Can I retire at 67 with $250,000?
On these numbers, not comfortably. Spending $60,000 a year, this plan lasted in 0% of 2,000 simulated futures.
It depends most on what you spend
| Annual spending | Probability of success | Median left at 90 | Worst 10% at 90 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $40,000 | 34% | $0 | $0 |
| $60,000 | 0% | $0 | $0 |
| $80,000 | 0% | $0 | $0 |
In most simulated futures this plan ran out before the plan did. That is worth knowing early, while there are still options, rather than late. It also does not mean retirement is off the table — it means retirement at this age, on this portfolio, at this level of spending is a stretch, and one of those three has room in it. The most common fix is not saving dramatically more; it is some combination of a later date and a lower spending floor.
What would change this
- A later retirement date, which is usually the single most powerful lever available.
- A lower spending floor, which is the second most powerful and often more achievable than it sounds.
- Delaying Social Security to raise the inflation-adjusted income that lasts as long as you do.
- Part-time income in the early years, which relieves exactly the drawdown that does the damage.
What we assumed
- You stop working at 67 — no further income or saving.
- $2,000 a month in Social Security from age 67.
- 7% average return with 15% volatility, and 3% average inflation.
- 2,000 simulated paths, each running to age 90.
Every one of those is an assumption, and the methodology page explains what the model does not capture — including long-term care and your actual tax situation. Computed 2026-08-20.
These are not your numbers
They are the numbers for a made-up person who happens to share your age and your balance. Run it with your own spending, your own Social Security estimate, and your own accounts — it is free and takes about two minutes.
Run it with my numbers →