The 4% rule: The golden rule for financial independence

Presentation slide titled 'La rule des 4%' listing five points about retirement strategy in French, with financial symbols and an elderly couple image

The famous 4% rule so much discussed by frugalists. In this article, we will analyze why the 4% Rule is the golden rule for financial independence 😉

⚠️ Remember that you are solely responsible for your investments. Investing involves a risk of losing money.

Would you like to one day live off your investments rather than your salary?

This is precisely the idea behind the famous 4% rule1.

Very popular with followers of the FIRE movement (Financial Independence, Retire Early), this rule allows us to estimate the capital needed to become financially independent.

But be warned: this is neither a magic formula nor a guarantee.

Let's see how it works.

The 4 % rule comes from the Trinity Study, a study published in 1998 by three professors from Trinity University in the United States.

Researchers analyzed several decades of stock market data to answer a simple question:

What percentage can be withdrawn from one's portfolio each year without risking depleting it too quickly?

Their conclusion is as follows:

Historically, a portfolio composed mainly of US stocks had a high probability of lasting at least 25 years with an initial withdrawal of 4%, then withdrawals adjusted for inflation.

It was this conclusion that gave rise to the famous 4 % rule.

Let's imagine you own a wallet of 1,000,000 CHF invested in a US equity ETF (for example, an S&P500 ETF).

The first year, you remove:

1,000,000 × 4 % = 40,000 CHF

So you have 40,000 CHF to live during this first year.

In subsequent years, you continue to withdraw a similar amount, adjusted for inflation.

Meanwhile, your portfolio remains invested in the stock market. Companies continue to pay dividends, and the value of your investments can increase... or decrease depending on market performance.

The goal is therefore not to preserve exactly 1,000,000 CHF, but to ensure that your assets continue to generate sufficient returns to fund your withdrawals for several decades.

Let's take a concrete example.

Let's imagine your wallet gets:

  • an average annualized return of 8% per year
  • over the next 30 years
  • that you remove 4% per year.

In this scenario, your portfolio would generally continue to grow despite your withdrawals. After 30 years, it's even quite possible that it would be worth more than one million francs.

Conversely, if the markets go through several bad years right after you start your retirement, your portfolio could decline more rapidly.

👉 That's why the 4% rule doesn't try to predict the exact amount you'll have left in 30 years.. It simply indicates that historically, a withdrawal of 4% offered a high probability that the portfolio would be stabilized after 30 years.

I asked artificial intelligence to apply the 4% rule from 2010 to 2025 with an S&P500 ETF (ETF VOO).

An S&P 500 ETF is a collection of the 500 best-performing US stocks. According to the 4% rule, a portfolio composed of 100% US stocks has the best chance of being profitable.

Although artificial intelligence is not an infallible source, I wanted to analyze the calculation.

It should also be noted that I have considered the creation date of the S&P 500 VOO ETF (2010) up to December 31, 2025, i.e., approximately 15 years. The 4% rule is generally intended for a period of at least 25 years.

My question to the AI:

If a shareholder had invested USD 500,000 in the VOO ETF in September 2010 (date of creation of the ETF), reinvested the dividends, and withdrawn 4% annually from his portfolio, what amount would he have on December 31, 2025?

We see that in this example, the portfolio would have more than tripled despite a withdrawal of 4% each year.

However, this example is not an absolute rule. For instance, if the stock market shows very negative returns for three consecutive years in the future, the results will be very different from this example.

Calculating the 4% rule is very simple.

If you remove 4% of your assets each year, your capital must represent 25 years of spending.

In other words:

Capital required = Annual expenses × 25

For example :

  • Expenses of CHF 20,000/year → objective of 500,000 CHF
  • Expenses of 30,000 CHF/year → objective of 750,000 CHF
  • Expenses of 40,000 CHF/year → objective of 1,000,000 CHF

This amount is often called the Fire Number.

And if you wish, you can also calculate your FIRE Number based on your monthly expenses. Simply do the following:

Monthly expenses x 300

The result will be the same as annual expenses x 25.

Some financial experts argue that it is better to withdraw small amounts each month than to withdraw one large sum per year.

For example, if your goal is to withdraw 4% per year, you need to do a simple calculation:

4 : 12 months = 0.333% per month

Thus, to apply the 4% per month rule, you must withdraw 0.333% from your portfolio each month.

This would result in approximately 4% of withdrawal per year.

In my opinion, this option is preferable, because we are used to spending one salary per month.

In addition, some financiers claim that this option has a greater chance of growing the portfolio.

Yes… but with caution.

This rule is based on the historical performance of US financial markets.

However, no one can guarantee that the coming decades will resemble the previous ones.

It also assumes:

  • a well-diversified portfolio
  • a large proportion of shares
  • low investment costs
  • a retirement of approximately 30 years

So it's an excellent estimate, but certainly not a guarantee.

Many investors now prefer to be a little more cautious.

Instead of removing 4%, Some choose:

  • 3,8%, to have a small safety margin
  • 3,5%, when they wish to retire very early

In practice, the difference is small, but it allows for better resistance to long periods of market decline.

However, if US stock market performance is as good in the future as it was in the 2010-2025 period, a withdrawal of 4% is already sufficiently prudent.

The 4% rule does not predict the future.

It simply allows you to estimate a balance between withdrawal and growth in your stock portfolio.

It's an excellent tool for setting a financial goal, provided you remain flexible and don't consider that percentage as an absolute truth.

Ultimately, the 4 % rule does not answer the question:

" How much can I earn? ? »

It actually answers a different, much more interesting question:

" How much do I really need to be free? »

The 4 % rule is not a magic formula, nor a guarantee of success. It is above all a tool to estimate the capital needed to live off one's investments.

This is a very good calculation to determine the possible withdrawal rate that allows one to preserve assets over the long term.

This academic study reminds us of an essential idea: by investing regularly over the long term, it is possible to build up assets capable of gradually financing our lifestyle.

Should you withdraw 4% per year once you have acquired a good stock market portfolio? Not necessarily.

Some investors prefer to be more cautious and aim for 3.5% or 3.8% per year. And others, like me, think that 4% of annual withdrawals is already conservative enough.

Ultimately, the 4 % rule doesn't aim to predict the future. It primarily invites us to think differently: Rather than working our whole lives to earn money, why not build wealth that can work for us?

FAQ – The 4% Rule: The Golden Rule for Financial Independence

The 4% rule is based on historical data and the Trinity study. It is not a guarantee, but an estimate based on past performance of financial markets. Future returns may differ.

Because it allows for a quick estimate of the capital needed to achieve financial independence. It has become a popular reference in the FIRE (Financial Independence, Retire Early) movement.

The most well-known calculation involves multiplying your annual expenses by 25.

Example :
25,000 CHF of annual expenses × 25 = 625,000 CHF required.

Because an annual withdrawal of 4% mathematically corresponds to 1/25 of the portfolio. This formula simplifies the calculation of the target capital.

Not directly. That's why some investors prefer to use a more conservative rate, such as 3.5% to 3.8%, in order to incorporate an additional safety margin.

No. However, the Trinity study shows that portfolios heavily weighted in equities have historically performed better over the long term. On the other hand, they are also more volatile.

Yes, but the calculation must be adapted to Swiss taxation, the cost of living, insurance, the 2nd pillar, the AVS and your personal situation.

This is one of the main risks: a significant drop at the beginning of withdrawals can have a lasting impact on the portfolio. Some investors then temporarily reduce their spending or maintain a cash reserve.

The choice depends mainly on your level of risk tolerance. A lower rate generally increases the chances of preserving your capital for longer, but also requires a larger net worth.

No. No financial strategy can offer an absolute guarantee. The 4% rule should be used as an estimation tool, not as a certainty.

Subscribe for the latest news

You have a frugalist or minimalist project and you want a training? Click ”here”.
My pages
Lastest Post

How does this blog live?

Overall, this blog lives on sharing a frugal and minimalist lifestyle.

For a question of transparency towards the readers. All recommended products are in order to make life cheaper, simpler and to promote the essentials.

  • Trainings that I realize
  • Promo codes for the products I use
  • Donations that readers make in exchange for neutral information.
About me

Compared to before, I was a person who consumed a lot until the day I realized that my consumption made me sadder and poorer 😑

Now I prefer the minimum of my needs to be happy and achieve my financial freedom.

Without realizingI started to focus on saving and investing to depend on a boss for as little time as possible and to speed up my personal projects.

As a result, I am getting richer in a way that I never imagined since I have an average salary in Switzerland.

It is for this purpose that I decided to create this blog. In order to share and learn with other people who seek freedom and simplicity 😉

Are you rather minimalist or frugal Jonny?

I am as minimalist as I am frugalist. However, there are situations where I lean more towards an art of life.

To conclude, I think the most important thing is to feel comfortable in your lifestyle 😊

Sign up for the latest tips and tricks.
I promise! You won’t be bombarded with e-mails.
Minimalist and Frugalist Logo
Sign up for the latest tips and tricks.
I promise! You won’t be bombarded with e-mails.
Minimalist and Frugalist Logo

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

En savoir plus sur Minimaliste et Frugaliste

Abonnez-vous pour poursuivre la lecture et avoir accès à l’ensemble des archives.

Continue reading