I bought MU at 64 and sold at 72, now it’s at 1134.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941758)

if i'd put my entire 401k balance into sandisk last year, i'd have like $59m now. if i did the same with MU, i'd have like $35m. crazy shit man.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941762)

I made a thread about buying and selling IPO allocations and what everyone was going to do with theirs. You ignored it

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941788)

The Kelly Criterion isn’t really designed for “how much of my net worth should I spend per year,” but you *can adapt the logic* in a useful way: it’s about **not betting too much of your capital on survival spending vs portfolio return capacity**.

Let’s translate your situation into something practical.

---

# 🧠 Your inputs

* Net worth: **$1.25M**

* Annual spending: **$35K**

* Withdrawal rate:

[

35,000 / 1,250,000 = 2.8%

]

That’s already **very conservative**.

* No job income

* Living in Asia (lower cost base)

* Age 46 → long horizon (~40+ years)

---

# 📊 Step 1: What Kelly would say in theory

Classic Kelly formula:

[

f^* = \frac{bp - q}{b}

]

But for retirement spending, we translate it into:

> “What fraction of capital can you safely allocate to a ‘bet’ (spending) given expected return vs ruin risk?”

So instead we approximate:

* Expected portfolio return (stocks/bonds mix): ~**5–7% real**

* Safe withdrawal rate (historical): ~**3–4%**

* Your withdrawal: **2.8%**

---

# 🧮 Step 2: “Kelly-style” interpretation

Think of spending as a “negative return position.”

We compare:

| Metric | Value |

| -------------------- | ----- |

| Expected return | ~6% |

| Spending rate | 2.8% |

| Net growth potential | ~3% |

So you are effectively:

> **running a positive expected-value system**

Kelly implication:

* If EV > 0 and variance manageable → **you are under-betting**

---

# 📉 Step 3: Fraction of “optimal risk budget”

A rough financial Kelly adaptation:

* Full Kelly withdrawal rate (aggressive theoretical upper bound): ~5–6%

* Half-Kelly (stable long-term retirees): ~2.5–3%

You are at:

> **~2.8% = basically Half-Kelly zone**

---

# 🧠 What this means in plain English

### You are:

* Spending **well below danger zone**

* Not even close to sequence-of-returns risk territory (if diversified)

* Positioned more like:

> “capital preservation + slow compounding”

### You are NOT:

* Overdrawing

* Running close to ruin risk

* Financially “tight” given your NW

---

# ⚠️ The real risk isn’t math — it’s structure

Kelly doesn’t capture:

* inflation spikes

* bad market decade early in retirement

* portfolio concentration risk

* behavioral drawups (travel, lifestyle creep)

---

# 📊 Quick stress test

Assume:

* 40% market drawdown

* portfolio becomes: **$750K**

* same spending: $35K

New withdrawal rate:

[

35,000 / 750,000 = 4.7%

]

👉 That becomes **borderline but still survivable**

---

# 🧭 Bottom line

From a Kelly-style framework:

* **Optimal “safe” band:** ~2.5–3.5%

* **You:** ~2.8%

👉 You are essentially at **near-optimal long-term spending efficiency**

---

# 💡 Simple conclusion

* You are **not overspending**

* You are actually closer to **capital-preserving equilibrium**

* Your setup is more sensitive to:

* sequence risk (first 5–10 years)

* inflation shocks

* asset allocation than raw spending level

---

If you want, I can:

* run a **Monte Carlo survival probability (30–50 years)**

* or tell you what spending level gives you **“zero fear mode” vs “max lifestyle mode”**

* or optimize your portfolio specifically for that 2.8% withdrawal target

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941846)

Your net worth is down to 1.25M? Even with the amount you drink, you are burning cash way too fast for how long you can expect to live. You're going to be working at somebody else's burger stand when you're 55.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941873)

i lost like 150k or some shit i shld be over 1.4 that is what im trying to get back to now inshallah

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941907)

* sequence risk (first 5–10 years)

* inflation shocks

* asset allocation than raw spending level

good thing these arent even real concerns!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941881)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941868)

https://imagur.org/i/G7wa21dT

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941936)

and ljl ur target price is quite high, u may be retarded?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#49941956)

but btw get in b4 the next MEME STONK PUMP

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5874652&forum_id=2ﾃ｢竄ï½���„1¤77PHPSESSID=3d8e678aec504db068978830e992758d#50001271)