“The bridge between hope and reality is built with preparation.”
“Guardrails, Not Guesswork: Why 4% Is Looking More Like 4.7%
About 35 years ago, I used to white‑knuckle my way across the old Cooper River bridges in Charleston. Narrow lanes, little room for error, and a lot of praying when you shared the bridge with a big truck. Today it’s a different story: the Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge carries you over the same water with eight wide lanes and modern barriers. Same crossing; completely different feeling. Solid wide clear roads and guardrails don’t make you reckless—they make you confident and responsive.
Retirement income works the same way. When you set guardrails—clear rules for when to dial spending back (or allow a little more)—you don’t have to white‑knuckle it. In fact, with guardrails, many retirees can start a bit higher and still feel safe.
And that’s the headline: Bill Bengen, the “4% rule” guy, has updated his research. His guidance points to roughly 4.7% as a conservative baseline safe withdrawal rate—and in today’s environment, he argues many retirees could justify ~5.25%–5.5% if they’re willing to adjust as conditions change. (Barron’s, MarketWatch)
“Wait…what about Morningstar’s 3.7%?”
Both can be true. Morningstar’s 2025 work pegs 3.7% as a prudent static starting rate for a 30‑year retirement if you want a high (90%) success standard and no adjustments beyond inflation—think “very sturdy speed limit when you never change lanes.” Morningstar
Bengen’s update and guardrail research says, “use a sensible speed limit and respond to traffic.” The well‑known Guyton‑Klinger rules show how simple, pre‑agreed adjustments can support higher initial rates—because you promise to steer when markets misbehave (freeze raises after down years, trim if withdrawals drift too high, allow modest bumps when things are unusually good). In their testing, those rules supported initial rates around 5.8%–6.2% depending on allocation during a tough historical start. Financial Planning Association
So the choice isn’t “right vs. wrong”—it’s static baseline (3.7%) vs. dynamic guardrails (often allowing ~4.7%+). Your comfort, flexibility, and goals decide the lane. MorningstarBarron’s
What does 4.7% look like?
On $1,000,000, a 4.0% start is $40,000. A 4.7% start is $47,000. That extra $7,000 might fund a grandkid trip, build a healthcare cushion, or just reduce the number of “Do we really need this?” conversations—as long as you actually use your guardrails when the road gets slick. Barron’s
Bottom line
Rules of thumb are helpful. Guardrails are better. If you’re willing to adjust as you go, starting around 4.7% is now a defensible conversation—not a myth—especially with a written Riverbend Bridge Method that tells you how to adjust. If you prefer ultra‑simple and ultra‑conservative, 3.7% remains a solid baseline. Either way, let your money serve your life, not the other way around. Barron’sMorningstar
In the News
I was recently featured in MarketWatch in an article titled “America has 5 wealth classes. See where you fit in — and how much it takes to reach the upper echelons.”
They highlighted my perspective that while being in the top 25% of wealth is certainly a privilege, it often takes far more than the $714,000 benchmark to truly enjoy an above-average lifestyle in many parts of the U.S. — especially for retirees or those whose wealth is mostly tied up in their home.
You can read the full article here: MarketWatch Feature
