How Close to FI are you? What's your CURRENT % of your Target Passive Income?

[Monkey Uncle]

I'm at >110 but too chicken sh*t to quit. I've moved to part time and work two 10 hour days a week- Wednesday and Friday. I get benefits with this. This is the first summer with this so I'm pretty stoked. However I'm acruing vacation very slowly because I work fewer hours and at some point the desire to do more than a four day weekend will allow will overcome and I'll fire. I'd love for a month or two off to go on a nice long road trip. If only employers could give us that I would happily come back to work. Instead they will lose a well trained employee.

I really need to get over my cold feet to RE.

Your sig says you're aiming to do 7 more years.  Why on earth would you do that if you're already at 110% of your target?

[John Doe]

My portfolio pays out about 5.2% (before taxes) with more than half of the holdings regularly increasing their dividend payouts so that works as a hedge against inflation, so if your goal is 4% withdrawal without touching capital yes it can be done. You do of course have to be comfortable with the increased risk with such an approach. 

[SwordGuy]

Well, so far, 61% of folks are at 50% or less of their target passive income, and 39% are over 50%.

It will be interesting to see whether that changes over the next few weeks this survey will be open.

So far, the trend has gone from 50/50 to 61/39.   

[boarder42]

Well, so far, 61% of folks are at 50% or less of their target passive income, and 39% are over 50%.

It will be interesting to see whether that changes over the next few weeks this survey will be open.

So far, the trend has gone from 50/50 to 61/39.

the issue with this is it will likely skew towards the lower and more often than not as the people who reach FI leave and move on ... as well as people who just learn all they thought they needed and left.  or those who jumped on the train for a few years then move on.

[SwordGuy]

Well, so far, 61% of folks are at 50% or less of their target passive income, and 39% are over 50%.

It will be interesting to see whether that changes over the next few weeks this survey will be open.

So far, the trend has gone from 50/50 to 61/39.

the issue with this is it will likely skew towards the lower and more often than not as the people who reach FI leave and move on ... as well as people who just learn all they thought they needed and left.  or those who jumped on the train for a few years then move on.

I quite agree!  That's why I was so surprised to see the poll start off 50/50!

[Cassie]

We have been semi-retired for past 5 years but are older then most on this board.  40k/year is passive with a house value of 300 and 200 paid. WE don't know if we will sell to move to cheaper condo as we age or if we will stay.  This has been the best of both worlds for us.

[effigy98]

Over 110% based on my monthly spend, but I want house paid off and some more diversification before I pull the trigger as I believe everything is inflated and this feels like a few years before the last two major crashes.

[SwordGuy]

Over 110% based on my monthly spend, but I want house paid off and some more diversification before I pull the trigger as I believe everything is inflated and this feels like a few years before the last two major crashes.

I understand!

One reader of my blog commented that I appeared to be in the business of manufacturing safety margins...

And I'm guilty as charged.

[SwordGuy]

Inching towards 62%/38% under/over 50% target income.  I wonder where it will end up?

One of the cool things about passive income while you're sill working is it's like getting a raise - only it's better than most raises people get from their employers!

If you're making 30% of your target income in passive earnings, you're going to be much harder to derail financially.   You'll be able to take bad situation in stride, as "somewhat of an inconvenience" instead of as a total disaster to your wealth.  That's really cool!

[gerardc]

Interestingly, people tend to have a lowish number when they're just starting, like 750k, then that number grows as they get closer to it. They're probably trying to get more motivated by seeing the finish line closer than what it is!

[Khan]

74% of 2020 target, ~26% of FI target. Well on track for 2020 target/mid-life break(almost FI w/ GI Bill).

[itchyfeet]

Interestingly, people tend to have a lowish number when they're just starting, like 750k, then that number grows as they get closer to it. They're probably trying to get more motivated by seeing the finish line closer than what it is!

If you are young and getting paid well, whist it is possible to live on $30K per year for the rest of your life, walking away from a little extra spending power down the line is certainly not an easy decision to commit to once you have put yourself in a position to make the choice. A great position to be in for sure - and of course not a binary decision for most, but not an easy decision.

 I have far more than $750K, and could certainly live a comfortable life if I retired today, but as I expect to be around for another 40+ years, investing a little more time up front to have a few more choices down the line seems a fair trade. If I was being paid less and was not saving 60% of my salary, or if I was 20 years older, or if I really despised my job, I am sure I would have a different view

[boarder42]

Interestingly, people tend to have a lowish number when they're just starting, like 750k, then that number grows as they get closer to it. They're probably trying to get more motivated by seeing the finish line closer than what it is!

If you are young and getting paid well, whist it is possible to live on $30K per year for the rest of your life, walking away from a little extra spending power down the line is certainly not an easy decision to commit to once you have put yourself in a position to make the choice. A great position to be in for sure - and of course not a binary decision for most, but not an easy decision.

 I have far more than $750K, and could certainly live a comfortable life if I retired today, but as I expect to be around for another 40+ years, investing a little more time up front to have a few more choices down the line seems a fair trade. If I was being paid less and was not saving 60% of my salary, or if I was 20 years older, or if I really despised my job, I am sure I would have a different view

thats gonna be the hard part for me... full well knowing that the 4% rule is overly safe already.  but i gain alot working part time at least 6 months a year if my company would let me do it ... so my one more year may become one more partial year a couple times before i throw in the towel.  but right now 5-7 years away i'm still thinking i'll throw in on time.

[homestead neohio]

Interestingly, people tend to have a lowish number when they're just starting, like 750k, then that number grows as they get closer to it. They're probably trying to get more motivated by seeing the finish line closer than what it is!

If you are young and getting paid well, whist it is possible to live on $30K per year for the rest of your life, walking away from a little extra spending power down the line is certainly not an easy decision to commit to once you have put yourself in a position to make the choice. A great position to be in for sure - and of course not a binary decision for most, but not an easy decision.

 I have far more than $750K, and could certainly live a comfortable life if I retired today, but as I expect to be around for another 40+ years, investing a little more time up front to have a few more choices down the line seems a fair trade. If I was being paid less and was not saving 60% of my salary, or if I was 20 years older, or if I really despised my job, I am sure I would have a different view

I'm not sure how many start with a low number, then increase it, but if that is the trend then I'm the outlier.  My number has continued to go down as I keep cutting expenses and realize I don't feel deprived living on less.   Maybe a separate poll is in order.

Maybe more significant is the amount I feel I need to downshift.  The extent of my boredom with my current occupation has certainly played a role there.  While my full FIRE target is lower than I originally envisioned, I'm still a few years away from that, so it might go back up if I start manufacturing safety margins.

[itchyfeet]

Not sure what the trend is. I am sure there are plenty of examples both ways.

My experience:
  PHASE 1 - An idea. wow, I am really starting to save some money. Given the share market goes up on average by more than 5% per year above inflation I should be able to stop work once I have 20x my spending and I will never have to touch the principal.
  PHASE 2 - Research. Learn about sequence of returns risk. Stumble across ERE and then MMM. Ok best increase my savings to 25x my spending.
  PHASE 3 - Budget realism. My spending number needs to include long term items and taxes and things that I didn't include sufficiently in earlier projections. Add 10% to the
Target
 PHASE 4 - Padding. Hell, why not save a little more while I am at it. Better now than worrying about it later.

So for me a significant increase in my targeted stash from when I first conceived of the idea of retiring extremely early. This evolution has played out over the past 4 or 5 years. Prior to that I believed early retirement to be 55 years old.

[boarder42]

Not sure what the trend is. I am sure there are plenty of examples both ways.

My experience:
  PHASE 1 - An idea. wow, I am really starting to save some money. Given the share market goes up on average by more than 5% per year above inflation I should be able to stop work once I have 20x my spending and I will never have to touch the principal.
  PHASE 2 - Research. Learn about sequence of returns risk. Stumble across ERE and then MMM. Ok best increase my savings to 25x my spending.
  PHASE 3 - Budget realism. My spending number needs to include long term items and taxes and things that I didn't include sufficiently in earlier projections. Add 10% to the
Target
 PHASE 4 - Padding. Hell, why not save a little more while I am at it. Better now than worrying about it later.

So for me a significant increase in my targeted stash from when I first conceived of the idea of retiring extremely early. This evolution has played out over the past 4 or 5 years. Prior to that I believed early retirement to be 55 years old.

yep my plan was 55 with 5MM then found all this and cut it down. to 37 with around half that or less.

[sol]

Interestingly, people tend to have a lowish number when they're just starting, like 750k, then that number grows as they get closer to it.

My target number started off high, then dropped steadily as I found more efficiencies, and is now rising again as I approach the finish line and find new excuses to spend more money.

At some point in the middle, I was definitely too optimistic about how low my spending would go.  It was motivating to see my target date pushed up, but I now see that I was oversimplifying things.  Fortunately, stellar market returns have meant the date can hold steady while the amount continues to rise.

Plus, I'm still planning to donate half of my income after I reach my target date, for as long as I can hold out.  So I may technically stay past what I consider my effective retirement for savings purposes.

[itchyfeet]

Interestingly, people tend to have a lowish number when they're just starting, like 750k, then that number grows as they get closer to it.

My target number started off high, then dropped steadily as I found more efficiencies, and is now rising again as I approach the finish line and find new excuses to spend more money.

At some point in the middle, I was definitely too optimistic about how low my spending would go.  It was motivating to see my target date pushed up, but I now see that I was oversimplifying things.  Fortunately, stellar market returns have meant the date can hold steady while the amount continues to rise.

Plus, I'm still planning to donate half of my income after I reach my target date, for as long as I can hold out.  So I may technically stay past what I consider my effective retirement for savings purposes.

I do like your stance on donating. It is very admirable.

My DW will almost certainly work casually post FIRE as she is a teacher who loves her work (unlike me as a corporate slave).

She is contemplating doing some teaching stints in remote communities ( aboriginal communities in outback Australia) or volunteering to teach in Africa. I guess this is a bit the same as your donating - giving back something once your are set.

I am very open to the idea of living in some remote, small community for a couple of years, having been a city dweller my whole adult life after growing up in a smallish town. I am sure I will find a way to make a valuable contribution in some way if my DW relocates us to the back of beyond..

[aFrugalFather]

After the last election, FIRE # is up to $2M.  It might go back down with better election results next time around.

Hmm, if your numbers are so dependent on political winds you might want to rethink your overall faith in FIRE. 

[SwordGuy]

My plan went like this:

1) Wife and I each work until age 70 and keep saving money.  Then hope it's enough.  Plod along at work.

2) I discover MMM and the shockingly simple math.   My eyes are opened!   I start researching because it can't really be this easy.  Or everyone would do it!   

3) Wife and I are convinced this will work and we cut spending and start looking for a side gig that will create additional passive income.  We pick a target of median family income with a paid off mortgage.

4) We end up buying a cool new house for ourselves, one that is better suited for aging in place and for our post-FIRE side gig activities.  But now we have a mortgage.  But we're going to sell the old house, so it won't affect our FIRE target.

5) Then we learn investing over paying off a low interest rate mortgage is the way to go, so our target is now median family income plus mortgage.

Or, possibly, we'll pay off the mortgage in 2 years when we flip the house we've started work on. 

We're still on the fence on that one:  smart math with bigger payoff but larger risk of loss vs simplicity and no risk.

Interestingly enough, we've already hit our target income.   But until we finish flipping the house and sell it, we haven't hit our target expenses.  We'll be $100,000 to $150,000 over target expenses spread over the next two years.   That's why we decided to opt for one more year of employment.

[gerardc]

A few years ago I wasn't even thinking about it, I had this vague idea of always working.

Then after discovering MMM, my number went way down very quickly, like $500-750k, in a vague of optimism.

Then I came to my senses and it went up a little, like 1.2-1.5m. Never ending race of always wanting more!

[itchyfeet]

A few years ago I wasn't even thinking about it, I had this vague idea of always working.

Then after discovering MMM, my number went way down very quickly, like $500-750k, in a vague of optimism.

Then I came to my senses and it went up a little, like 1.2-1.5m. Never ending race of always wanting more!

I hear you 100% on this. True mustachians (whatever) know when enough is enough.

Me on the other hand looks at my large stash, which makes me pretty well off by almost any measure, amd I go "if I assume my investments double every 10 years even if I don't add anything, how about DW and I work just to cover our expenses for the next 10 years, and them we'll be pretty rich in 10 years time".

It's always tempting to be greedy.

[itchyfeet]

According to my handy-dandy spreadsheet, I'm looking like this:


% Survive is my number at which my housing, basic utilities (water/electricity/heat), healthcare, food, clothing, and transportation will be covered.
% Bare Bones is for just those necessities plus a few near-necessities, like a phone/Internet.  No frills, like travel/play money and Netflix.
% Complete is for a retirement with the lifestyle I want.

I've broken it down by withdrawal rate, since ideally I'd like to be at 3-3.5%, but I would settle for 4%.  I could probably go cheaper on the % Survive number by assuming that I will find a way to cut back further on food, clothing, and transport, but I don't plan to retire at this level so I include it more out of curiosity than anything.

I occasionally ponder that maybe I should hav more than enough for 4%, like 3.5%. But then I consider the large chunk of my expenses I could defer by a few years if needed (eg: travel, car replacement, major home repairs/ refurb, even clothes), and also how much expenses I could just trim and save all together like food, entertainment etc, and I end up feeling pretty comfortable that I could mitigate any damage quite a bit if their was a major crash that took a few years to recover.

So, in the end I conclude I am ok with 4%. I am sure the worst that could happen won't be that bad. My DW could always do a little sub teaching if things got critical.

If we quit today our withdrawal rate would be 4.7%. Even at this level, based on history, I probably have a 66% chance of success (firesim) over 35 years and that is without managing cashflows a bit more scientifically, than blindly withdrawing 4.7%/12 every month.

I feel I am getting very close. Yeeehaaa!!!!

[Milizard]

After the last election, FIRE # is up to $2M.  It might go back down with better election results next time around.

Hmm, if your numbers are so dependent on political winds you might want to rethink your overall faith in FIRE.

It was the ACA that made me believe that FIRE was safely obtainable for someone with a smaller stash.  I have very mundane preexisting conditions galore.  My DH is having some more substantial current problems.  This administration blames us for these, and want to penalize us with higher premiums.

[SwordGuy]

After the last election, FIRE # is up to $2M.  It might go back down with better election results next time around.

Hmm, if your numbers are so dependent on political winds you might want to rethink your overall faith in FIRE.

It was the ACA that made me believe that FIRE was safely obtainable for someone with a smaller stash.  I have very mundane preexisting conditions galore.  My DH is having some more substantial current problems.  This administration blames us for these, and want to penalize us with higher premiums.

$20k or so per year vs $5k per year makes a mighty big difference.  At a 4% rate, it requires a good bit more in the stash.

[RedmondStash]

After the last election, FIRE # is up to $2M.  It might go back down with better election results next time around.

Hmm, if your numbers are so dependent on political winds you might want to rethink your overall faith in FIRE.

It was the ACA that made me believe that FIRE was safely obtainable for someone with a smaller stash.  I have very mundane preexisting conditions galore.  My DH is having some more substantial current problems.  This administration blames us for these, and want to penalize us with higher premiums.

$20k or so per year vs $5k per year makes a mighty big difference.  At a 4% rate, it requires a good bit more in the stash.

Yeah, the potentially accelerating rise of future health care costs is why I no longer have confidence that I'm at my FIRE number. I can't predict how rapidly premiums, copays, coinsurance, and uncovered costs will rise, and without those numbers, I can't set a FIRE target number. Especially because in some years, those costs go up 25% or more. Kind of throws all my careful planning into disarray.

[SwordGuy]

$20k or so per year vs $5k per year makes a mighty big difference.  At a 4% rate, it requires a good bit more in the stash.

Yeah, the potentially accelerating rise of future health care costs is why I no longer have confidence that I'm at my FIRE number. I can't predict how rapidly premiums, copays, coinsurance, and uncovered costs will rise, and without those numbers, I can't set a FIRE target number. Especially because in some years, those costs go up 25% or more. Kind of throws all my careful planning into disarray.

It's possible to get very good health care in other countries for much, much less than in the USA.

Assuming it's not something that requires immediate care to save your life, a plane ticket to another country could cut your medical costs to almost nothing.

Medical tourism is actually a thing and has been for a couple of decades.

[Spork]

Well, so far, 61% of folks are at 50% or less of their target passive income, and 39% are over 50%.

It will be interesting to see whether that changes over the next few weeks this survey will be open.

So far, the trend has gone from 50/50 to 61/39.

the issue with this is it will likely skew towards the lower and more often than not as the people who reach FI leave and move on ... as well as people who just learn all they thought they needed and left.  or those who jumped on the train for a few years then move on.

Some of us hang around.

[RedmondStash]

$20k or so per year vs $5k per year makes a mighty big difference.  At a 4% rate, it requires a good bit more in the stash.

Yeah, the potentially accelerating rise of future health care costs is why I no longer have confidence that I'm at my FIRE number. I can't predict how rapidly premiums, copays, coinsurance, and uncovered costs will rise, and without those numbers, I can't set a FIRE target number. Especially because in some years, those costs go up 25% or more. Kind of throws all my careful planning into disarray.

It's possible to get very good health care in other countries for much, much less than in the USA.

Assuming it's not something that requires immediate care to save your life, a plane ticket to another country could cut your medical costs to almost nothing.

Medical tourism is actually a thing and has been for a couple of decades.

Yeah, that's something we're considering. But I'm not sure how keen I'd be to hop on a plane and deal with the stress of travel and foreign countries when I am -- or a loved one is -- in the midst of a health crisis. Only so many stressors I can handle at once. It would just depend on the type of health issue.

[gerardc]

After the last election, FIRE # is up to $2M.  It might go back down with better election results next time around.

Hmm, if your numbers are so dependent on political winds you might want to rethink your overall faith in FIRE.

It was the ACA that made me believe that FIRE was safely obtainable for someone with a smaller stash.  I have very mundane preexisting conditions galore.  My DH is having some more substantial current problems.  This administration blames us for these, and want to penalize us with higher premiums.

$20k or so per year vs $5k per year makes a mighty big difference.  At a 4% rate, it requires a good bit more in the stash.

Yeah, the potentially accelerating rise of future health care costs is why I no longer have confidence that I'm at my FIRE number. I can't predict how rapidly premiums, copays, coinsurance, and uncovered costs will rise, and without those numbers, I can't set a FIRE target number. Especially because in some years, those costs go up 25% or more. Kind of throws all my careful planning into disarray.

Yeah but if health costs go up 25% or ACA is abolished, the stock market will go up too. If you have a $1-2m stash and the market is up 10%, that might compensate for cost increases, no? Poor people with no savings will be affected, but Mustachians not so much.

[Milizard]

After the last election, FIRE # is up to $2M.  It might go back down with better election results next time around.

Hmm, if your numbers are so dependent on political winds you might want to rethink your overall faith in FIRE.

It was the ACA that made me believe that FIRE was safely obtainable for someone with a smaller stash.  I have very mundane preexisting conditions galore.  My DH is having some more substantial current problems.  This administration blames us for these, and want to penalize us with higher premiums.

$20k or so per year vs $5k per year makes a mighty big difference.  At a 4% rate, it requires a good bit more in the stash.

Yeah, the potentially accelerating rise of future health care costs is why I no longer have confidence that I'm at my FIRE number. I can't predict how rapidly premiums, copays, coinsurance, and uncovered costs will rise, and without those numbers, I can't set a FIRE target number. Especially because in some years, those costs go up 25% or more. Kind of throws all my careful planning into disarray.

Yeah but if health costs go up 25% or ACA is abolished, the stock market will go up too. If you have a $1-2m stash and the market is up 10%, that might compensate for cost increases, no? Poor people with no savings will be affected, but Mustachians not so much.

The health of the economy, and ultimately the stock market, depends on the well-being of the majority.  The rest is just hot air (bubbles).

[RedmondStash]

After the last election, FIRE # is up to $2M.  It might go back down with better election results next time around.

Hmm, if your numbers are so dependent on political winds you might want to rethink your overall faith in FIRE.

It was the ACA that made me believe that FIRE was safely obtainable for someone with a smaller stash.  I have very mundane preexisting conditions galore.  My DH is having some more substantial current problems.  This administration blames us for these, and want to penalize us with higher premiums.

$20k or so per year vs $5k per year makes a mighty big difference.  At a 4% rate, it requires a good bit more in the stash.

Yeah, the potentially accelerating rise of future health care costs is why I no longer have confidence that I'm at my FIRE number. I can't predict how rapidly premiums, copays, coinsurance, and uncovered costs will rise, and without those numbers, I can't set a FIRE target number. Especially because in some years, those costs go up 25% or more. Kind of throws all my careful planning into disarray.

Yeah but if health costs go up 25% or ACA is abolished, the stock market will go up too. If you have a $1-2m stash and the market is up 10%, that might compensate for cost increases, no? Poor people with no savings will be affected, but Mustachians not so much.

The health of the economy, and ultimately the stock market, depends on the well-being of the majority.  The rest is just hot air (bubbles).

Also, sequence of returns. Early steep increases in health-care costs would eat away at my stash and stop it from growing, the same way a down market for the first 10 years of retirement would predict a greater chance of long-term stash failure.

Not to mention, the stock market's activity bears only a passing resemblance to what happens to actual businesses, including health care. It's a chaotic system that no one successfully predicts over the short term of just a few years. And it could easily crash for an unrelated reason, like another housing bubble bursting. There is no guarantee that health costs increasing would mean the stock market soaring to great heights.

[Laserjet3051]

<<1%

[spud1987]

I checked 60% assuming 50k/year spend and a 3% withdrawal rate plus our rental income.

I'm hoping to close the 40% gap in the next three years.

[SwordGuy]

I checked 60% assuming 50k/year spend and a 3% withdrawal rate plus our rental income.

I'm hoping to close the 40% gap in the next three years.

Three years will fly by in no time!

[SwordGuy]

62%/38% below/above 50% target number.   The ratio appears to have stabilized.

[jlcnuke]

According to my handy-dandy spreadsheet, I'm looking like this:


% Survive is my number at which my housing, basic utilities (water/electricity/heat), healthcare, food, clothing, and transportation will be covered.
% Bare Bones is for just those necessities plus a few near-necessities, like a phone/Internet.  No frills, like travel/play money and Netflix.
% Complete is for a retirement with the lifestyle I want.

I've broken it down by withdrawal rate, since ideally I'd like to be at 3-3.5%, but I would settle for 4%.  I could probably go cheaper on the % Survive number by assuming that I will find a way to cut back further on food, clothing, and transport, but I don't plan to retire at this level so I include it more out of curiosity than anything.

Including my VA disability payments, I'm over 100% for the "survive" and "bare bones" categories currently, but only at 62.4% for the "Complete" category. I'm planning for another 7 years until FIRE currently, but I'll admit that much of my lifestyle isn't very mustachian.

[aceyou]

There are a lot of folks who are in the 0 to 30 range.

I imagine some of you might be a bit discouraged if you compare yourself to folks who are in the 70 to 110+ range.

Don't be!

Most Americans don't have passive income.

Most Americans aren't on track to be financially independent.

Quite a few of them are on track to be broke and quite a few of them are fully at fault for that.

You're on EXACTLY the right path!

Bravo to you!

Yeah, I'm at 10%, but I looked at it as the opposite.  If no one here was polling solid progress, it'd be a sign that this site has bad advice for achieving FI.  The fact that so many are ahead of me and working their way up the FI ladder is hugely affirming that this works:) 

I've never been so happy to be at 10%!!!

[powersuitrecall]

Currently   -->   64%
EOY 2017  -->   73%
EOY 2018  -->   87%
EOY 2019  --> 101%

[BoonDogle]

At roughly 52% but closing fast.  As someone mentioned earlier, the last half comes much faster than the first half.  4.5 years to go.

[SpartyStash]

I'm at >110 but too chicken sh*t to quit. I've moved to part time and work two 10 hour days a week- Wednesday and Friday. I get benefits with this. This is the first summer with this so I'm pretty stoked. However I'm acruing vacation very slowly because I work fewer hours and at some point the desire to do more than a four day weekend will allow will overcome and I'll fire. I'd love for a month or two off to go on a nice long road trip. If only employers could give us that I would happily come back to work. Instead they will lose a well trained employee.

I really need to get over my cold feet to RE.

I think I'm somewhat similar (cold feet on full retirement).  I'm paying myself ~133% of what I need (1/2 from dividends & interest, the other half from 2% withdrawal of capital from my taxable accounts (not touching 401K, IRA or pension)).  I'm still doing a bit of scientific consulting now & then to stay in the industry.  I actually interviewed for a position in the Northeast yesterday, half of my brain is asking why?  The other half would benefit from the scientific interaction and getting out a lot more than I currently do (+ I'd be able to up my charitable contributions).  I'd love to move back to the west coast, but I need to stay on the east coast for the foreseeable future (Mom is in a nursing home and I take care of everything (2 siblings are pretty much useless)).
   
 

[Gumption]

I have been thinking about this recently.
I do think that the NW number is really meaningless, as we all have a different number here.
I think percent of FI is more accurate but doesn't quite get at the real question.

I think the better question to ask is, "how close are you to your FI date?

I am no math wiz, so please correct me if I am off base here.

Percentage is certainly a real metric, but with compound interest (or lack thereof,) its a bit misleading.
It's it not like we are covering a distance at a constant speed.

If your goal is $1M, getting from $0 to $100k is certainly a much harder task than getting from $600k to $700k even though both are $100k (%10 of goal) increases.

With compound interest, we get faster as we get closer to the finish line.

[MVal]

I'm encouraged that I'm in the largest cohort in the poll. In about another month, I'll be 25% of the way there. Halfway to halfway! I've been batting around the idea of leaving my job sometime next year to find a new opportunity. I'm bored here and would like to try something new, possibly even make more money, but I'm too scared right now. I'm hoping to build up some taxable investments I could more easily get to in an emergency if needed if I decide to jump ship and potentially fail.

[Seradoc]

Just changed my answer from 60-70% down to 40-50% due to buying a larger house next month.  Since I knew it was coming one of these years, maybe I should have already factored it into my original poll answer.


Since it is likely that I will end up pushing for 1M in the bank rather than 750k due to my conservative nature, maybe I should just go ahead and put myself down into the 30-40% bracket while I am at it.



I'm really not sure that I could ever have a firm answer to this poll while mid-way through the saving process.

[SwordGuy]

I have been thinking about this recently.
I do think that the NW number is really meaningless, as we all have a different number here.
I think percent of FI is more accurate but doesn't quite get at the real question.

I think the better question to ask is, "how close are you to your FI date?

I am no math wiz, so please correct me if I am off base here.

Percentage is certainly a real metric, but with compound interest (or lack thereof,) its a bit misleading.
It's it not like we are covering a distance at a constant speed.

If your goal is $1M, getting from $0 to $100k is certainly a much harder task than getting from $600k to $700k even though both are $100k (%10 of goal) increases.

With compound interest, we get faster as we get closer to the finish line.

Yes.  And No. :)

There are lots of different ways to get to one's income target.  For example, a 20 year military pension is worth $0 for years 1-19.9999 and becomes worth money after that.

Someone might be at 20% (according to this poll on one day and 100% the very next day).

That's a very different growth trajectory than someone who is accumulating wealth via stock and bond purchases.

One could argue that, "But it's predictable that they'll get their pension in 7 more years."   Well, maybe.   Life is uncertain and military life in wartime even more so.

Someone who is investing in real estate as an appreciation speculator might not know when their property will skyrocket upwards in value or the rate at which it will do so.

There are so many ways to reach the goal that I don't think that any one measurement can capture all the nuances.

[SwordGuy]

There are a lot of folks who are in the 0 to 30 range.

I imagine some of you might be a bit discouraged if you compare yourself to folks who are in the 70 to 110+ range.

Don't be!

Most Americans don't have passive income.

Most Americans aren't on track to be financially independent.

Quite a few of them are on track to be broke and quite a few of them are fully at fault for that.

You're on EXACTLY the right path!

Bravo to you!

Yeah, I'm at 10%, but I looked at it as the opposite.  If no one here was polling solid progress, it'd be a sign that this site has bad advice for achieving FI.  The fact that so many are ahead of me and working their way up the FI ladder is hugely affirming that this works:) 

I've never been so happy to be at 10%!!!

Real wisdom!

[SwordGuy]

Well, we just got a smidge past 62%/38% below/above 50% passive income.

I would be surprised if this moved very much, but I like surprises!

[SwordGuy]

Bump up since we're getting near the end of the voting period.
I'll do another in the Jan timeframe.

[SwordGuy]

Oh, go ahead, register and vote.    Don't just lurk! :)

[Lan Mandragoran]

27yrs old, need 28k a year, I think our goal is 40k though.

Rental = 5k a year (after expenses and all that fun stuff)
30k invested~ so 1.2k swr

so... we have a ways to go lol. sigh :P. Good news is we only started trying 18 months ago.

Bare minimum = 22%
More relaxed = 15%