Retired Couple, 68 and 74, Ask If a 99% Simulated Success Rate Means They Can Spend More

A husband, 68, and his wife, 74, have been told by their financial adviser that their savings have a 99% chance of lasting, and they want to know why they should not spend far more of it.

MarketWatch columnist Quentin Fottrell, who writes the Moneyist advice column, answered by urging the couple to build an emergency fund before raising their spending.

Fottrell's reply, published Oct. 31, 2026, said the plan looks sound but leaves gaps. The column was also listed on RoboMacro's wire feed on Oct. 30.

The Couple's Finances

The husband wrote that both are in good health, married later in life and have no children or close family left. They expect any legacy to go to charity.

After more than 40 years of maxing out their 401(k) and 403(b) accounts, they sold their longtime home last June, moved across the country and bought a smaller-roomed but more spacious retirement home.

According to the version of the column on Morningstar (Morningstar, Inc.), the couple's adviser ran Monte Carlo simulations, which test a portfolio against thousands of market scenarios.

The adviser's runs showed a 99% probability the couple would not outlive their assets, and likely would leave several million dollars more than they started with. The couple's own simulations could not push the success rate below 90%.

Their numbers, as the husband gave them, are below.

• Social Security and two lifetime annuities together exceed monthly expenses by about $2,500.
• Home equity is $1 million, set against a $700,000 mortgage that also paid for several hundred thousand dollars of repairs.
• Traditional IRAs total more than $1.4 million, with another $70,000 in Roth IRAs.

Fottrell's Response

Fottrell said the guaranteed income leaves a $30,000 annual surplus, a strength. The large mortgage for people in their late 60s and early 70s is a risk if it strains cash flow. The husband did not give the payment.

Fottrell estimated roughly $3,500 a month on a 30-year loan at 4.5%, or $5,300 on a 15-year loan, before property taxes and maintenance.

Required minimum distributions, the annual withdrawals the tax code requires from traditional IRAs, add to the cushion. Fottrell put 3.92% of a $1.4 million balance at about $54,900.

He said that money could fund the emergency reserve the couple lacks, and he suggested at least 12 months of essential expenses.

He said the couple could test a $30,000 annual travel budget, subject to review. He cautioned that a market correction or recession could intervene, and that long-term care for one person could cost $100,000 a year depending on the facility and location.

Questions to Put to the Adviser

Fottrell said a Monte Carlo result is only as good as its assumptions. He suggested the couple ask the adviser three things.

First, what does the 99% figure mean, and how much money would remain after 30 years of inflation-adjusted spending? He also wanted to know whether the model accounts for taxes, Medicare, long-term care and home maintenance.

Second, what happens if stocks fall, interest rates jump and inflation surges in the first five years of retirement while withdrawals are large? Third, does the 99% fall substantially if the couple spends $30,000 more on vacations each year?

The husband had also raised income-related Medicare premiums, known as IRMAAs, and possible future changes to Social Security as considerations. The excerpts reviewed do not show Fottrell addressing either.