A widow with a very handsome nest egg came to us with a common worry: 'Is this enough to keep living the way I'm used to? I want money I won't need to spend to grow for my children — but I don't want to lose it.' She wanted a professional opinion on how much she could spend, how much might be left for her kids, and whether her structure would stand up to market volatility.

We applied our Income-Liquidity-Family approach. First, Income: how much income would be ideal? How much should be guaranteed, and how much subject to market fluctuation? Second, Liquidity: what reserve would give her confidence during down markets, and how much risk should she take? Third, Family: how much might go to her children under different approaches?

We illustrated two approaches side by side under realistic market conditions — a two-year downturn with a 20% drop in year one and 15% in year two, the kind that occurs roughly once every ten years.

Approach 1: Portfolio withdrawals only, with all income from investments that fluctuate in value. Approach 2: Some withdrawals from a variable portfolio, some from a guaranteed portfolio, plus a separate reserve fund.

When we illustrated the two approaches during periods of realistic market stress, the difference was apparent. She saw how the differing approaches affected her income and her legacy.

She went from worrying 'Am I doing this wisely?' to confidence that she had an income structure that was right for her. Her confidence came not from the size of her account, but from the time spent researching, testing, verifying, and structuring a plan customized to her personality.