The 4% Rule and XEQT: Does It Work in Canada?
The 4% rule is the most widely cited retirement withdrawal guideline in the world. It was developed using US market data. Here is what happens when you apply it to Canadian investors using XEQT, and what adjustments the Canadian context requires.
What is the 4% rule?
The 4% rule states that a retiree can withdraw 4% of their portfolio value in the first year of retirement, then adjust that withdrawal amount for inflation each subsequent year, and the portfolio will last at least 30 years in the large majority of historical scenarios.
The inverse of the 4% withdrawal rate gives you the portfolio target: to sustain withdrawals of $40,000 per year (4% of $1,000,000), you need $1,000,000. Equivalently, the portfolio target is 25 times your annual withdrawal requirement. If you need $60,000 per year from your portfolio, you need $1,500,000.
The rule applies to the amount you need from your portfolio, not your total retirement income. If CPP and OAS provide $20,000 per year, and you want total income of $65,000, you only need $45,000 from your portfolio. That implies a portfolio target of $1,125,000, not $1,625,000.
Where it came from
The 4% rule emerged from research by financial planner William Bengen in 1994, later validated and popularized by the Trinity Study published by three finance professors at Trinity University in 1998. Both analyses used historical US stock and bond return data from 1926 onward.
The Trinity Study tested portfolio survival rates across a range of withdrawal rates (3% to 12%) and asset allocations (0% to 100% equity) over rolling 15, 20, 25, and 30-year retirement periods. The finding that became the rule: a 4% withdrawal rate on a portfolio with at least 50% equities survived all or almost all 30-year historical periods. The 100% equity portfolio often survived even better than the 50/50 portfolio, though with more volatility.
The limitation of both studies: they used US-only data during a period of unusually strong US equity returns. The US market outperformed most global markets significantly over the 20th century, partly due to survivor bias (the US economy survived the 20th century well; many others did not). Applying the 4% rule globally requires acknowledging this limitation.
The Canadian adjustment
Applied to a global portfolio like XEQT rather than a US-only portfolio, the safe withdrawal rate may be modestly lower in some scenarios, around 3.5% to 3.7%, based on analysis of global market data. This is because global markets have historically returned somewhat less than the US market over long periods.
Research by financial planner and blogger Ben Felix, who writes extensively on Canadian personal finance and passive investing, suggests that using a withdrawal rate of 3.5% to 4% is appropriate for globally diversified portfolios with long retirements. His analysis using a globally diversified Fama-French factor model broadly supports the 4% guideline for Canadian investors with balanced portfolios.
For practical purposes, the 4% rule remains a reasonable baseline for Canadian retirement planning. A more conservative investor might use 3.5% (implying a 28.6x portfolio target). A more aggressive investor with strong CPP benefits, other income sources, and flexibility to reduce spending in bad market years might be comfortable with 4% or slightly higher.
XEQT is 100% equity
The original Trinity Study tested portfolios ranging from 0% to 100% equity. The finding on the 100% equity portfolio is important: it was actually more likely to survive 30-year withdrawals at the 4% rate than the 50/50 portfolio in historical data, because higher long-run equity returns outweighed the higher volatility.
However, the 100% equity portfolio had one significant failure mode: if poor returns arrived in the first few years of retirement (sequence of returns risk), the portfolio was more likely to be depleted early than the balanced portfolio. The higher expected return did not always save a portfolio that was unlucky with the timing of its early drawdowns.
For Canadian retirees using XEQT, the practical implication is: holding 100% XEQT through retirement is likely fine statistically, but it requires the psychological ability to continue planned withdrawals during market downturns. A retiree who reduces spending or maintains some bond allocation during early-retirement downturns significantly improves their outcomes.
| Portfolio | Success Rate (30yr) | Note |
|---|---|---|
| 100% Equities | 98% | Highest success rate, highest volatility |
| 75% Equity / 25% Bonds | 97% | Near equivalent success, lower volatility |
| 50% Equity / 50% Bonds | 95% | Classic balanced portfolio |
| 25% Equity / 75% Bonds | 80% | Bond-heavy underperforms long-term |
| 100% Bonds | 20% | Fails most 30-year periods at 4% |
CPP and OAS: a Canadian advantage
Canadian retirees have a significant advantage that most 4% rule discussions ignore: CPP and OAS provide inflation-indexed lifetime income that reduces how much must be drawn from the portfolio. This effectively lowers the portfolio withdrawal rate without reducing income.
A retiree receiving $15,000 per year from CPP and OAS combined who needs $50,000 total income draws $35,000 from their portfolio. On a $900,000 portfolio, that is a 3.9% withdrawal rate, safely within the 4% guideline. A retiree without these benefits drawing $50,000 on a $900,000 portfolio is withdrawing at 5.6%, which is meaningfully more aggressive historically.
The practical implication: Canadian retirees often need a smaller portfolio than the 25x rule suggests when CPP and OAS are properly accounted for. And deferring CPP to age 70 (a 42% increase in the monthly benefit) further reduces the portfolio required, potentially by hundreds of thousands of dollars in required savings. For the specific math, use the retirement calculator with your personal CPP and OAS estimates.
When the 4% rule fails
The 4% rule fails in two main circumstances: early-retirement market crashes combined with rigid withdrawal behaviour, and retirements that extend well beyond 30 years.
Retiring in 1929, 1966, or 2000 and rigidly withdrawing 4% annually regardless of portfolio performance would have depleted many portfolios. What saved most retirees in these scenarios was some combination of spending flexibility (reducing withdrawals during bad markets), other income sources, or plain longevity luck (not living to 90). The 4% rule assumes some ability to adapt spending.
Retirements longer than 30 years also push the failure probability up. A 45-year-old retiring on XEQT faces a potential 45 to 50-year drawdown period. The original 4% rule was not tested for periods that long. A more conservative 3% to 3.5% withdrawal rate (implying a 29x to 33x portfolio) provides more margin for a very long retirement.
Practical modifications
Several research-backed modifications improve on the rigid 4% rule for real-world retirees. Flexible spending (reducing withdrawals by 10% to 20% in years when the portfolio is down) significantly improves portfolio survival rates without requiring major lifestyle changes. A floor-and-ceiling approach, where you set a minimum and maximum withdrawal amount that adjusts with portfolio performance, gives structure to the flexibility.
Holding one to two years of living expenses in cash or short-term GICs prevents forced equity selling during market downturns. This cash buffer is rebuilt when markets recover and provides psychological comfort during downturns without meaningfully reducing long-run expected returns. It is a practical solution to sequence-of-returns risk that many Canadian retirees use with their XEQT portfolios.
Delaying OAS or CPP, if the portfolio can sustain the gap years, permanently increases the government income floor. Each year CPP is deferred past 65 increases the benefit by 8.4%. Deferring from 65 to 70 increases the benefit by 42%. This inflation-indexed annuity-like income from the government is extremely valuable and often underweighted in retirement planning discussions.
The Canadian verdict
The 4% rule is a sound starting framework for Canadian retirees using XEQT. The Canadian context actually improves the outlook relative to a pure US-market analysis, because CPP and OAS provide an inflation-indexed government income floor that reduces portfolio dependency.
Use 4% as your planning number. If you are retiring early (before 55) or want extra conservatism, use 3.5%. If you have strong CPP benefits that cover a substantial portion of expenses, the portfolio withdrawal rate may effectively be well below 4% even if your portfolio is smaller than the 25x rule suggests. The numbers are specific to each person and each retirement plan.
For the full step-by-step retirement income plan, including account withdrawal sequencing, RRIF minimums, and OAS clawback management, see the XEQT drawdown sequence guide and the XEQT withdrawal strategy article.
Build the portfolio. Apply the rule.
XEQT on Wealthsimple. Commission-free, $25 free on your first deposit.
Open Wealthsimple → Get $25 Free