Braden Warwick

nothing to note.

I think because the results didn't change very much at all, the average was 2% to 3%, but the bounds were a 1% change to a 5% change.

So it's really all within the normal financial planning assumptions updates could change the success rates by that much.

So then I went from the success rates to looking at the change in the sustainable spending amounts.

And you would expect that those results to be pretty similar because the sustainable spending

Basically, it's the same mechanism.

The success rate is going to inform the sustainable spending amount.

That's pretty much what we saw.

We saw changes of spending that ranged within 1% to 2%.

Not a drastic difference.

I think one thing to note, like some people, it may be confusing because the tails of the distribution changed so much, but then we're not seeing a ton of change with this.

The reason why is it's really the point on the distribution of like, say, the bottom 20th percentile.

If you're looking for an 80% success rate, it's the return at that exact point, the bottom 20th percentile that's going to drive these results.

So if there's really not a big shift left or right, then it's really not going to have a dramatic impact on these metrics specifically.

That's right.

So you wouldn't really expect a dramatic shift here anyways, because like you said, Ben, like we're already capturing the standard deviation and the expected mean, and that's the same as it was previously.

100%.

And I'm going to circle back to this point once I cover this next section, because it's going to become even more obvious why that is important and why that's going to be super impactful.

Up to this point, in terms of the success rate and the sustainable spending amount, not drastic changes.

I feel like I make this point every time I'm on, but it always comes back to the goals of the client.