BogeyT wrote:So what I'm hearing is past performance has nothing to do with future potential.
It is almost humanly impossible not to look at past performance. I'm sure most everyone does it sometimes. But the future might not look like the past. The future might be different. The future has a way of presenting stuff none of us ever even thought about. For example, whoever though we'd take pictures with the telephone, of all things.
We know what we think will happen. But we don't know what will happen. You have to prepare for all possibilities, not just the one you expect.
Preservation at 65 is more important than higher return.
At 65, Yes. Unless you have so much money that you will never need it (in which case you might invest for heirs or charity).
What is the upside of getting a higher return? Now compare that to the downside of a greater loss suffered because of greater risk taken trying to get the higher returns. Consider that these things are both likely to happen. If you compare them, does it seem wise only strive for higher return? Or should you follow a more moderate path in case you actually need the money?
The following would be a annual rebalance and forget it the rest of the time?
Wellington VWELX 50%
LS Moderate VSMGX 25%
LS Conservative VSCGX 25%
This works out to roughly what you want - about 57% stocks. It's not the only way to get there, just one way to get there. (Perhaps a better idea might have been just Wellington and LS Conservative). It combines one actively managed fund with 2 funds that contain only index funds. Some people would consider that a good thing (active and index both). Others would want only active or only index. What do you want?
I don't know how much rebalancing would be needed since each fund rebalances itself. I guess if one fund greatly outgrew the others you'd want to bring things back to this.
About 57.7% bonds, 41.2% stocks, 1.1% reserves.
It seems to be 57 - 58% stocks to me.
I'm guessing we are looking at about 7.3% return BASED ON PAST PERFORMANCE?
I have no idea. That depends on what the market does in the future. For the people who do predict the future, they don't seem to think that returns will be as high as they have been the last 50 or 100 years. I don't know if they are right or not.
We know you want about 55% stocks. What else is important to you? Do you like index funds or actively managed funds? Or both? Do you want to work with your portfolio every week or month or do you want to check it once or twice a year? Do you like a lot of foreign stock? Just a touch? Somewhere in between?