Any input appreciated!

I've run two portfolios. General input: 40 year time horizon, customized risk/return statistics, sequence of returns first 10 years worst years . First portfolio, no income in a 40 year time period. Second portfolio, income based on life expectancy starting year 1.

**Regarding Loss probabilities**:

For a given return range (say >=2.5%), why would the probability of a loss be greater for a portfolio in which you were NOT taking income be HIGHER than for a portfolio in which you WERE taking the income.

Am I "mixing my metaphors", not comparing apples to apples???

Thank you!