Traditional FIRE spends a lot of time on the withdrawal rate, which makes sense. If your portfolio can't support your expenses, you aren't financially independent.
But once you own more than one asset, there's another question sitting underneath the 4% rule: which asset actually pays the bill?
Cash, bonds, taxable stocks, retirement accounts, home equity, and bitcoin don't all play the same role. A dollar in your checking account can buy groceries next week. Home equity might make you wealthy on paper, but it doesn't pay the grocery bill unless you sell, refinance, or borrow against it.
For a mixed-asset FIRE BTC household, I think the hierarchy should be explicit. Spend the weaker, more liquid assets first, and give bitcoin the longest runway possible.
That doesn't mean bitcoin is never sold. It means selling it should be a planned decision, not a blended-withdrawal default hidden inside a calculator.
The useful question is simple: if you stopped working today, how many years could your non-bitcoin liquid assets cover your expenses before you were forced to sell BTC?
That's your bitcoin runway.
I wrote about withdrawal order, spendable runway, and why the asset you sell first can matter as much as the withdrawal rate:
https://firebtc.io/p/sell-stocks-first-let-bitcoin-breathe