lobo/zfin
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages 2 Wiki Activity Actions

add accumulation SWR todo

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Emil Lerch 2026-05-13 13:06:19 -07:00
parent cf948d607b
commit bff4569665
1 changed files with 39 additions and 9 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

48
TODO.md
View file

@ -16,15 +16,45 @@ manual-check accounts mechanism (medium effort, real user value).
- **Configurable return cap per position — priority MEDIUM.** - **Configurable return cap per position — priority MEDIUM.**
Default: none; cap outliers like NVDA. Should route through Default: none; cap outliers like NVDA. Should route through
`projections.srf` cleanly. `projections.srf` cleanly.
- **"Not Retired Yet" accumulation-phase mode — priority HIGH.** - **Accumulation-mode SWR rate column is misleading — priority LOW.**
Accumulation phase with contributions before retirement. When `retirement_age`/`retirement_at` is configured, the "Safe
Separate from life events — the simulation has two distinct phases: Withdrawal" table's % column divides the SWR amount by the
accumulation (base spending = 0, contributions applied) and CURRENT portfolio value, not the post-accumulation portfolio
distribution (searched-for withdrawal + spending model). Config: value. The dollar amount is correct (it's the safe spending in
`retirement_age::60` or `retirement_in::10`, plus retirement, given the projected accumulation), but the % rate
`annual_contribution::100000`. Safe withdrawal search only applies comes out absurdly high (e.g., 22% of today's portfolio). The
to the distribution phase. Chart shows portfolio growing during Accumulation phase block already shows the median portfolio at
accumulation, peaking at retirement, then drawing down. retirement, so the user can compute the real rate themselves —
but the SWR table's rate column should ideally divide by the
median post-accumulation value, or be suppressed when accumulation
is active. Decide which.
- **Chart vertical line at retirement boundary — priority LOW.**
The accumulation-phase spec called this "mandatory" but it was
explicitly deferred during implementation. The chart currently
shows the full `accumulation_years + horizon` span without a
visual marker for where accumulation ends and distribution
begins. Easier to add to the kitty-graphics chart than the braille
one.
- **Goal-seek over distribution horizon for W1 — priority LOW.**
Today the W1 ("set spending, find date") workflow reports the
earliest retirement at each user-configured `(horizon, confidence)`
cell. The philosophically correct version asks "when have I
accumulated enough wealth that the projection shows a 95%
probability of success withdrawing X per year from retirement
until age-of-death?" — i.e. goal-seek across both `accumulation_years`
AND `distribution_years` simultaneously, anchored to a configured
age-of-death. NP-shaped search; not worth optimizing until
someone wants it.
- **Per-person retirement_age — priority LOW.**
V1 of the accumulation-phase spec chose Option A: a single
household retirement boundary derived from the oldest configured
birthdate. Households where one earner retires significantly
earlier than the other would benefit from per-person
`retirement_age` fields on each `type::birthdate` record, with
contributions stopped per-person.
- **Configurable max_accumulation_years — priority LOW.**
Hardcoded at 50 years. Route through `projections.srf` if anyone
hits the cap.
- Configurable MIN period selection (currently 3Y/5Y/10Y, exclude 1Y) - Configurable MIN period selection (currently 3Y/5Y/10Y, exclude 1Y)
- Multiple spending models: flat (current), decreasing (1-2% real annual decrease, - Multiple spending models: flat (current), decreasing (1-2% real annual decrease,
Blanchett "spending smile"). Late-life healthcare better modeled as a life event. Blanchett "spending smile"). Late-life healthcare better modeled as a life event.