I saw this question recently and am wondering about the specifics:
Alice has $\$10,000$. She saves $\$1000$ a year. The interest rate is $10\%$, and she retires $10$ years later. Which of the following leads to the biggest increase in her retirement funds?
- Starting with $10\%$ more money
- Saving $10\%$ more per year
- Getting $10\%$ more interest (i.e. $11\%$ per year)
- Saving for $10\%$ more years (i.e. $11$ years)
It's easy enough to do the calculations and find that the answer is 4 > 3 > 1 > 2.
However, I notice that this ordering is not set in stone; it is affected by the input parameters. For example, if Alice saves $\$12,000$ a year, then the ordering changes to 4 > 2 > 3 > 1. Intuitively this makes sense - when you save more money a year than the starting capital, the effect of saving $10\%$ more ought to be magnified. Similarly, if Alice had started with $\$1,000,000$, then the impact of starting with $10\%$ more money ought to be greatly magnified.
What is the threshold for these input parameters at which the ordering changes? That is, how can one calculate at what point one parameter begins to dominate over the others? It's easy enough to "experimentally" verify if the ordering has changed, but how can one derive the point of change?