I don't preserve equities. I maintain an AA. If the goal was as much equities as possible, I wouldn't hold any bonds in the first place. How could 800/100, an 89/11 AA, be more desirable than 80/20 for someone who literally desires 80/20?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:53 pmNothing changed, it's really a matter of preserving equities when you can. This is not to say 720/180 is a terrible idea, but less desirable than 800/100 imo.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:40 pm Why? When I had $900k before I was $720/180. What changed?
Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
It's a temporary situation though. You will be replenishing fixed income gradually over time is the key here. I'm not suggesting 89/11 will be your new AA.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:58 pmI don't preserve equities. I maintain an AA. If the goal was as much equities as possible, I wouldn't hold any bonds in the first place. How could 800/100, an 89/11 AA, be more desirable than 80/20 for someone who literally desires 80/20?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:53 pmNothing changed, it's really a matter of preserving equities when you can. This is not to say 720/180 is a terrible idea, but less desirable than 800/100 imo.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:40 pm Why? When I had $900k before I was $720/180. What changed?
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I don’t see the point. When my portfolio was $500k, 600k, 1 million 80/20 was desirable. Why then, when it goes from 1 million back to 900k would it not be?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:59 pmIt's a temporary situation though. You will be replenishing fixed income gradually over time is the key here. I'm not suggesting 89/11 will be your new AA.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:58 pmI don't preserve equities. I maintain an AA. If the goal was as much equities as possible, I wouldn't hold any bonds in the first place. How could 800/100, an 89/11 AA, be more desirable than 80/20 for someone who literally desires 80/20?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:53 pmNothing changed, it's really a matter of preserving equities when you can. This is not to say 720/180 is a terrible idea, but less desirable than 800/100 imo.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 7:40 pm Why? When I had $900k before I was $720/180. What changed?
If I'm 800/200 and then markets fall and now I'm at 900k, should I go to 800/100? Of course not. Makes no sense.
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
To each their own then. I'm a nudger, I try not to rebalance bigly when I don't have to.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 8:05 pm I don’t see the point. When my portfolio was $500k, 600k, 1 million 80/20 was desirable. Why then, when it goes from 1 million back to 900k would it not be?
If I'm 800/200 and then markets fall and now I'm at 900k, should I go to 800/100? Of course not. Makes no sense.
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
When do you have to?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 8:57 pmTo each their own then. I'm a nudger, I try not to rebalance bigly when I don't have to.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 8:05 pm I don’t see the point. When my portfolio was $500k, 600k, 1 million 80/20 was desirable. Why then, when it goes from 1 million back to 900k would it not be?
If I'm 800/200 and then markets fall and now I'm at 900k, should I go to 800/100? Of course not. Makes no sense.
“TE OCCIDERE POSSUNT SED TE EDERE NON POSSUNT NEFAS EST"
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I can't think of any. 200K is a lot of fixed income to deal with emergencies.bgf wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:10 pmWhen do you have to?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 8:57 pmTo each their own then. I'm a nudger, I try not to rebalance bigly when I don't have to.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 8:05 pm I don’t see the point. When my portfolio was $500k, 600k, 1 million 80/20 was desirable. Why then, when it goes from 1 million back to 900k would it not be?
If I'm 800/200 and then markets fall and now I'm at 900k, should I go to 800/100? Of course not. Makes no sense.
- anon_investor
- Posts: 15122
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Do you add to your fixed income or keep the $ amount static?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:15 pmI can't think of any. 200K is a lot of fixed income to deal with emergencies.bgf wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:10 pmWhen do you have to?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 8:57 pmTo each their own then. I'm a nudger, I try not to rebalance bigly when I don't have to.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 8:05 pm I don’t see the point. When my portfolio was $500k, 600k, 1 million 80/20 was desirable. Why then, when it goes from 1 million back to 900k would it not be?
If I'm 800/200 and then markets fall and now I'm at 900k, should I go to 800/100? Of course not. Makes no sense.
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
The way I operate is to keep a % of AA. If my AA is 2M, I might have 60K (3%) EF for example. I find it easier to calculate it this way than turning 2M into 97/3.anon_investor wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:30 pm Do you add to your fixed income or keep the $ amount static?
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
But you just said you wouldn't keep the percentage steady.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:34 pmThe way I operate is to keep a % of AA. If my AA is 2M, I might have 60K (3%) EF for example. I find it easier to calculate it this way than turning 2M into 97/3.anon_investor wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:30 pm Do you add to your fixed income or keep the $ amount static?
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I said temporarily...the idea is to replenish over time once fixed income is spent down.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:41 pmBut you just said you wouldn't keep the percentage steady.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:34 pmThe way I operate is to keep a % of AA. If my AA is 2M, I might have 60K (3%) EF for example. I find it easier to calculate it this way than turning 2M into 97/3.anon_investor wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:30 pm Do you add to your fixed income or keep the $ amount static?
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Whatever works for you.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:42 pmI said temporarily...the idea is to replenish over time once fixed income is spent down.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:41 pmBut you just said you wouldn't keep the percentage steady.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:34 pmThe way I operate is to keep a % of AA. If my AA is 2M, I might have 60K (3%) EF for example. I find it easier to calculate it this way than turning 2M into 97/3.anon_investor wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:30 pm Do you add to your fixed income or keep the $ amount static?
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
1. There is *not* data to support having more geographical diversification increases returns and reduces risk. The data shows that something like a 60/40 US/ex-US portfolios *decreases* performance and has little effect on risk. US and ex-US equities are *all* highly correlated equities; ex-US fell farther than US in 2008, despite the GFC beginning in the US (it only fell about 10% farther, but still).Nathan Drake wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 12:24 pmThis is false. There is plenty of data to support that having more geographical diversification both increases returns and reduces risk. It’s literally one of the only free lunches in investing.LunarOpal wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 11:38 amI can’t speak for Taylor, but I can say (and often do say) that US has out-performed ex-US in the past 10 years, the past 20 year, the past 30 years, the past 40 years, and the past 50 years. That’s not “recent”.Nathan Drake wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 11:22 amThere are countless examples of people in this thread using recent past performance to dissuade others from investing globally.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 10:38 am As far as I can tell, no one's trying to convert others to go 100% US. We just explain why we do what we do. As I said, this is kind of like betting on the favorite, the underdog, or a mixture of both.
What was the purpose of Taylor bringing up 14% vs 10% annualized returns this past decade?
Feel free to justify 100% US for yourself, but realize that it goes against the conventional wisdom of all financial planning, and is rooted in a flawed investment strategy that could do harm to one’s ability to meet their financial goals.
The “conventional wisdom” argument is just an argument from authority. It’s not based on data; to the extent it’s based on anything, it’s based on a narrative. A nice story unsupported by data (or, worse, supported by deliberately misleading data). The idea that people must hold an international component is a fairly recent fad development as well.
The idea that not having an international component “could” harm one’s ability to meet financial goals is just scare-mongering. *Having* an international component is just as likely to harm one’s ability to meet financial goals.
But, realistically? People will meet their financial goals either way; the markets are so correlated that there won’t be much of a difference.
The internet has a tendency to make everyone want to be absolutist and extremist; reality is different.
And the US has not outperformed over every time period. You are extrapolating decades with a recent end date already in mind. Adjust both the starting dates and ending dates which reveals a completely different set of outcomes.
And it is completely unknowable whether you will be able to meet your needs with a 100% US only portfolio. This suggests a false level of confidence. There are risks, however low, that any region could suffer a very prolonged period of poor returns. US is not exempt.
Having more diversification leads to a better assurance of meeting financial goals; not less - it’s a completely different topic than “well, my investment returned more, therefore my strategy was clearly better”.
2. It's true that there are time periods where ex-US has outperformed. What you are ignoring is that the ex-US outperformance was much *smaller* than US outperformance. Gains are based on total returns, not on winning a particular decade. ex-US out-performance by 5% in one decade followed by US outperformance of 30% in another decade followed by ex-US performance of 3% in the next decade, capped by US out-performance of 45% in the next decade doesn't mean that there's a tie because each outperformed in two 10 year periods.
3. "And it is completely unknowable whether you will be able to meet your needs with a 100% US only portfolio."
This is a strange statement.
The future is completely unknowable. Me meeting my goals with a 100% US portfolio is no more or less knowable than you meeting your goals with a 60/40 US/ex-US portfolio. They are unknowable to the exact same degree.
4. "This suggests a false level of confidence."
Because you can predict the future? Just stick to your beliefs and stop insulting people who have reached different conclusions based facts.
5. "There are risks, however low, that any region could suffer a very prolonged period of poor returns. US is not exempt."
Sure. There are also real risks, perhaps not so low, that ex-US will continue to underperform because many ex-US markets are not focused on increasing shareholder returns the way that the US and a few other markets are.
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I know the math works, but I admit I sometimes wonder if 3% in EF is enough. This is essentially 1 year of EF assuming 3% WR. Normal years are fine, but if we run into another 2000~2008 then it might be rough.
- anon_investor
- Posts: 15122
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Ah okay, my EF stays a certain minimim number of months of expenses.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:34 pmThe way I operate is to keep a % of AA. If my AA is 2M, I might have 60K (3%) EF for example. I find it easier to calculate it this way than turning 2M into 97/3.anon_investor wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 9:30 pm Do you add to your fixed income or keep the $ amount static?
-
- Posts: 6234
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:28 am
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
1. No, see: vanguard study on diversificationLunarOpal wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 10:21 pm1. There is *not* data to support having more geographical diversification increases returns and reduces risk. The data shows that something like a 60/40 US/ex-US portfolios *decreases* performance and has little effect on risk. US and ex-US equities are *all* highly correlated equities; ex-US fell farther than US in 2008, despite the GFC beginning in the US (it only fell about 10% farther, but still).Nathan Drake wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 12:24 pmThis is false. There is plenty of data to support that having more geographical diversification both increases returns and reduces risk. It’s literally one of the only free lunches in investing.LunarOpal wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 11:38 amI can’t speak for Taylor, but I can say (and often do say) that US has out-performed ex-US in the past 10 years, the past 20 year, the past 30 years, the past 40 years, and the past 50 years. That’s not “recent”.Nathan Drake wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 11:22 amThere are countless examples of people in this thread using recent past performance to dissuade others from investing globally.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 10:38 am As far as I can tell, no one's trying to convert others to go 100% US. We just explain why we do what we do. As I said, this is kind of like betting on the favorite, the underdog, or a mixture of both.
What was the purpose of Taylor bringing up 14% vs 10% annualized returns this past decade?
Feel free to justify 100% US for yourself, but realize that it goes against the conventional wisdom of all financial planning, and is rooted in a flawed investment strategy that could do harm to one’s ability to meet their financial goals.
The “conventional wisdom” argument is just an argument from authority. It’s not based on data; to the extent it’s based on anything, it’s based on a narrative. A nice story unsupported by data (or, worse, supported by deliberately misleading data). The idea that people must hold an international component is a fairly recent fad development as well.
The idea that not having an international component “could” harm one’s ability to meet financial goals is just scare-mongering. *Having* an international component is just as likely to harm one’s ability to meet financial goals.
But, realistically? People will meet their financial goals either way; the markets are so correlated that there won’t be much of a difference.
The internet has a tendency to make everyone want to be absolutist and extremist; reality is different.
And the US has not outperformed over every time period. You are extrapolating decades with a recent end date already in mind. Adjust both the starting dates and ending dates which reveals a completely different set of outcomes.
And it is completely unknowable whether you will be able to meet your needs with a 100% US only portfolio. This suggests a false level of confidence. There are risks, however low, that any region could suffer a very prolonged period of poor returns. US is not exempt.
Having more diversification leads to a better assurance of meeting financial goals; not less - it’s a completely different topic than “well, my investment returned more, therefore my strategy was clearly better”.
2. It's true that there are time periods where ex-US has outperformed. What you are ignoring is that the ex-US outperformance was much *smaller* than US outperformance. Gains are based on total returns, not on winning a particular decade. ex-US out-performance by 5% in one decade followed by US outperformance of 30% in another decade followed by ex-US performance of 3% in the next decade, capped by US out-performance of 45% in the next decade doesn't mean that there's a tie because each outperformed in two 10 year periods.
3. "And it is completely unknowable whether you will be able to meet your needs with a 100% US only portfolio."
This is a strange statement.
The future is completely unknowable. Me meeting my goals with a 100% US portfolio is no more or less knowable than you meeting your goals with a 60/40 US/ex-US portfolio. They are unknowable to the exact same degree.
4. "This suggests a false level of confidence."
Because you can predict the future? Just stick to your beliefs and stop insulting people who have reached different conclusions based facts.
5. "There are risks, however low, that any region could suffer a very prolonged period of poor returns. US is not exempt."
Sure. There are also real risks, perhaps not so low, that ex-US will continue to underperform because many ex-US markets are not focused on increasing shareholder returns the way that the US and a few other markets are.
2. No, exUS was significantly greater during 60s through 80s
3. No, if the US has some sort of Japanese style market meltdown, and bonds provide zero return, you will need to save significantly more (wait significantly longer) to meet retirement goals. Very unlikely a globally diversified portfolio has the same fate as the climate of a single country.
4. See point 3. There’s no insulting going on.
5. ExUS continuing to underperform at some level is possible. Having both exUS and US will allow you to reach your goals in this scenario, since a diversified strategy is not contingent on any single country out performing. And it also allows you to prevent single country risk of a very steep and prolonged downturn.
20% VOO | 20% VXUS | 20% AVUV | 20% AVDV | 20% AVES
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I find it odd the religious level zealotry some people have for trying to demand everyone have the same portfolio choices they do.....its just weird.
I can sorta understand the argument based on valuations that some folks give as a forward looking argument in favor of adding international stocks; but the historical argument is pretty terrible. There have been some times that international did quite well, but over the 25 years of actual history we have with actual investable mutual funds it was quite bad.
Importantly I'm not saying US just did better. Rather I am saying on an objective basis, as an equity investment; Vanguard's Total International Index fund (VGTSX) did poorly. It returned a mere 5.32% while the U.S. market delivered a historically normal 9.76%. VGTSX did this while providing steeper drawdowns and higher levels of volatility.
In fact since 1996, when VGTSX became available for real investors; a 60/40 US Stock/Bond portfolio outperformed a 60/40 US/Int 100% stock portfolio.
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... tion3_3=40
I can sorta understand the argument based on valuations that some folks give as a forward looking argument in favor of adding international stocks; but the historical argument is pretty terrible. There have been some times that international did quite well, but over the 25 years of actual history we have with actual investable mutual funds it was quite bad.
Importantly I'm not saying US just did better. Rather I am saying on an objective basis, as an equity investment; Vanguard's Total International Index fund (VGTSX) did poorly. It returned a mere 5.32% while the U.S. market delivered a historically normal 9.76%. VGTSX did this while providing steeper drawdowns and higher levels of volatility.
In fact since 1996, when VGTSX became available for real investors; a 60/40 US Stock/Bond portfolio outperformed a 60/40 US/Int 100% stock portfolio.
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... tion3_3=40
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Therein lies the logic problem. I didn't add international stocks to my U.S. stock portfolio. I built a portfolio of stocks from all sectors, styles, sizes, and countries.
Most people have no problem with the U.S. total market and say it's neutral relative to sectors, styles, and sizes. Why, then, are they so adamant about not being neutral relative to countries?
The U.S. market is only neutral to sectors, styles, and sizes when you disregard that there are other countries with different weightings of each of those.
The international proponents in this thread are trying to give a fair shake to new investors who come to the forum and prevent them from thinking that a 100% U.S. equity portfolio is somehow the default, neutral equity portfolio. It is not. Vanguard says it as well.
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Endpoints and start dates matter so much. If one starts in 1997 (oldest year for both VTSMX and VGTSX) US has been ahead or close the whole period. If one starts 20 years ago they were tied the first 4 years and then International was ahead, sometimes markedly, until about 2013. At the current point of significant recent US outperformance it is easy to believe it will go on forever, that is how peoples minds are wired to work.Alchemist wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 6:36 am Importantly I'm not saying US just did better. Rather I am saying on an objective basis, as an equity investment; Vanguard's Total International Index fund (VGTSX) did poorly. It returned a mere 5.32% while the U.S. market delivered a historically normal 9.76%. VGTSX did this while providing steeper drawdowns and higher levels of volatility.
In fact since 1996, when VGTSX became available for real investors; a 60/40 US Stock/Bond portfolio outperformed a 60/40 US/Int 100% stock portfolio.
However unlike you, I don't believe that I know the future relative returns of US and Int'l. Maybe you are right, the US will outperform forever. In fact, maybe that will go on until US market cap asymptotically approaches 100% of world market cap (isn't that the logical result of permanent outperformance?). Maybe US valuations will continue to rise because everyone recognizes that inevitable future, that things have changed forever and that the rough historical parity of US and international stock returns is just a thing of the past. That is I suppose indeed possible, and if so I'll do well. Because I invest in US stocks. Maybe that won't be the case and the US will underperform Int'l. I'll be OK there too. That is why I prefer to invest in both, I'll be OK either way.
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
We're trying to protect novice investors by having them see both sides of the argument.
The religious zealotry points back to this thread.
Stocks-80% || Bonds-20% || Taxable-VTI/VXUS || IRA-VT/BNDW
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
The international proponents aren't just going for ex-US; they still want US exposure. In this sense, they're more like world-cap proponents. And if they're world-cap proponents, their equities AA would have to be world market weight more or less (can't be 99/1 or something lopsided).
Thus lots of people end up advocating for the same portfolio choices they do.
- anon_investor
- Posts: 15122
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
For a US domiciled investor, having your equity allocation of US/Interational anywhere from 100/0 to world market cap weighted (currently - as of 4/30/2021: 57.7/42.3) is reasonable. We can all argue what is optimal from a diversification standpoint, but we will not know until the future what was optimal from an investment standpoint.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:03 amThe international proponents aren't just going for ex-US; they still want US exposure. In this sense, they're more like world-cap proponents. And if they're world-cap proponents, their equities AA would have to be world market weight more or less (can't be 99/1 or something lopsided).
Thus lots of people end up advocating for the same portfolio choices they do.
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Given that the genesis of this thread (and the extensive pointers to the thread by OP elsewhere) are based on advocacy towards making the same portfolio choices he did/does, why would you be confused if others respond in the same vein? While I disagree with his POV, there is nothing wrong with advocating for your beliefs.
US vs Int'l is clearly a secondary decision to percentage of equities (of whatever national origin) in your portfolio. So you might be right that the level of heat is not justified. And, oddly enough, here you are advocating for a position...
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
That's an interesting take. I don't think I've seen a poster who advocates for heavy US holdings with very little ex-US. A lot of them do call for world market cap weighted though.anon_investor wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:27 am For a US domiciled investor, having your equity allocation of US/Interational anywhere from 100/0 to world market cap weighted (currently - as of 4/30/2021: 57.7/42.3) is reasonable. We can all argue what is optimal from a diversification standpoint, but we will not know until the future what was optimal from an investment standpoint.
- anon_investor
- Posts: 15122
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I think I a lot of people use 80/20, I believe that the was original BH recommendation and what Vanguard's recommendation was at some point.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:35 amThat's an interesting take. I don't think I've seen a poster who advocates for heavy US holdings with very little ex-US. A lot of them do call for world market cap weighted though.anon_investor wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:27 am For a US domiciled investor, having your equity allocation of US/Interational anywhere from 100/0 to world market cap weighted (currently - as of 4/30/2021: 57.7/42.3) is reasonable. We can all argue what is optimal from a diversification standpoint, but we will not know until the future what was optimal from an investment standpoint.
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Yes, I think Mr. Bogle said "up to 20%" or something along those lines. 80/20 sounds reasonable to me.anon_investor wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:53 amI think I a lot of people use 80/20, I believe that the was original BH recommendation and what Vanguard's recommendation was at some point.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:35 amThat's an interesting take. I don't think I've seen a poster who advocates for heavy US holdings with very little ex-US. A lot of them do call for world market cap weighted though.anon_investor wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:27 am For a US domiciled investor, having your equity allocation of US/Interational anywhere from 100/0 to world market cap weighted (currently - as of 4/30/2021: 57.7/42.3) is reasonable. We can all argue what is optimal from a diversification standpoint, but we will not know until the future what was optimal from an investment standpoint.
-
- Posts: 6234
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:28 am
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
What? That’s the whole point of this two fund approachMarseille07 wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:35 amThat's an interesting take. I don't think I've seen a poster who advocates for heavy US holdings with very little ex-US. A lot of them do call for world market cap weighted though.anon_investor wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:27 am For a US domiciled investor, having your equity allocation of US/Interational anywhere from 100/0 to world market cap weighted (currently - as of 4/30/2021: 57.7/42.3) is reasonable. We can all argue what is optimal from a diversification standpoint, but we will not know until the future what was optimal from an investment standpoint.
20% VOO | 20% VXUS | 20% AVUV | 20% AVDV | 20% AVES
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Only if "very little ex-US" is 0Nathan Drake wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 12:51 pmWhat? That’s the whole point of this two fund approachMarseille07 wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:35 amThat's an interesting take. I don't think I've seen a poster who advocates for heavy US holdings with very little ex-US. A lot of them do call for world market cap weighted though.anon_investor wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 10:27 am For a US domiciled investor, having your equity allocation of US/Interational anywhere from 100/0 to world market cap weighted (currently - as of 4/30/2021: 57.7/42.3) is reasonable. We can all argue what is optimal from a diversification standpoint, but we will not know until the future what was optimal from an investment standpoint.
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
This is the fundamental question at the bottom of this US-only vs Global Weight stock issue.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 7:24 amMost people have no problem with the U.S. total market and say it's neutral relative to sectors, styles, and sizes. Why, then, are they so adamant about not being neutral relative to countries?
The U.S. market is only neutral to sectors, styles, and sizes when you disregard that there are other countries with different weightings of each of those.
Do you believe the U.S. is "just another country" or do you believe it has unique attributes and/or advantages that make it a lower risk market to invest in?
Those of us who view the U.S. as unique among other nation-states will see international equity investing as an unnecessary additional risk. For Bogleheads who think it deserves no special consideration and believe it should be viewed the same as Sweden, Japan, Germany, or New Zealand will find the idea of U.S.-only investing as taking an unnecessary risk that can be diversified away with international equities.
Everything else that gets discussed (currency, valuations, etc) is superfluous to this central question.
Such "protection" for the entire history of the Bogleheads forum (and the Diehards before it) would only have delivered greater risks and lower returns. I am certainly glad that when I was a novice investor just starting out 12 years ago that I did not receive such "protection" when I decided to keep my equity investing to US TSM.
Investors are adults. They need no protection but they do benefit from various viewpoints so they can make up their own minds.
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
-
- Posts: 6234
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:28 am
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I believe that US advantages have been more than priced in. I also believe that the risks of the US haven’t been adequately priced in. A total stock market heavily concentrated in large tech. Sky high debt levels starting to exceed worst parts of Eurozone. Demographics that are worse than emerging markets. I don’t believe US is less risky than most developed nations. If it was, then returns would adjust to less than exUS to account for these risksAlchemist wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 2:22 amThis is the fundamental question at the bottom of this US-only vs Global Weight stock issue.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Thu May 27, 2021 7:24 amMost people have no problem with the U.S. total market and say it's neutral relative to sectors, styles, and sizes. Why, then, are they so adamant about not being neutral relative to countries?
The U.S. market is only neutral to sectors, styles, and sizes when you disregard that there are other countries with different weightings of each of those.
Do you believe the U.S. is "just another country" or do you believe it has unique attributes and/or advantages that make it a lower risk market to invest in?
Those of us who view the U.S. as unique among other nation-states will see international equity investing as an unnecessary additional risk. For Bogleheads who think it deserves no special consideration and believe it should be viewed the same as Sweden, Japan, Germany, or New Zealand will find the idea of U.S.-only investing as taking an unnecessary risk that can be diversified away with international equities.
Everything else that gets discussed (currency, valuations, etc) is superfluous to this central question.
Such "protection" for the entire history of the Bogleheads forum (and the Diehards before it) would only have delivered greater risks and lower returns. I am certainly glad that when I was a novice investor just starting out 12 years ago that I did not receive such "protection" when I decided to keep my equity investing to US TSM.
Investors are adults. They need no protection but they do benefit from various viewpoints so they can make up their own minds.
ExUS is a collection of so many different countries. Some will not do so well. Just like not all US stocks go well. Some will have better advantages (demographically or otherwise), than the US. Some may look like bad countries, but their valuations are so low that an upside surprise means that returns are superior.
In terms of diversification, I see a stronger argument to be 100% exUS rather than 100% US
But since I don’t pretend to be a fortune teller and care more about downside protection than the best possible returns, I will hold both at roughly market weight.
20% VOO | 20% VXUS | 20% AVUV | 20% AVDV | 20% AVES
-
- Posts: 15360
- Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 12:29 am
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Tony,abuss368 wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:50 pm Bogleheads -
An excellent article by our mentor John C. Bogle: “Why you don’t need international stocks; Why to hire an Advisor”
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/bogle-interview.html
Enjoy!
Tony
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
He got to 25k and stopped posting.Northern Flicker wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:04 pmTony,abuss368 wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:50 pm Bogleheads -
An excellent article by our mentor John C. Bogle: “Why you don’t need international stocks; Why to hire an Advisor”
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/bogle-interview.html
Enjoy!
Tony
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
- anon_investor
- Posts: 15122
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
He's probably enjoying a nice vacation with all that extra money from US out performance over international.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:13 pmHe got to 25k and stopped posting.Northern Flicker wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:04 pmTony,abuss368 wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:50 pm Bogleheads -
An excellent article by our mentor John C. Bogle: “Why you don’t need international stocks; Why to hire an Advisor”
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/bogle-interview.html
Enjoy!
Tony
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
But only recently.anon_investor wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:23 pmHe's probably enjoying a nice vacation with all that extra money from US out performance over international.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:13 pmHe got to 25k and stopped posting.Northern Flicker wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:04 pmTony,abuss368 wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:50 pm Bogleheads -
An excellent article by our mentor John C. Bogle: “Why you don’t need international stocks; Why to hire an Advisor”
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/bogle-interview.html
Enjoy!
Tony
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
-
- Posts: 2390
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 5:49 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
He did not stop posting by choice. He is currently not able to defend his position on these topics accordingly.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:13 pmHe got to 25k and stopped posting.Northern Flicker wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:04 pmTony,abuss368 wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:50 pm Bogleheads -
An excellent article by our mentor John C. Bogle: “Why you don’t need international stocks; Why to hire an Advisor”
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/bogle-interview.html
Enjoy!
Tony
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
“You only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out.“ — Warren Buffett
- anon_investor
- Posts: 15122
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Depends what your definition of recent is.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:46 pmBut only recently.anon_investor wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:23 pmHe's probably enjoying a nice vacation with all that extra money from US out performance over international.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:13 pmHe got to 25k and stopped posting.Northern Flicker wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:04 pmTony,abuss368 wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:50 pm Bogleheads -
An excellent article by our mentor John C. Bogle: “Why you don’t need international stocks; Why to hire an Advisor”
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/bogle-interview.html
Enjoy!
Tony
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I don't understand. Is he physically unable to post? On a ban or suspension?Ferdinand2014 wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:54 pmHe did not stop posting by choice. He is currently not able to defend his position on these topics accordingly.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:13 pmHe got to 25k and stopped posting.Northern Flicker wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:04 pmTony,abuss368 wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:50 pm Bogleheads -
An excellent article by our mentor John C. Bogle: “Why you don’t need international stocks; Why to hire an Advisor”
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/bogle-interview.html
Enjoy!
Tony
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
- anon_investor
- Posts: 15122
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Yikes, I hope it's not the former...Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:02 pmI don't understand. Is he physically unable to post? On a ban or suspension?Ferdinand2014 wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:54 pmHe did not stop posting by choice. He is currently not able to defend his position on these topics accordingly.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:13 pmHe got to 25k and stopped posting.Northern Flicker wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:04 pmTony,abuss368 wrote: ↑Sun May 16, 2021 1:50 pm Bogleheads -
An excellent article by our mentor John C. Bogle: “Why you don’t need international stocks; Why to hire an Advisor”
https://www.mymoneyblog.com/bogle-interview.html
Enjoy!
Tony
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
-
- Posts: 2390
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2018 5:49 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Banned/Suspension or whatever the forum calls it for a length of time. I am not sure of the rules on this forum nor his thoughts regarding giving any more information beyond that so I won't.anon_investor wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:02 pmYikes, I hope it's not the former...Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:02 pmI don't understand. Is he physically unable to post? On a ban or suspension?Ferdinand2014 wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:54 pmHe did not stop posting by choice. He is currently not able to defend his position on these topics accordingly.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:13 pmHe got to 25k and stopped posting.Northern Flicker wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 8:04 pm
Tony,
I'm struggling to rationalize your position in the present thread with your position from postings in the following thread:
viewtopic.php?p=4827793#p4827793
viewtopic.php?p=4877691#p4877691
viewtopic.php?p=5804850#p5804850
What exactly are you proposing that we should be doing?
“You only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out.“ — Warren Buffett
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Looks like the OP dropped international around Nov 2019. Didn't Mr. Bogle say "up to 20%" for international? Seems like a fine move, criticism isn't warranted in my opinion.
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
We've been through this this gazillion times. The criticism is due to him spamming the forum pushing his two fund portfolio.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:10 pm Looks like the OP dropped international around Nov 2019. Didn't Mr. Bogle say "up to 20%" for international? Seems like a fine move, criticism isn't warranted in my opinion.
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Oh OK, I didn't notice he was doing that but I take your word for it.Triple digit golfer wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:20 pmWe've been through this this gazillion times. The criticism is due to him spamming the forum pushing his two fund portfolio.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:10 pm Looks like the OP dropped international around Nov 2019. Didn't Mr. Bogle say "up to 20%" for international? Seems like a fine move, criticism isn't warranted in my opinion.
-
- Posts: 1285
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 5:16 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Random poster in this super long and seemingly controversial thread...Marseille07 wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 11:15 pmOK so please tell me this:Da5id wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 11:09 pmWhy? In this thread many who are 100% US tout past performance and seem to think it will persist. Those who have some ex-US seem more focused on diversification. If they argued that ex-US were going to perform better than US and overweighted ex-US compared to global that would be performance chasing as I understand the phrase.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 10:54 pmWe're all performance chasing to some degree. It's nonsensical to say US holders are performance chasing and ex-US holders aren't.Nathan Drake wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 10:36 pm So....are we performance chasing?
When US underperforms does that mean somebody should have been 100% exUS?
Investor A: 100/0, 100% US, 0% ex-US
Investor B: 0/100, 0% US, 100% ex-US
Is Investor A performance-chasing? How about Investor B? If your answer differs, where exactly is the difference coming from?
Investor A - performance chasing. Sleeps better at night with that decision
Investor B - performance chasing. Sleeps better at night with that decision
Investor A and Investor B - performing better than non BH investors as long as they stick to buy and hold and do all the other good things preached on this forum.
Investors who did not turn into Investor A or Investor B until later in the investing career - - wishes they had discovered low cost index investing when they first started investing.
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Thanks for chiming in. I actually agree with your take, however those ex-US proponents turned out to be world market-cap weighted proponents. We later agreed that neither holding US-only long enough, nor holding world-cap weighted, is performance chasing.helloeveryone wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:44 pm Random poster in this super long and seemingly controversial thread...
Investor A - performance chasing. Sleeps better at night with that decision
Investor B - performance chasing. Sleeps better at night with that decision
Investor A and Investor B - performing better than non BH investors as long as they stick to buy and hold and do all the other good things preached on this forum.
Investors who did not turn into Investor A or Investor B until later in the investing career - - wishes they had discovered low cost index investing when they first started investing.
- spdoublebass
- Posts: 889
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:04 pm
- Location: NY
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
helloeveryone wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:44 pm
Investor A and Investor B - performing better than non BH investors as long as they stick to buy and hold and do all the other good things preached on this forum.
This is why people get so touchy.
When you don’t stay the course and you jump ship, don’t start advising everyone else to follow you.
That is the only reason people get bent out of shape with this thread.
I'm trying to think, but nothing happens
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Not sure why people don't give Tony a break. He switched from a BH portfolio to another BH portfolio almost 2 years ago.spdoublebass wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 11:22 pmhelloeveryone wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:44 pm
Investor A and Investor B - performing better than non BH investors as long as they stick to buy and hold and do all the other good things preached on this forum.
This is why people get so touchy.
When you don’t stay the course and you jump ship, don’t start advising everyone else to follow you.
That is the only reason people get bent out of shape with this thread.
Personally I also switched from 90/10 to 100/0 six months ago. People make changes from time to time.
- spdoublebass
- Posts: 889
- Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:04 pm
- Location: NY
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
This is not Facebook. These threads shouldn’t function as support group. This thread for example actually has good information in it if all of the bumping could just be removed.Marseille07 wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 11:26 pmNot sure why people don't give Tony a break. He switched from a BH portfolio to another BH portfolio almost 2 years ago.spdoublebass wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 11:22 pmhelloeveryone wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 9:44 pm
Investor A and Investor B - performing better than non BH investors as long as they stick to buy and hold and do all the other good things preached on this forum.
This is why people get so touchy.
When you don’t stay the course and you jump ship, don’t start advising everyone else to follow you.
That is the only reason people get bent out of shape with this thread.
Personally I also switched from 90/10 to 100/0 six months ago. People make changes from time to time.
When you bombard other threads about how great your new AA is, it becomes tiresome. Especially when you know it’s never been tested through a down period and you staying the course.
I'm trying to think, but nothing happens
-
- Posts: 16054
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 12:41 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
I'm going to move closer to Warren Buffett's Two Fund Portfolio approach. Since my fixed income is cash, what I'll do is to count this cash portion as part of AA - basically, my AA is a combination of accounts holding equities and a checking account holding cash.
I think I found a solution to the rebalancing problem. As long as I rebalance slowly then it's fine; I should be able to avoid deep cuts on my AA.
I think I found a solution to the rebalancing problem. As long as I rebalance slowly then it's fine; I should be able to avoid deep cuts on my AA.
- anon_investor
- Posts: 15122
- Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:43 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
The Buffet widow portfolio is 90/10. Are you going to move towards that from 97/3? If you do and start hitting FDIC insurance limits, would you roll T-bills?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Sun May 30, 2021 12:33 am I'm going to move closer to Warren Buffett's Two Fund Portfolio approach. Since my fixed income is cash, what I'll do is to count this cash portion as part of AA - basically, my AA is a combination of accounts holding equities and a checking account holding cash.
I think I found a solution to the rebalancing problem. As long as I rebalance slowly then it's fine; I should be able to avoid deep cuts on my AA.
-
- Posts: 10433
- Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 5:57 pm
Re: Jack Bogle - Two Fund Portfolio
Wow, a 10 figure EF for Buffett's wife! That would easily cover new tires on her Volvo and any leaky roof repairs in her old home.anon_investor wrote: ↑Sun May 30, 2021 6:48 amThe Buffet widow portfolio is 90/10. Are you going to move towards that from 97/3? If you do and start hitting FDIC insurance limits, would you roll T-bills?Marseille07 wrote: ↑Sun May 30, 2021 12:33 am I'm going to move closer to Warren Buffett's Two Fund Portfolio approach. Since my fixed income is cash, what I'll do is to count this cash portion as part of AA - basically, my AA is a combination of accounts holding equities and a checking account holding cash.
I think I found a solution to the rebalancing problem. As long as I rebalance slowly then it's fine; I should be able to avoid deep cuts on my AA.