism. 

Any outcome where you outlive your money is a “failure,” even if you’re projected to run out of money after you are likely to have taken your last breath. Any outcome where your money lasts longer than your life is a “success.” This is true if you die with $1 or $10 million.

Clearly there is a need for nuance.

However, it would be equally faulty to look at other recent retirees, assume you can just do as they did, and throw caution to the wind. Your results may be far different.

This gray area in between these extremes is where good planning can happen if you have a solid decision making framework. Do you?

Related Reading

***Limited Time Credit Card Offer***

Before finishing today, I wanted to let you know that my favorite travel credit card is currently offering a rare and limited time offer.

You can currently earn 75,000 bonus points with the card_name by spending at least $4,000 in the first three months after opening the card. That’s over $900 when you redeem through Chase Travel℠.

To earn the points, you would have to spend at least $4,000 on the card which would give you a minimum of 4,000 additional points. This brings the value of your rewards to a minimum of $950 towards travel for spending $4,000 in the first 3 months after opening the card. The card has a $95 annual fee.

If you are considering a new credit card to accumulate travel rewards, you want to jump on this deal while this offer lasts!

* * *