Scenario
What if you stop contributing five years before retirement?
Last updated: October 2026
Specific retirement question
This scenario measures the difference between contributing through retirement and pausing contributions five years before target retirement. The effect is often larger than expected because contributions have fewer years to compound.
This is a planning scenario only; it does not predict any personal outcome.
Inputs used
- Current age 44
- Retirement target 60
- Current savings $620,000
- Monthly contribution until age 55 $2,200
- Monthly contribution after age 55 $0
- Expected return 6.8%
- Inflation 3.0%
- Annual spending $60,000
- Withdrawal rate 3.5%
- Volatility 17%
Result summary
Continued contribution case: projected portfolio about $2.50M at age 60, with about 60% modeled success.
Stop-at-55 case: projected portfolio about $2.35M at age 60, about 6% lower, with about 56% modeled success.
Estimated FIRE number: around $1.71M in today's dollars ($60,000 ÷ 3.5%) in both paths, or about $2.75M in age-60 dollars. Both paths fall short of it.
How these were computed: the calculator takes one flat contribution, so the continued case comes from the calculator and the stop-at-55 case from the same engine math with contributions set to zero after age 55.
This demonstrates that contribution timing can matter as much as return assumptions.
Tradeoff analysis
- Lost compounding: five non-contribution years remove both cashflow and growth contributions.
- Buffer pressure: spending flexibility becomes more important when contributions stop.
- Risk exposure: same volatility with lower assets amplifies sequence effects.
Monte Carlo interpretation
With fewer assets entering retirement, the simulation spread widens; early drawdowns can dominate outcomes. A lower success rate does not imply failure by design; it means this assumption set has less margin.
Use contribution timing decisions as one lever among withdrawal and spending behavior, then rerun the scenario.
Sensitivity notes
- Resume contributions for a shorter period and success can improve materially in later years.
- Reducing spending at retirement start by 5-10% improves margins faster than lowering volatility assumptions.
- Delaying retirement by one year, to 61, brings the projected portfolio back to about $2.51M and success to about 59%.
Common mistakes
- Assuming future contributions are optional without adjusting spending or timeline.
- Using a deterministic target without checking Monte Carlo sensitivity.
- Confusing a higher target as a better target instead of better runway risk control.
Scenario links