Can I retire at 62 with $1M?
The answer is a qualified yes. $1M at age 62 supports roughly $48K/yr of spending with high confidence (90% of market scenarios): a comfortable middle-class retirement for a single person, with Social Security carrying part of the load from 67 on.
The short answer
We ran $1M through the Drawdown Arc engine for a single filer retiring at age 62 and holding to 95, a 33-year retirement. The three numbers below come straight from that model.
$48K/yr
Spend around this much (inflation-adjusted) and around 90% of 2,000 Monte Carlo runs still have money at 95. This is the number to build a plan on.
$65K/yr
A single smooth-return projection stretches to here, but spending this much survives only 37% of market scenarios. Treat it as an optimistic ceiling, not a target.
$24K/yr
Claimed at full retirement age (67), near the average retired-worker benefit. Your portfolio funds the full 5-year bridge until it begins.
What $1M actually supports at age 62
A 33-year retirement is longer than the 30-year period the classic 4% rule was built around, so a more conservative withdrawal rate is prudent. The $48K/year plan figure works out to roughly 4.8% of the starting balance, but that single percentage hides what the engine is really doing.
The projection doesn't just multiply by a fixed rate. It draws from each account in tax order, applies real 2026 federal brackets year by year, layers Social Security in at 67, and adjusts spending for 2.5% inflation. For this page we assumed the $1M is split $700,000 in tax-deferred accounts (a 401(k) or traditional IRA), $200,000 in a taxable brokerage, and $100,000 in a Roth: a 70/20/10 mix typical of someone arriving at retirement. That mix matters: the taxable and Roth dollars give the model room to manage your tax bracket in the early years.
At $1M, the $48K/year high-confidence figure lands squarely in comfortable middle-class territory for a single person: it covers a normal budget with some discretionary room, especially once Social Security starts at 67 and shoulders part of the load. Spend toward the $65K ceiling and you're betting on a friendly market; stay near $48K and you've bought yourself real margin.
The Social Security bridge
Retiring at 62 while claiming Social Security at full retirement age (67) means your portfolio carries all of your spending for the first 5 years. That bridge is the single biggest stress on a portfolio this size.
Our base case assumes a $24,000/year benefit (close to the average retired-worker check) starting at 67. During the bridge years, the full $65K of spending comes out of savings, which is exactly when a bad market hurts most (sequence-of-returns risk). Once Social Security begins, it covers a meaningful slice of spending and the withdrawal rate on the portfolio drops, which is why the money lasts as long as it does.
You have three real choices on timing, and each one moves the numbers on this page. Claiming early at 62 raises near-term income but locks in a benefit roughly 30% lower for life. Claiming at 67 is the base case here. Delaying to 70 maximizes the benefit (and the survivor benefit) but lengthens the bridge your portfolio must fund. The Social Security timing guide walks through the breakeven math, and the calculator lets you test each claiming age against this exact portfolio.
Will it last? The odds behind the number
A single projection assumes markets behave like a smooth average. They don't. That's why the second number on this page is a Monte Carlo success rate: we ran 2,000 randomized return sequences (12% annual volatility around the 6% average) and counted how many still had money at 95.
Spending the full $65K/year, only about 37% of simulations made it to 95. That's the honest catch with a deterministic figure: $65K is roughly the median outcome, so once you account for market volatility, the odds are closer to a coin flip. A bad first few years, right when the portfolio is funding the whole bridge to Social Security, is what sinks the failing runs.
This is the difference between "the average case works" and "I can sleep at night." A plan that succeeds in the base case but fails in a third of simulations is genuinely risky, because it depends on the market cooperating early. That's why the most useful number for many people is the third one: the spending level that survives 90% of scenarios. For this portfolio that's about $48K/year.
Levers to improve the odds
If the base case is tighter than you'd like, several levers move it, and they compound. The calculator lets you pull each one and watch the success rate respond in real time.
The biggest lever by far. Going from $65K to $48K/year takes the success rate from 37% to 90%. A flexible budget that trims in down years is worth more than any single decision.
Waiting from 67 to 70 raises the benefit about 24% for life and lifts the survivor benefit: an inflation-adjusted raise no annuity can match, if your portfolio can fund the longer bridge.
Even $15K–$25K/year for the first few years shrinks the bridge-year withdrawals that do the most damage during a downturn.
With taxable and Roth dollars on hand, the low-income years before 67 are prime for Roth conversions at the 10–12% bracket, cutting future RMDs and lifetime taxes.
Model your own numbers
The figures on this page describe one specific saver. Yours will differ on the inputs that matter most: your real Social Security benefit, your spending target, your account mix, and whether you are planning for one person or two. The interactions between those variables are exactly what a year-by-year projection captures and a rule of thumb can't.
Drawdown Arc models your retirement from age 62 through your plan-to age, drawing from each account with the right tax treatment, applying federal brackets year by year, and showing the Monte Carlo odds. The free version covers everything on this page. Pro adds state taxes, scenario comparison, and PDF reports so you can put "spend $65K" and "spend $48K" side by side and see the trade-off in dollars.