How Can You Run Out of USD 6 Million?

Financial Independence asked on my recent post about the 4% rule:

"I need to have more insights on how somebody can run out of almost 6 million dollars. Why and how would you even spend 180,000 a year"

Thank you for the inspiration for another post! First of all, this is a simulation where you spend 4% in the first year and it then increases at the rate of inflation. The expected rate of return is 8.3% a year with a monthly standard deviation of 1.86% (that is low volatility)* and the inflation rate is 4% per year, which is the current rate in Australia. Failure is defined as having negative money left apart from our house (currently about USD 950k of the total) in 2060, when Moominmama would be 85. The model does include getting the Australia age pension when the money falls below the asset test level and the UK state pension. You could still sell the house, but that would reduce the Australian age pension–owner occupied property is not in the asset test. With 4% inflation there is a 10% probability of failure. There is about a 20% probability of having less than AUD 1 million left. With only 3% inflation but the same rate of return the failure rate falls to 3%.

So, this doesn't say that we would actually spend USD 180k per year. It is a thought exercise. 

On the other hand, to see what we actually spent, you can check this post with almost 40 years of data and my latest post on 2024-25 spending, which also gives recent years. We spent about AUD 175k (c. USD 125k) according to this last year. It includes mortgage interest but not principal in spending. It doesn't include taxes. These will be a lot lower than they were in recent years, but you also have to pay those out of your portfolio. I think we can easily get to USD 150k including taxes going forward. Education is the biggest expense apart from taxes. If we stay in private education it is going to rise steeply. It is around USD 30k per year at the moment. Apart from this we don't live a luxurious lifestyle–for example, our car was built 22 years ago, though we will probably buy a new one soon.

* The investment returns are the averages over 30 years of the target portfolio. They are better than our own track record, because we did so poorly before 2012.  

Interactive Brokers Customers Beat the S&P500 in 2025

 

Both individual and hedge fund clients beat the index. On average individuals made 19.2% vs. 17.9% for the index. We made 18.1% overall in USD terms. Interactive Brokers' hedge fund clients made 28.9%!

The Power Law in Venture Capital

Maybe you have heard that returns from venture capital are governed by a "power law". But what exactly is that? When I first read about this I was confused. I have now figured out the technical steps need to convert the general idea of the power law you may see in popular articles into something actually useable. I'll skip those steps and show you what I think is a useable version of this idea. First we need to distinguish between investments that lose money and those that deliver a multiple of one or more times the capital invested. My version of the power law is just for profitable investments with a multiple of one or greater. The equation is:

This says that the probability P that the multiple M is greater or equal to m is equal to the formula on the right, where alpha is the power of the power law. To take an example, if alpha = 1.75 and m is 10, the probability is 0.178 or a 17.8% chance that you get more than a 10x multiple. Conversely, the probability that the multiple is between 1 and 10 is 1-0.178 or 0.822. Remember, that isn't the probability that your investment makes this much money, rather, that if it makes money how likely will it make more than m.

The interesting thing is that for 1 < alpha < 2, the probability of getting a given payoff decreases slower than the payoff is increasing. This means that more and more of the expected value of your portfolio is derived from higher and higher multiples (again for alpha = 1.75):

Expected value is just the product of average payoff and probability. This is why people say that you need to make a lot of investments in venture capital to get good results. If half your investments go to zero, you need to get an average multiple of more than two on the other half to make any money. If you only make ten investments, a 128-256x outcome, which has only a 1.1% probability of happening among your successful investments, probably won't be in your portfolio. 

20 Years of Moomin Valley

Reading Sam's post on 17 years of Financial Samurai, I realized I missed the 20th Anniversary of Moomin Valley! These were the first two posts. In the early years, I posted a lot. Since the GFC and even more since 2012, I have posted less. The nadir was in 2017 (25 posts)–the year after our first child was born. But I still managed a few posts beyond the monthly and annual reports. 2018 was a bumper year for posting and since then, I've stabilized at around 60 posts a year on average. In total there have been 2,270 posts or about 110 per year.

At first, I wasn't sure what I would use the blog for. Mostly, it has been for accountability for myself. I know I need to post about the ups and downs each month. Writing about investments means that you need to think about them. I hoped my wife would read it to learn about our finances, but that didn't really happen. 

More Gold Exposure

I brought my gold exposure back up to 10% of gross assets. But instead of investing in the PMGOLD ETF I invested in the L1 Gold Fund. This is a hedge fund invested mostly in gold mining stocks. I am lumping this in with gold metal as the price of gold is the main driver of gold mining stocks. If the government's capital gains tax changes are implemented, it will be better to have a franked dividend paying fund instead of a gold metal ETF in my personal name.

I also sold some Regal Investment Fund (RF1.AX) and bought some more Pengana Private Equity (PE1.AX). Despite the success of the SpaceX IPO, which is its largest holding, it dropped sharply today! One possible reason is that Pengana is launching a new AI fund, Maybe some people are selling this to buy that?

4% Rule Failure Rate

I have been discussing retirement planning with my brother who is two years younger than me. As a result of these discussions, I have added stochastic investment returns to my projection model as well as the Australian Age Pension (which is means tested) and I increased the planning horizon to 2060 from 2050. Moominmama would be 85 in 2060. Previously, I stress tested the projection by using very low constant rates of return.

Running my baseline spending scenario–linear growth in real spending with stepdowns of 1/6 after each child finishes university–it is very rare to run out of money by 2060. This is defined as negative net worth beside our house. In 100 runs there are no failures.

But if we spend according to the 4% rule, we run out of money by 2060 about 10% of the time, though rarely by 2050. This is using the monthly returns distribution over the last 30 years of the benchmark target portfolio as investment returns. In many more cases, real (2026 dollars) net worth is below AUD 1 million by 2060 and falling fast. If I use our own historical returns–which were very bad before 2012–the failure rate is around 40%. With our returns and linear spending the failure rate is around 25%.  

This graph compares the target portfolio, our track record, Australian shares, the MSCI World Index, and gold:

Spending according to a 3% rule and the target portfolio returns has no failures in 100 runs, though a few near misses. 

So, we need to keep our spending well below 4% or increase returns if we don't want to run out of money.

Things I Don't Invest In

For every investment I do make, there are a lot that I look at and decide against. A recent example that I blogged about is the Pabrai Funds. 

I'm sent more and more invitations to invest in start-ups. One I saw today was Venice AI. Some complicated story about a privacy oriented LLM (but uses resources from other LLMs maybe?) plus two different crypto tokens. I couldn't understand the pitch and deleted it. In general, I like to see some attention to the "economics" - what is the route to profitability. If it is not discussed at all, I tend to pass on the opportunity.

And then there are more mature opportunities including two upcoming IPOs. One is the IPO of SpaceX. CommSec has provided an Australian version of the prospectus. I already have exposure via Pengana Private Equity (PE1.AX) and if I wanted more I could buy more shares in that fund, which are trading at a discount to what the NAV would be with the SpaceX IPO price. SpaceX is their largest holding by far. S&P have decided not to change their index rules to allow unprofitable and new companies to join their indices. NASDAQ on the other hand will be including it in the NASDAQ 100 index very quickly. I am sceptical of the idea that there will be a pop in price at the IPO beyond the already crazy price–the price is near 100 times 2025 sales. With USD 75 billion of shares being issued in the IPO, most people who want them will probably get them? Most IPOs do not perform well in the short term if you buy at the IPO price.

The other IPO I looked at was a new fund from Pengana focusing on 20 private AI related companies–AIX. Bytedance and Handshake are the two seed assets. They will also be investing in "picks and shovels" and applications companies not just LLM providers. But most closed end funds definitely don't trade well following their IPO. My preference is to be invested in related resources (e.g. via Tribeca Global Resources, TGF.AX) and in earlier stage firms that have routes to profitability (see above).

Treasury Wines Investor Day

Two days after I bought into Treasury Wine Estates (TWE.AX), the company had an investor day where they announced that they would focus on luxury and trendy wines and greatly reduce the number of brands and product lines. They also said that they were reviewing their US operations and were getting good sales growth in China–better than other wine producers. Investors were very happy with this presentation and the stock is currently up 13%. I bought another 7,500 shares to get to 17,500.

 

 

May 2026 Report

International stock markets gained, but the Australian market lagged, presumably in response to the tax changes. The Australian Dollar was little changed moving from USD 0.7179 to USD 0.7185. Gold fell in USD terms. Here is the performance of our benchmarks (total returns including dividends):

US Dollar Indices

MSCI World Index (gross): 5.21%

S&P 500: 5.26%

HFRI Hedge Fund Index (forecast): 1.50%

Australian Dollar Benchmarks

ASX 200: 1.34%

Target Portfolio (forecast, depends on HFRI): 2.56%

Australian 60/40 benchmark: 2.92%

We underperformed all our benchmarks by a lot. In Australian Dollar terms we gained 0.44% and in US Dollar terms we gained 0.53%. This barely covers inflation. The SMSF also underperformed gaining 0.43% while Unisuper gained 2.26% and PSS(AP) 2.31%.

Here is a report on the performance of investments by asset class:

The asset class returns are in currency neutral terms as the rate of return on gross assets and do not include investment expenses such as margin interest, and so the total differs from the Australian Dollar returns on net assets mentioned above. Gold, futures, and private equity lost money but all other asset classes gained. Hedge funds were the best performer and greatest contributor. 

Why did we underperform the target portfolio? The most important reason is that we had a -0.15% contribution from private equity while the target benchmark had a 1.84% contribution. If the target portfolio had lost 0.15% on private equity instead, it would have returned only 0.57% overall. As we will see below, 3i was a major detractor, and we just don't have consistent wins on our venture portfolio yet. This is the J-curve curse. If and when we do have consistent returns–returns are actually positive already– they'll report with a long time lag too.  

Things that worked well this month:

• Six investments gained AUD 10k or more: Tribeca Global Resources (TGF.AX, 44k), Unisuper (18k), PSS(AP) (14k), Pengana Private Equity (PE1.AX, 13k), Acadian Global Equity Long-Short (13k), and Regal Partners (RPL.AX, 10k). Our industry/public sector super funds were nice diversifiers this month.

What really didn't work:

• Three investments lost AUD 10k or more: L1 Global Long-Short (GLS.AX, 27k), 3i (III.L, 22k), gold (14k).

Our distance from our target allocation very slightly narrowed. Our actual allocation currently looks like this:

Almost 70% of our portfolio is in what are often considered to be alternative assets: real estate, art, hedge funds, private equity and credit, gold, and futures. A lot of these are listed investments or investments with daily liquidity, so our portfolio is not as illiquid as you might think.

Moominmama receives employer superannuation contributions every two weeks. We also make monthly concessional contributions to Moominmama's superannuation to reach the annual cap on contributions. There will still be capital calls from Aura Venture Fund II and III. I am receiving monthly pension payments from both Unisuper and our SMSF totalling AUD 5,150 per month. I got a bit more active in the market, making the following investment and trade moves this month:

• We received a large value of distributions this month. AUD 20k from URF.AX, AUD 24k from Aura VF2, 3k from Aura VF1, and more than AUD 10k including the franking credit from WAM Capital. The first of these largely went to paying our SMSF's tax bill of AUD 16k after the annual accounts were finalized. The Aura payments were a welcome boost to our offset account, which is currently at just below AUD 300k:

• I made three investments (USD 2k each) in startups on Angellist. These were my first investments that were not with the Unpopular Ventures syndicate. Two of them are in the medical/health field.
• I sold 20k shares of Tribeca Global Resources (TGF.AX) around the recent price peak. This reduced our margin loan back towards the level I fixed at a constant interest rate.
• I sold 2k shares of the ASX 200 ETF, IOZ.AX. I think I was just getting bored of this! I used the money to:
• Buy 1,000 shares of ZIM again and 10k shares of Regal Partners (RPL.AX). ZIM has fallen since I sold and continued to fall since I rebought... There seems to be a lot of resistance in the government to approve the takeover by Hapag-Lloyd. On the other hand, businessman Haim Sakal has made a higher bid for the firm, though it doesn't seem to being taken very seriously. Regal just seems very cheap given the growth the firm is achieving. These helped us rebalancing as well.
• I also sold 10k shares of Pengana Private Equity (PE1.AX) as the price now seems to reflect the NAV including the expected value of SpaceX at its upcoming IPO. I bought 5k shares of Regal Investment Fund (RF1.AX) instead as it is trading below NAV.

Here are the income and spending accounts * for this month:

I just realised that I have been treating tax on employer superannuation contributions and tax on SMSF contributions asymmetrically and tax on superannuation earnings asymmetrically with tax on non-superannuation investment returns. I have been deducting contributions tax from contributions for employer super inside the "other income" category but all the tax paid on the SMSF, which includes contributions tax, has been relegated to "tax credit". Similarly, all tax paid on non-super investment returns has been in "Other income" but all tax paid on superannuation earnings is in "tax credit".

I think the solution is to deduct all the tax actually paid by the SMSF from other income, while leaving the tax credits received by the SMSF in "tax credit" obviously, but also all the imputed tax on employer super investment earnings will stay in tax credit because we never actually receive that money. The accounts above employ this new approach. This will give us a better picture of how we are performing relative to the 4% rule.

Other income includes Moominmama's salary and employer superannuation contributions but also the tax paid by the SMSF, which was AUD 16k this month.. It was a low spending month at AUD 6k, which is about the same as we spent in March. This number does not include our mortgage payments, which are regarded here as saving and investment costs. Dissaving amounted to AUD 18k, mainly because of the SMSF tax. This is still within the 4% rule limit of AUD 23k. We gained AUD 30k investing, all of which was in retirement accounts. We received a dividend from WAM Capital in the SMSF with associated franking credits this month. We also paid a lot of tax to the ATO from the SMSF. As a result of all this, net worth rose by AUD 6k to AUD 8.231 million. This is net worth is lower than that reported last month due to a fall in the estimated value of our house, where I use the same value for all months of the year.

* Results are shown separately for retirement and non-retirement accounts as well as housing, which nowadays doesn't have much activity. The grey shaded rows are additional notes. Total investment income is split into investment income before exchange rate moves and the contribution of exchange rates. Other income is non-investment income including salaries, employer superannuation contributions, net tax returns minus superannuation contribution tax and all SMSF tax payments to the ATO. Investment income is shown pre-tax. Tax credits include franking credits on Australian Dividends etc. and imputed tax on industry superannuation returns. These are taken away from investment income to get changes in actual net worth. Inheritances include gifts from relatives. Saving is from non-investment income, transfers, and inheritances. 

Having Another Run at Treasury Wine Estates

I did well on my trade last time. Stock is beaten down but rebounding a little. I sold 50 shares of Berkshire Hathaway to fund this.

 Daou Vineyard, California

Fixing Margin Loan Interest Rate?

A year ago, I fixed most of my CommSec margin loan at a constant rate for the year ahead. The rate I got was 7.54% compared to a variable rate of 9.4%. I just got an email from CommSec asking whether I want to fix my rate again. The fixed rate is now 9.2%, but the variable rate has only increased to 9.65%. Clearly, I made the right choice to fix my loan, but this doesn't look like a good option going forward. Instead, I will reduce my borrowing probably by selling my gold ETF holdings, or at least some of them, especially if the recent budget CGT measures are passed by Parliament. The Greens hold the balance of power, but they think that nominal gains should be taxed at ordinary income tax rates and that there should be no grandfathering, so they might yet derail things for Labor.

Capital Gains Can Vary Radically Depending on the Currency They Are Measured In!

Our SMSF provider only completed our 2024-25 financial year accounts at the end of April. I check these carefully before signing off and paying the ATO. They have made mistakes in capital gains calculations in the past.

I thought that was the case this time too for our investments in the Fidelity Bitcoin ETF and Defi Technologies. So, I challenged their calculation. Their response was that the numbers were correct if I converted the purchases and sales to Australian Dollars using spot exchange rates on the exact days of the transactions. 

I don't use this method in my own tax accounting, as it is complicated. I just take the gain in USD or CAD and multiply by the exchange rate on 30th June of the tax year in question. I thought this was pretty close. It turns out it's not!

The gain on the bitcoin transaction was USD 19k. I downloaded the exchange rates from Pacific Exchange Rate Service, which I use for all my forex calculations, on each transaction day–there were many purchases–and multiplied the USD amounts by those exchange rates. Then I deducted the sum of all the purchases in AUD from the sale amount in AUD. The capital gain turned out to be AUD 53k! 

This is as if the Australian Dollar to US Dollar exchange rate was 35 cents, when it was never below 60 cents. The reason this happened was that I sold when the exchange rate was only 60 US cents but bought at higher exchange rates. Given the USD gain was not that big relative to the size of the transactions, the difference in exchange rates was levered up into a large AUD gain. I never thought something this extreme was possible. 

The Defi Technologies gains were not as radically different in the two currencies because I made more money on those relative to the size of the transactions. The tax bill for the bitcoin trade of AUD 8k is more than half of the SMSF's annual tax bill of AUD 14.4k.

54 Wellington

The Liberman Family ended up liquidating their property fund as a result of developing this office building. And ASA Diversified Property Fund, which our SMSF is a unitholder of, ended up buying it for a bargain price that is much less than replacement cost.

Australian Commonwealth Budget 2026

The budget speech was tonight, and all of the worst stuff that was leaked in the lead up to the budget appears to be in it. The worst is a minimum 30% tax on capital gains instead of up till now a maximum of 23.5%! Australia now has the most favourable tax treatment of dividends in the world and the least favourable treatment of capital gains. I'm sure Labor is thinking about that discrepancy. They were in 2019. I am exactly the type of person worst hit by this budget–a retiree probably in the 30% tax bracket.

The existing capital gains tax discount served two purposes. One is that taxing gains that are just due to inflation seems unfair (though we do that to interest payments), and the second is that companies already pay corporation tax on the profits they reinvest to generate capital gains. While franked dividends in Australia fully pass on to shareholders a credit for tax already paid, the current CGT regime partially does that. Whether or not replacing that with inflation indexation makes sense, a minimum 30% tax on capital gains seems especially unfair. 

I am already thinking about how to adapt to the new regime. I probably will sell my gold ETF holdings and replace them with futures contracts due to the new minimum 30% capital gains tax. And probably put the futures inside our SMSF for good measure. Freeing up the capital will allow me to reduce debt, contribute to super as much as I can and buy some dividend yielding investment instead.

Our Pershing Square Holdings, 3i, Berkshire Hathaway, Masterworks, and Angellist investments are all less attractive. Should also reconsider our accounts (outside the SMSF) with Colonial First State (CFS Imputation Fund and Acadian Global Long-Short Fund) that distribute capital gains. It doesn't make sense to get rid of all investments likely to have real capital gains. Instead, the expected rate of return needs to be high enough post-tax to hold onto those investments. 

Also, it seems that the 30% minimum CGT will only apply to the gains relative to the investment's value at 1 July 2027. So, there is no rush to make changes. This is going to greatly complicate tax calculations.

Pabrai Funds

Monish Pabrai is a well-known value investor who is often interviewed. He recently launched an actively managed ETF: WAGN listed on NASDAQ. After watching the interview and hearing about the ETF, I was curious about his performance. I found online his investor letter from 2020. PIF2, which started in 2000, returned 15.4% per year up to 2019 compared to the S&P 500's 7.1%. This sounds good, but the fund had extreme volatility, and so its information ratio was 0.54 compared to 0.48 for the S&P 500. You might still want to invest on this basis but PIF3, which started in 2002 returned 10.3% vs 8.2% for the S&P 500 with even higher volatility and PIF4 underperformed the S&P 500 also with extreme volatility. PIF4 has continued this pattern since 2020. The mutual fund and ETF have done well since inception in 2023 but I think it is likely that this pattern of high volatility continues. So, for now, I decided not to invest.

Education Bond Analysis

I've now done some spreadsheet simulations of education bonds. Assuming that our marginal personal tax rate will be 30%, the goal is to pay out fund earnings equal to the 30% tax threshold, which is currently $45k (everything in AUD of course) in each of the three years the children are in university. I assume a nominal fund return of 9% and inflation of 3% per year. I increase the amount saved each year by the rate of inflation. When the children finish university, all the contributions are removed.

For Little My, who is now in school year 1, you need to start by saving $17k in the scheme this year. In the end there will be $241k of contributions. The maximum tax saving over the 3 payout years is $40,600 in total and the management fees incurred over the course of the scheme are $18k. The cost of the management fees is a bit higher than this–about $3-$4k–due to compounding. So, the tax benefit is roughly double the extra cost. However, if Little My earned the equivalent of $18,200 per year–the current tax-free threshold–the tax benefit goes down to $16,500!

For Moomin, who is now in school year 5, you need to start by saving $31,750k in the scheme this year. In the end there will be $282k of contributions. The maximum tax saving over the 3 payout years is $36k in total and the management fees incurred over the course of the scheme are $15,500k. The cost of the management fees is again a bit higher than this due to compounding. So, the tax benefit is roughly double the extra cost. However, if Moomin earned the equivalent of $18,200 per year–the current tax-free threshold–the tax benefit goes down to $14,900.

Here is Little My's analysis:

Of course, if they don't go to uni, but work instead, you pay a whole load of management fees and get into maybe a suboptimal investment for nothing. 

Also, up till now I have assumed that all our income is ordinary income. If instead it is all long-term capital gains–for example from selling gold ETF shares–then the tax benefit is halved and the maximum tax benefit is equal to the management fees. Of course, the 50% capital gains discount might not exist in the future–Labor wants to abolish it. If all our income came from franked dividends, then in the 30% tax bracket we would pay no tax on these anyway and so there would be no tax benefit, just management fees!

P.S. 

It seems unlikely that the two of us would earn more than $270k between us outside of super, but just for completeness, I looked at the case where we are in the 37% tax bracket.  In this case the tax benefit for Little My assuming they don't work and keeping all other assumptions the same, rises to $54k or three times the management fee. But again, if all our income came from capital gains that would only be $27k and if all our income came from franked dividends our tax rate on the grossed up dividend is only 7% after the franking credit or 10% of the net dividend. This means there is only a tax benefit on the first $18.2k paid out for education expenses, which would be negated if Little My worked. So, I don't think I am going to do this.