Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
JBTX
Posts: 7099
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:46 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by JBTX »

HomerJ wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:49 pm
steve321 wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:37 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Why do you believe in a person rather than in the evidence? As far as I've understood, Swedroe's advice is based on the evidence provided by academic studies. Shouldn't peer reviewed studies carry more weight than someone's authority?
Economics isn't a real science. Too many variables, not enough data points, can't repeat experiments, hard to isolate independent variables, etc.

Then throw in human emotions and changing laws, etc.

Imagine how hard it would be to quantify anything in physics if Congress could change variables with laws, or if enough people got spooked, the gravitational constant could change year to year.
Of if the two fundamental theoretical frameworks of physics, relativity and quantum mechanics, were currently irreconcilable.....
AlphaLess
Posts: 2700
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 11:38 pm
Location: Kentucky

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by AlphaLess »

Ron Scott wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:29 am
David Jay wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:20 am
Ron Scott wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:13 am What are the key differences between them and who is right, in your opinion?
Right about what?

I'm going with Rick's analysis of the two philosophies above, here are my thoughts on the implications:
1. Larry may well be able to provide slightly better growth over time.
2. The average investor is likely better served by simplicity.

That probably means they are both "right" in their own ways.
Not sure I follow your response to my question.

So the key difference between them is that Larry’s philosophy yield better results over time? But that is somehow not good for the “average investor“?

Confused...
No one on this forum knows the answer to that question.
"A Republic, if you can keep it". Benjamin Franklin. 1787. | Party affiliation: Vanguard. Religion: low-cost investing.
User avatar
nisiprius
Advisory Board
Posts: 42201
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:33 am
Location: The terrestrial, globular, planetary hunk of matter, flattened at the poles, is my abode.--O. Henry

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by nisiprius »

larryswedroe wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:05 pm...my own portfolio, the Larry Portfolio, for equities, can be built with just two funds BOSVX and DWUSX, and wrote blog showing that...
Back online at etf.com: Simple Factor Investing
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.
Elysium
Posts: 3226
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:22 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Elysium »

Grt2bOutdoors wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 2:20 pm
Elysium wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:21 pm Difference between Jack's advice and Larry's, I will put it this way:

Bogle's advice is timeless and it will stand the test of time. Swedroe's advice is flavor of the decade, it may not stand the test of time. Question one need to ask, do I feel lucky?

Full disclosure: I do not own a 3-fund portfolio, but I am not an active investor in the sense I buy & hold low cost funds with intention of forever, in this regard I am following Jack's advice.
Flavor of the decade huh? Well, I have a few of Larry’s books, the earliest variation of this strategy harkens back to the 1990’s. Larry is not as old as Jack, (I do thank Jack for founding Vanguard and giving us small guys a fair shake) but give Larry a few more decades - then we’ll see how it holds up. Twenty years is not enough time to make a fair determination.
I am pretty sure I am not communicating this correctly, that must be the reason the message isn't coming through. To me, and many others, Bogle is one of a kind once in a century type of person. You do not get many Bogle's. With all due respect to Larry who is a fine person and has extensive knowledge, he isn't a once in a century kind of person like Bogle. There will be others like him, in fact there are many, they just don't write or speak as much as he does to promote his ideas, that's all.

If you want to know what I meant by flavor of the decade comment, you can read the post by nisiprius a few posts back explaining how the ideas keep shifting based on the decade.
User avatar
nedsaid
Posts: 13938
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 12:33 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by nedsaid »

Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
Taylor, I am sooooo old, that I remember when Rick Ferri believed in factor tilting. Somewhere, I have his book on "All About Asset Allocation." This seems to have been forgotten. Rick has expressed in recent years that he agrees more and more with the three fund portfolio. I
remember him saying recently that people that tilt should have a long term perspective. So I am not sure that he has completely abandoned factor tilting. He posts here often and can give us the definitive answer.
A fool and his money are good for business.
Elysium
Posts: 3226
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:22 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Elysium »

nedsaid wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:10 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
Taylor, I am sooooo old, that I remember when Rick Ferri believed in factor tilting. Somewhere, I have his book on "All About Asset Allocation." This seems to have been forgotten. Rick has expressed in recent years that he agrees more and more with the three fund portfolio. I
remember him saying recently that people that tilt should have a long term perspective. So I am not sure that he has completely abandoned factor tilting. He posts here often and can give us the definitive answer.
As I have said before, he has been fairly honest about it, and he was never dogmatic about factor tilting as if that is the best and only option available. Most certainly, he never jumped on the CCF bandwagon or alternatives. What makes someone truly believable is coming across with little bit of humility and not pretending to have all the answers always. Rick was never one to pretend he knew all the answers, of course he showed conviction, but never to the point of refuting everyone else as uninformed and foolish.

That plus, he is a former marine, and oh btw he has more hair than Larry, so that should settle it :happy As for Taylor, he is a WWII vet and a paratrooper. These two gents are with Bogle, so no question bogle wins. Case closed. :D
Last edited by Elysium on Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
dknightd
Posts: 2374
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:57 am

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by dknightd »

We can't even predict the weather accurately. And we have a pretty good understanding of how it works. Investment philosophies, are philosophies. Nothing more, nothing less
If you value a bird in the hand, pay off the loan. If you are willing to risk getting two birds (or none) from the market, invest the funds.
Silverado
Posts: 446
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 6:07 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Silverado »

Wow, some pretty deep thought out responses in this thread. Several way past me. My view is simple. Larry is trying to sell people something to make money, period. Jack hasn't had to sell anything in a long time, and simply preaches philosophy.

Larry=salesman, selfish (though does share a lot of thoughts that stimulates discussion)
Jack=preacher, selfless (used to sell an idea, it worked, now just stands behind it)
Elysium
Posts: 3226
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:22 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Elysium »

Silverado wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:43 pm Wow, some pretty deep thought out responses in this thread. Several way past me. My view is simple. Larry is trying to sell people something to make money, period. Jack hasn't had to sell anything in a long time, and simply preaches philosophy.

Larry=salesman, selfish (though does share a lot of thoughts that stimulates discussion)
Jack=preacher, selfless (used to sell an idea, it worked, now just stands behind it)
Sorry, but I beg to differ. As someone who has spoken openly against many of his positions, I still would not stand by and agree with comments he is trying to make money out of it. It is well known to old timers on the forum that Larry has made his money and he works because it is his passion. I just think they are not easy to implement and comes with high costs for most DIY investors on this forum. Personal attacks such as one above should be avoided.
Wakefield1
Posts: 1059
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Wakefield1 »

The Swedroe theories,analyses and academic work might be seen as useful to trying to understand why markets work as they do,in a sort of scientific detached way. Attractive to someone with a passionate interest in understanding such things.
Bogle gave us a way to navigate the markets such as to seek as much financial security as practical and to provide for ourselves with an absolute minimum of having to rely on blind chance and Lady Luck while not having to deal with complicated strategies and understandings.
Jiu Jitsu Fighter
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:22 am

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Jiu Jitsu Fighter »

Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
I believe in evidence-based investing, not people.
sreynard
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 8:11 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by sreynard »

Jiu Jitsu Fighter wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:56 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
I believe in evidence-based investing, not people.
OK, so post a graph of Jack's and Larry's approaches over the last 30 or 40 years and lets see which has done better? Let's don't talk evidence, let's see evidence. To quote some stupid sports movie, "Show me the money!"

As a historical note, evidence-based medicine was the antithesis of academic theory-based medicine. Just saying....

"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is." -- Benjamin Brewster, The Yale Literary Magazine, 1882
(A quote Nassim Taleb uses often)
Greenman72
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2013 2:17 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Greenman72 »

Silverado wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:43 pm Wow, some pretty deep thought out responses in this thread. Several way past me. My view is simple. Larry is trying to sell people something to make money, period. Jack hasn't had to sell anything in a long time, and simply preaches philosophy.
I can't agree more. Bogle has never sold anything, ever. He's in the poor house, and will certainly be laid to rest in a pauper's grave.

Or not. https://personalfinancenews.com/john-bogle-net-worth/
Greenman72
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Nov 01, 2013 2:17 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Greenman72 »

Elysium wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:54 pm
Silverado wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:43 pm Wow, some pretty deep thought out responses in this thread. Several way past me. My view is simple. Larry is trying to sell people something to make money, period. Jack hasn't had to sell anything in a long time, and simply preaches philosophy.

Larry=salesman, selfish (though does share a lot of thoughts that stimulates discussion)
Jack=preacher, selfless (used to sell an idea, it worked, now just stands behind it)
Sorry, but I beg to differ. As someone who has spoken openly against many of his positions, I still would not stand by and agree with comments he is trying to make money out of it. It is well known to old timers on the forum that Larry has made his money and he works because it is his passion. I just think they are not easy to implement and comes with high costs for most DIY investors on this forum. Personal attacks such as one above should be avoided.
And I'm not sure why it's okay for Jack Bogle and Rick Ferri and Taylor Larimore to make money on their academic theories, but it's criminal for Larry Swedroe to make money on his.
Grt2bOutdoors
Posts: 23143
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: New York

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Grt2bOutdoors »

Elysium wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:54 pm
Silverado wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:43 pm Wow, some pretty deep thought out responses in this thread. Several way past me. My view is simple. Larry is trying to sell people something to make money, period. Jack hasn't had to sell anything in a long time, and simply preaches philosophy.

Larry=salesman, selfish (though does share a lot of thoughts that stimulates discussion)
Jack=preacher, selfless (used to sell an idea, it worked, now just stands behind it)
Sorry, but I beg to differ. As someone who has spoken openly against many of his positions, I still would not stand by and agree with comments he is trying to make money out of it. It is well known to old timers on the forum that Larry has made his money and he works because it is his passion. I just think they are not easy to implement and comes with high costs for most DIY investors on this forum. Personal attacks such as one above should be avoided.
+1
"One should invest based on their need, ability and willingness to take risk - Larry Swedroe" Asking Portfolio Questions
Coato
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:34 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Coato »

a lot of people who index because they recognize what they can’t know seem quite comfortable making broad judgments of other people from afar.
User avatar
nedsaid
Posts: 13938
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 12:33 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by nedsaid »

sreynard wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:41 pm
Jiu Jitsu Fighter wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:56 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
I believe in evidence-based investing, not people.
OK, so post a graph of Jack's and Larry's approaches over the last 30 or 40 years and lets see which has done better? Let's don't talk evidence, let's see evidence. To quote some stupid sports movie, "Show me the money!"

As a historical note, evidence-based medicine was the antithesis of academic theory-based medicine. Just saying....

"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is." -- Benjamin Brewster, The Yale Literary Magazine, 1882
(A quote Nassim Taleb uses often)
Actually, Larry supplied me with the performance of his recommendations given in his first book. It was information presented to Buckingham clients and if I remember right was net of fees. I posted it and if you look around you could probably find it. I think it has been a couple of years. I think I also used portfolio visualizer to test the "Larry portfolio" and I posted that somewhere as well.

I did challenge Larry once to post Buckingham's results but for compliance reasons and other reasons he would not and could not. You can however see how the recommendations of his first book performed.
A fool and his money are good for business.
User avatar
oldcomputerguy
Moderator
Posts: 9451
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2015 6:50 am
Location: In the middle of five acres of woods in East Tennessee

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by oldcomputerguy »

Greenman72 wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 6:24 am
Silverado wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:43 pm Wow, some pretty deep thought out responses in this thread. Several way past me. My view is simple. Larry is trying to sell people something to make money, period. Jack hasn't had to sell anything in a long time, and simply preaches philosophy.
I can't agree more. Bogle has never sold anything, ever. He's in the poor house, and will certainly be laid to rest in a pauper's grave.

Or not. https://personalfinancenews.com/john-bogle-net-worth/
It seems that your post mischaracterizes what Silverado wrote.
"I’ve come around to this: If you’re dumb, surround yourself with smart people; and if you’re smart, surround yourself with smart people who disagree with you." (Aaron Sorkin)
Elysium
Posts: 3226
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:22 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Elysium »

When comparing performance results, let's not forget that Bogle also created the Windsor funds and the Primecap funds, even though they are managed by outside firms he selected those management teams, brought them in, instituted low fees unheard of for active management, and gave them a chance to succeed. How have they performed? well, you can take a look at long term performance of Primecap team, and the original Windsor fund team. Also, do not forget the sector funds, Healthcare, Energy, and the former utilities fund which became Dividend Growth later on. They have all been excellent. The reason is costs matter principle.

People often confuse Bogle philosophy with Total Stock Index funds on these forums, mostly because he is advicing simplicity and it is repeated constantly over here for a good reason. I agree it is probably best for most investors. But there is nothing complex about holding some of these other funds as long as you are a buy & hold investor. As far as I know he never said do not buy & hold them.

full disclosure: I have owned Primecap funds and Healthcare fund for long periods and reaped the rewards. I continue to hold large chunks of them. I thank Jack bogle for offering me these fine funds at a low cost, and a management structure for them that I can trust.
staythecourse
Posts: 6993
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by staythecourse »

Great thread. If I had to say it all has to do with Mr. Bogle belief in heavy market cap U.S. equities (TSM) mixed with bonds to level of age and Mr. Swedroe trying to maximize efficiency and being heavy in small and value on the equity side then a LARGE helping of 2 years u.s. treasuries to cut the tail of the dispersion of returns.

The answer which is better is an easy one, but can't be predicted. Such as simple concept yet very few seem to grasp it even on this board is a portfolio return is simple a summation of all its subassets in a weighted average. So, which philosophy will outperform (returns)? Which ever of the small, value, TSM, TBM, and 2year treasuries do best. That simple. If the U.S. TSM does best going forward then Mr. Bogle looks like a genius. If small and value do best then Mr. Swedroe wins the crown.

Now that being said what should an investor do? Read about both (and many other approaches) and find the one that resonates with your beliefs and STICK with it. I doubt in 20-30 years anyone is going to curse MR. Swedroe or Mr. Bogle that they are poor because they chose to follow their philosophy. My guess though is there are plenty of folks who will say, "I thought I could stick with that plan, but just couldn't and bailed out at the worst time".

IN conclusion, sticking to a reasonably good plan is MUCH BETTER then whatever was (in retrospect) the best plan.

Good luck.
"The stock market [fluctuation], therefore, is noise. A giant distraction from the business of investing.” | -Jack Bogle
anil686
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 12:33 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by anil686 »

They are actually more alike than not - contrary to some of the strong views in this thread. Bogle is buy and hold with a total market philosophy (although if you read Common Sense on Mutual Funds - he can get a little slicy and dicey). Swedroe really (IMO) pushes the envelope of MPT and really tries to string together as many asset classes together with the hopes that they are un-correlated enough to lead to better long term returns but in a buy and hold pattern.

The big difference is the acknowledgment that Bogle makes - either implicitly in his early works or explicitly in his more recent books - that investor behavior tends to have a strong negative effect on returns. The emotions of investing can really derail the best laid plans. Being able to stay the course - without changing plans frequently (ideally never at all) - probably will make up any difference and then some of rebalancing between 5-10 different asset classes. I think others - like Bernstein and Ferri have echoed this over the past few years. They both have written books many years ago that talked about the advantages of portfolio construction with less correlated asset classes - but have both seemed to gravitate over the past few years to the 3 fund portfolio.

To investors on this forum - it probably makes little difference. The investors posting and reading here have an interest in investing that is probably higher than 90% of investors. Also, they are probably aware moreso than ordinary investors of their own emotions and are probably more apt to stick with a plan. But for the average investor, I think it is pretty safe to say that simpler with less moving parts, less variance from the major indices or benchmarks and lower costs probably would be the better way to go. JMO though...
chisey
Posts: 276
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:47 am

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by chisey »

Silverado wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:43 pm Wow, some pretty deep thought out responses in this thread. Several way past me. My view is simple. Larry is trying to sell people something to make money, period. Jack hasn't had to sell anything in a long time, and simply preaches philosophy.

Larry=salesman, selfish (though does share a lot of thoughts that stimulates discussion)
Jack=preacher, selfless (used to sell an idea, it worked, now just stands behind it)
This is a completely unfair characterization, IMO. Larry has shared countless hours of discussion with the people on this forum and to my knowledge has NEVER tried to convert anyone here to a client. He does that because he enjoys it and we all benefit, and it's this accusation that has caused him to slow his posting here to a trickle.

I'm sure he gets clients from those who read his articles, but I see nothing whatsoever wrong with that either. Larry is one of the good guys and it's a shame that some people have to run him down on here.
Elysium
Posts: 3226
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:22 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Elysium »

My point is, do not think about Bogle as one dimensional, after all he managed the original Wellington fund, another widely successful fund over long periods. He is far more nuanced when it comes to investment principles and he understands all the factor matters more than anyone else I suspect. It's just that Bogle understands most investors, and I dare say that include many here as well, cannot and do not stay the course with such strategies. Same goes for active managed funds run by Vanguard, you need to stay the course and not worry about tracking error occationally. This is why the simplicity of a three fund total market portfolio is best for most investors. This is why he advocates them. That doesn't mean that he hasn't offered anything else, which is often overlooked on this form. When you factor in what Vanguard has done to active management under Bogle's leadership and vision, you get a true grasp of his genius vision.

To me, the core Bogle principles are (a) costs matter (b) stay the course (c) simplicity. Anyone following these three principles can be very successful.

Larry do not follow any of these, he suggests costs do not matter, just cost per unit of value (whatever is that value by his definition, not a standard), and stay the course only until new information comes out to refute your old beliefs. As for simmplicity, again he defines it according to his view. In other words, if you follow Larry you need the help of an advisory firm such as his to constantly navigate this costs per unit of value and change course with new information ideas.

In the end, Bogle created Vanguard and offered the best building blocks at lowest costs in the industry with which you can build a successful investment portfolio. Larry is offering complex strategies based on academic research through his advisory firm. Some here try to keep up and follow using backdoor strategies and ETFs as DIY. I suspect these folks will find it very hard to be successful in the long run. As for Larry's clients, I suspect they are already successful enough to begin with having accumulated the assets in first place and they probably need the services of someone hand holding for not just investment services but tax planning estate planning etc.

To me this whole thread is an apples to watermelon comparison, as I said in the beginning they are not equals and the strategies are not equally applicable. Bogle's strategies can be applied broadly, Larry's can be applied narrowly to a select set of individuals who use advisory servvices. The third group unfortunately I feel will be less successful following Larry's advice on their own, rather than follow the three core Bogle principles.
User avatar
HomerJ
Posts: 15335
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 12:50 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by HomerJ »

Elysium wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:26 amTo me, the core Bogle principles are (a) costs matter (b) stay the course (c) simplicity. Anyone following these three principles can be very successful.

Larry do not follow any of these, he suggests costs do not matter, just cost per unit of value (whatever is that value by his definition, not a standard), and stay the course only until new information comes out to refute your old beliefs. As for simmplicity, again he defines it according to his view. In other words, if you follow Larry you need the help of an advisory firm such as his to constantly navigate this costs per unit of value and change course with new information ideas.
This is a very accurate description. I think you've done the best to list the key differences.
In the end, Bogle created Vanguard and offered the best building blocks at lowest costs in the industry with which you can build a successful investment portfolio. Larry is offering complex strategies based on academic research through his advisory firm. Some here try to keep up and follow using backdoor strategies and ETFs as DIY. I suspect these folks will find it very hard to be successful in the long run. As for Larry's clients, I suspect they are already successful enough to begin with having accumulated the assets in first place and they probably need the services of someone hand holding for not just investment services but tax planning estate planning etc.

To me this whole thread is an apples to watermelon comparison, as I said in the beginning they are not equals and the strategies are not equally applicable. Bogle's strategies can be applied broadly, Larry's can be applied narrowly to a select set of individuals who use advisory servvices. The third group unfortunately I feel will be less successful following Larry's advice on their own, rather than follow the three core Bogle principles.
I agree with this as well.

Both can be right.
A Goldman Sachs associate provided a variety of detailed explanations, but then offered a caveat, “If I’m being dead-### honest, though, nobody knows what’s really going on.”
sreynard
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 8:11 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by sreynard »

nedsaid wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 7:11 am
sreynard wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:41 pm
Jiu Jitsu Fighter wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:56 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
I believe in evidence-based investing, not people.
OK, so post a graph of Jack's and Larry's approaches over the last 30 or 40 years and lets see which has done better? Let's don't talk evidence, let's see evidence. To quote some stupid sports movie, "Show me the money!"

As a historical note, evidence-based medicine was the antithesis of academic theory-based medicine. Just saying....

"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is." -- Benjamin Brewster, The Yale Literary Magazine, 1882
(A quote Nassim Taleb uses often)
Actually, Larry supplied me with the performance of his recommendations given in his first book. It was information presented to Buckingham clients and if I remember right was net of fees. I posted it and if you look around you could probably find it. I think it has been a couple of years. I think I also used portfolio visualizer to test the "Larry portfolio" and I posted that somewhere as well.

I did challenge Larry once to post Buckingham's results but for compliance reasons and other reasons he would not and could not. You can however see how the recommendations of his first book performed.
And how does the performance in his first book correlate to that in his second, third, ..., or latest book? :?

Actually, was pretty sure you had examined the evidence. I'm questioning the people that say they follow evidence-based investing, but never seem to give any of the evidence. More like they are going on the belief that there is such evidence rather than analyzing themselves.

Nobody in their right mind would argue that Larry's approach can't have higher performance and/or lower risk. It can. Jack's argument is that the simple approach is good enough. Jack argues the TSM is enough diversity. Larry argues that fewer stocks have more. :wink:

Larry has argued over and over it isn't about higher performance, it's about reducing risk. A lot of risk mitigation strategies can look very silly for a long time. Until they don't. The question is always, does the usefulness of the strategy warrant the cost and complexity? Larry obviously believes it does. I still don't know. I think he has a lot more faith in some of the academic research than I do.
Random Walker
Posts: 4618
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:21 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Random Walker »

nedsaid wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 7:11 am
sreynard wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:41 pm
Jiu Jitsu Fighter wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:56 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
I believe in evidence-based investing, not people.
OK, so post a graph of Jack's and Larry's approaches over the last 30 or 40 years and lets see which has done better? Let's don't talk evidence, let's see evidence. To quote some stupid sports movie, "Show me the money!"

As a historical note, evidence-based medicine was the antithesis of academic theory-based medicine. Just saying....

"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is." -- Benjamin Brewster, The Yale Literary Magazine, 1882
(A quote Nassim Taleb uses often)
Actually, Larry supplied me with the performance of his recommendations given in his first book. It was information presented to Buckingham clients and if I remember right was net of fees. I posted it and if you look around you could probably find it. I think it has been a couple of years. I think I also used portfolio visualizer to test the "Larry portfolio" and I posted that somewhere as well.

I did challenge Larry once to post Buckingham's results but for compliance reasons and other reasons he would not and could not. You can however see how the recommendations of his first book performed.
For the people asking about comparison of Larry results versus Jack results. I think it’s really hard to do that, harder than people realize. What Larry proposes, I think, is an approach to asset allocation, not a specific asset allocation. One first needs to determine a forward looking desired expected return for the portfolio. Next he would need to construct a Jack portfolio and a Larry portfolio, each with the same expected return. The Jack portfolio would be some sort of TSM/TBM portfolio with substantially higher equity allocation than the Larry portfolio. The comparison Larry portfolio would have a lower equity allocation, big tilt to SV or all SV, maybe other factors, maybe alternatives, bigger dose of safe bonds. To really get a feel, one would need to compare returns, SD, Sharpe ratios, maximal drawdowns.

Dave
History_Prof
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:06 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by History_Prof »

I've read both Bogle and Swedroe, and I found both to be intellectually compelling. I am happy both approaches exists. I would be very curious to see in the long run to know not just "who wins" but also "by how much." Given my current options in my various retirement saving plans, I simply cannot follow a Swedroe model. Reading his works has nonetheless made me a more critical consumer. That's value added.

It's also my sense that Swedroe's writings are a bit more down to earth than Bogle's sometimes. For example, in Bogel's Common Sense he writes “No matter how long or short the time frame, the gross return in the stock market, minus intermediation costs, equals the net return earned by investors as a group. If the data do not prove that indexing wins, well, the data are wrong,” 31-2. Now the data seems to show that indexing wins, but framing it like this seems a bit cavalier to me. That said, there is something to say about Bogel's passion.
snailderby
Posts: 1240
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2018 11:30 am

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by snailderby »

I don't know if this is a perfect approximation of the "Larry portfolio" (and like Random Walker pointed out, there probably isn't just one "Larry portfolio"), but there is this: https://portfoliocharts.com/portfolio/larry-portfolio/. I don't think it uses specific mutual funds that Swedroe recommends, but it backtests some of the asset classes that he has spoken favorably of.

For comparison, here are the charts for a 60/40 three-fund portfolio (with a 67% domestic 33% int'l equities split): https://portfoliocharts.com/portfolio/t ... portfolio/.
User avatar
Rowan Oak
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:11 pm
Location: Yoknapatawpha

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Rowan Oak »

nedsaid wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:10 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
Taylor, I am sooooo old, that I remember when Rick Ferri believed in factor tilting. Somewhere, I have his book on "All About Asset Allocation." This seems to have been forgotten. Rick has expressed in recent years that he agrees more and more with the three fund portfolio. I
remember him saying recently that people that tilt should have a long term perspective. So I am not sure that he has completely abandoned factor tilting. He posts here often and can give us the definitive answer.
I think his signature says it all: "The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity."
“If you can get good at destroying your own wrong ideas, that is a great gift.” – Charlie Munger
GammaPoint
Posts: 2618
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 10:25 am
Location: Washington

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by GammaPoint »

Rowan Oak wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:50 am I think his signature says it all: "The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity."
To describe education and learning as a path on which you've already reached the final destination is not a viewpoint I ever try to espouse in any domain. While I believe simple, few-fund indexing is a great solution for many people, when people demand that that must clearly be the right solution and show animosity towards the possibility that that might not be the case, I tend to look elsewhere for investing ideas.
fortyofforty
Posts: 2083
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:33 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by fortyofforty »

Random Walker wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:25 pm Well, I’m the guy who posts his articles. Just to be clear, I’m not promoting him or his business. I’m promoting the education he provides.
I disagree. By posting his work, repeatedly, you are, in effect, promoting and endorsing it.
Elysium
Posts: 3226
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:22 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Elysium »

fortyofforty wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:00 am
Random Walker wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:25 pm Well, I’m the guy who posts his articles. Just to be clear, I’m not promoting him or his business. I’m promoting the education he provides.
I disagree. By posting his work, repeatedly, you are, in effect, promoting and endorsing it.
Bogleheads memebership has increaed many folds over the years, and it is a good source for generating web site traffic for linked articles. One thing we can do though is not to follow the click bait articles so that it stops serving the intended purpose.
grok87
Posts: 9161
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by grok87 »

JBTX wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:57 pm
HomerJ wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:49 pm
steve321 wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:37 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Why do you believe in a person rather than in the evidence? As far as I've understood, Swedroe's advice is based on the evidence provided by academic studies. Shouldn't peer reviewed studies carry more weight than someone's authority?
Economics isn't a real science. Too many variables, not enough data points, can't repeat experiments, hard to isolate independent variables, etc.

Then throw in human emotions and changing laws, etc.

Imagine how hard it would be to quantify anything in physics if Congress could change variables with laws, or if enough people got spooked, the gravitational constant could change year to year.
Of if the two fundamental theoretical frameworks of physics, relativity and quantum mechanics, were currently irreconcilable.....
nice!
RIP Mr. Bogle.
staythecourse
Posts: 6993
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by staythecourse »

fortyofforty wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:00 am
Random Walker wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:25 pm Well, I’m the guy who posts his articles. Just to be clear, I’m not promoting him or his business. I’m promoting the education he provides.
I disagree. By posting his work, repeatedly, you are, in effect, promoting and endorsing it.
Of course, he is promoting his work because he believes in it. Is that wrong? Unless he is getting a kickback from Buckingham (Mr. Swedroe's investment firm) I don't see anything wrong in it. Is it wrong to bring up new articles or interviews about Mr. Bogle. Doesn't that "promote" him?

It is NEVER wrong to bring up articles that you believe in. Actually, it is a great way to get opinions from others to see if there are aspects you have not thought about which may sway you one way or another.

Having different voices is what is great about this forum. If we all thought the same way it would lose its usefulness. Heck, if everyone said the same thing I wouldn't keep coming as I am the last person who "drinks the kool aid".

Good luck.
"The stock market [fluctuation], therefore, is noise. A giant distraction from the business of investing.” | -Jack Bogle
User avatar
Rowan Oak
Posts: 708
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:11 pm
Location: Yoknapatawpha

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Rowan Oak »

GammaPoint wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:55 am
Rowan Oak wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:50 am I think his signature says it all: "The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity."
While I believe simple, few-fund indexing is a great solution for many people, when people demand that that must clearly be the right solution and show animosity towards the possibility that that might not be the case, I tend to look elsewhere for investing ideas.
Doesn't that pretty much include all investment philosophies and strategies? Though I don't see anyone "demanding" they are right or showing animosity in this discussion. We won't know who had the "right"/better solution for decades and even then it won't mean much going forward.
“If you can get good at destroying your own wrong ideas, that is a great gift.” – Charlie Munger
staythecourse
Posts: 6993
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by staythecourse »

Rowan Oak wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:50 am
nedsaid wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:10 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
Taylor, I am sooooo old, that I remember when Rick Ferri believed in factor tilting. Somewhere, I have his book on "All About Asset Allocation." This seems to have been forgotten. Rick has expressed in recent years that he agrees more and more with the three fund portfolio. I
remember him saying recently that people that tilt should have a long term perspective. So I am not sure that he has completely abandoned factor tilting. He posts here often and can give us the definitive answer.
I think his signature says it all: "The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity."
A bit laughable. Mr. Ferri used to promote his 4 fund (TSM, TISM, TBM, and REIT) which was an excellent approach. So he drops REITS and does the other 3 and somehow it is so much simpler? As if one extra fund is complex.

There is bit too much cult mentality and kool aid drinking on this site in what is simple and complex.

Good luck.
"The stock market [fluctuation], therefore, is noise. A giant distraction from the business of investing.” | -Jack Bogle
UpperNwGuy
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:16 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by UpperNwGuy »

fortyofforty wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:00 am
Random Walker wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:25 pm Well, I’m the guy who posts his articles. Just to be clear, I’m not promoting him or his business. I’m promoting the education he provides.
I disagree. By posting his work, repeatedly, you are, in effect, promoting and endorsing it.
I would have to agree with fortyofforty. Nevertheless, The articles do provide food for thought.
UpperNwGuy
Posts: 4292
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:16 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by UpperNwGuy »

staythecourse wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:34 am
Rowan Oak wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 10:50 am
nedsaid wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:10 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
Taylor, I am sooooo old, that I remember when Rick Ferri believed in factor tilting. Somewhere, I have his book on "All About Asset Allocation." This seems to have been forgotten. Rick has expressed in recent years that he agrees more and more with the three fund portfolio. I
remember him saying recently that people that tilt should have a long term perspective. So I am not sure that he has completely abandoned factor tilting. He posts here often and can give us the definitive answer.
I think his signature says it all: "The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity."
A bit laughable. Mr. Ferri used to promote his 4 fund (TSM, TISM, TBM, and REIT) which was an excellent approach. So he drops REITS and does the other 3 and somehow it is so much simpler? As if one extra fund is complex.

There is bit too much cult mentality and kool aid drinking on this site in what is simple and complex.

Good luck.
REIT is a tilt, so I’m glad Rick dropped it from his recommended portfolio. It also makes taxes more complicated.
TallBoy29er
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:06 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by TallBoy29er »

Elysium wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:16 pm
nedsaid wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 9:10 pm
Taylor Larimore wrote: Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:40 pm
Rick Ferri wrote: Wed Oct 03, 2018 11:16 am Jack believes in portfolio simplicity.
Larry believes in portfolio complexity.
I believe in Jack.

Rick Ferri
Bogleheads:

I believe in Jack and Rick Ferri.

Best wishes.
Taylor
Taylor, I am sooooo old, that I remember when Rick Ferri believed in factor tilting. Somewhere, I have his book on "All About Asset Allocation." This seems to have been forgotten. Rick has expressed in recent years that he agrees more and more with the three fund portfolio. I
remember him saying recently that people that tilt should have a long term perspective. So I am not sure that he has completely abandoned factor tilting. He posts here often and can give us the definitive answer.
As I have said before, he has been fairly honest about it, and he was never dogmatic about factor tilting as if that is the best and only option available. Most certainly, he never jumped on the CCF bandwagon or alternatives. What makes someone truly believable is coming across with little bit of humility and not pretending to have all the answers always. Rick was never one to pretend he knew all the answers, of course he showed conviction, but never to the point of refuting everyone else as uninformed and foolish.

That plus, he is a former marine, and oh btw he has more hair than Larry, so that should settle it :happy As for Taylor, he is a WWII vet and a paratrooper. These two gents are with Bogle, so no question bogle wins. Case closed. :D
I have friends who are Marines, so based on what they've told me, the wording should be that Rick IS a Marine. :D
EnjoyIt
Posts: 4956
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 8:06 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by EnjoyIt »

I am a simple man and clueless about investing. For me to stay the course the plan must be simple to follow. I need a general idea of what I am doing, why I am doing it, and how to do it. For me the 3 fund approach makes sense, easy to follow and does not require additional input from a paid advisor. Not having to pay someone to tell me what to do offers me value. Will I end up with less money with this approach as opposed to something more complex, I do not know, and at this point I don't care.

I have read Mr. Swedroe's articles and to be honest, they are over my head which makes his approach not for me. I suspect I am not much different than most other investors most of which should probably just be buying a target date index fund or a life strategy fund and move on with life.
A time to EVALUATE your jitters: | https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79939&start=400#p5275418
MJW
Posts: 724
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 7:40 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by MJW »

I was actually a little surprised to see this thread is still open. Once the obvious distinctions between the two were made early in the discussion it seems silly for the conversation to drift into contentious territory. I wonder what either individual would think of people on the Internet fighting over them. :)

I've mentioned before that I consider the study of investing to be a hobby of mine and the actual act of investing to be a means to an end. I enjoy reading and learning about different philosophies and viewpoints and am always free to ignore or discard what I do not find useful. Same for everyone else. There should be no need for a purity test on this forum.
psteinx
Posts: 3570
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:24 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by psteinx »

The desire to rely on the authority of others ("John Doe says that the right way to allocate a portfolio is XYZ") is understandable, given the complexities of the arguments, the historical record, and trying to place these in present context.

That's why it's a relatively frequent topic here. In fact, the very name of these forums effectively elevates the authority of one expert. And there is often a sense of "one true" investing method, the "Boglehead method", never mind that it in fact isn't really an exact match for Bogle's own preferences. (As I understand them anyways. IIUC, Bogle is at a minimum less enthusiastic about international equities, and somewhat more enthusiastic about active investing than typical "Boglehead" formulations...)

But if forum discussions are, to some extent, arguments from authority, then discussion of the relative merits of such authorities (both positive AND negative) should be accepted.

Some further general issues with the use of authorities and argument from authority, in the contexts generally addressed on these forums:

1) Its very hard to assess who is a valid, accurate authority. Track records? Except in extreme cases, hard to verify, and subject to a LOT of framing issues. Swedroe in particular has written a lot of books and even more articles, over a long time span, with shifting recommendations, that address varied audiences.

2) Audiences vary. Recommendations that may be appropriate for a modest 401K account might be quite unsuitable for a large taxable account or a college endowment or whatever.

3) The authority that we seek to evaluate is often based on successes rather removed from the key issues many here face (constructed a reasonably good, if not optimal, portfolio for an individual investor.) Bogle built a great investment company. Buffett compounded money in various investment vehicles at very high rates, but more recently is running, effectively, a large conglamerate. Swedroe helped build an asset management company, and wrote and marketed his persona and that of his company. None of these are, IMO, an exact match for what most here are trying to accomplish.

Finally, on research:

Evaluating academic financial research, which is primarily backwards looking (what has happened in the PAST) is difficult. Swedroe is far from the only one who reads such material, and others (including myself and I presume many others on these forums) have read a fair amount of it, and may place different weights on what research was important and what conclusions one might usefully draw from it.

But in general, one should I think be rather circumspect about the utility of such advice. Financial markets, comprising the types and specifics of instruments available, the valuations placed on them by various metrics, the tax framework that the universe of investors face, and so on, has changed TREMENDOUSLY over the years. And it's not just one variable changing, slowly or quickly. Many MANY variables, some relatively easily ascertainable, but many that are obscure, have changed and are changing. So if we want to analyze and say what will happen in, say, the 10 years ahead, recognize that we only have a limited number of (full) 10 year historical periods of at least semi-modern financial markets to analyze, and that the specifics of the current investment marketplace, as of October 2018, are different from those of October 2008, October 1998, and so on.

Imagine that you want to know how an investment in 10 year treasury bonds will perform. You could look at the history, and say that, over some past period, these have returned about 6% nominal. So they'll return about 6% nominal over the next 10 years, right? Of course that's transparently silly - most folks here know that present nominal yields are much lower, and that it would be quite difficult (though not impossible) to get a 6% nominal return, from here, over the next 10 years.

But as we move from the more fixed side of the ledger to the more uncertain realm of equities and subslices of them (value, small, etc.) or even greater exotica, too many folks rely, too much I think, on relatively simple extrapolation from the past (as detailed, perhaps, in academic research). OK, they won't necessarily say that some past outperformance margin of some factor, whether an old standard or the latest one from some academic paper, will hold EXACTLY, but there's often a sense that the future will look pretty much like the past, even if we don't really understand how the present differs from the past that generated the data underlying that academic research.
cheezit
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2018 7:28 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by cheezit »

I don't get the hand-wringing over how hard it is to compare the performance of various portfolio construction approaches that has been mentioned in this thread, unless you're referring to the general caveats about past performance.

Here are three model portfolios: #1 is as close to a basic "Bogle" as I can manage on PortfolioVisualizer, #2 is a "Taylor"/"Rick" portfolio and probably the single most common fixed asset allocation on this board (from what I've seen in my limited time here, looking at what people post and what's in their sigs, at least!), and #3 is an old-style "Larry" portfolio.

Results over the longest period for which PV has data:

Image
Image
Image

You could also simulate Larry's most recent portfolio advice, from less than a month ago, by looking at the tilts of the individual funds in his three-equity fund portfolio (consisting of DFQTX, DFIEX and DFCEX) and mimicking them.

Of course, we don't know what the graphs and charts will look like going forward, the core problem with backtesting. With these model portfolios, I was unable to model shifting the bond/equity split with the investor's age as Bogle and Larrimore recommend. There is also probably some tracking error between the data PV uses for various asset classes (mostly sourced from French per their FAQ) and the index or indices that an investor might choose to track with an index mutual fund or ETF starting today or at some point in the past (eg. if you wanted a small value component, there are funds that track Russel 2K value, CRSP small value, and S&P 600 value to choose from, and none of them will line up perfectly with the data that PV used; and funds can switch which index they're tracking, as eg. VBR has done at least twice, and so on).

Before someone comes to stone me for the crime of supposedly offering sacrifice at the altar of PortfolioVisualizer, I will reiterate that I'm not saying here that charting examples of three broad schools of thought for asset allocation over roughly thirty years and looking at the results settles the question of which approach is best for anybody's goals, just that the particular question of "how would an investor who took this approach N years ago have done?" is not that hard to answer with reasonable error bars.
User avatar
Tycoon
Posts: 1500
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:06 pm

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by Tycoon »

psteinx wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 12:57 pm The desire to rely on the authority of others ("John Doe says that the right way to allocate a portfolio is XYZ") is understandable, given the complexities of the arguments, the historical record, and trying to place these in present context.

That's why it's a relatively frequent topic here. In fact, the very name of these forums effectively elevates the authority of one expert. And there is often a sense of "one true" investing method, the "Boglehead method", never mind that it in fact isn't really an exact match for Bogle's own preferences. (As I understand them anyways. IIUC, Bogle is at a minimum less enthusiastic about international equities, and somewhat more enthusiastic about active investing than typical "Boglehead" formulations...)

But if forum discussions are, to some extent, arguments from authority, then discussion of the relative merits of such authorities (both positive AND negative) should be accepted.

Some further general issues with the use of authorities and argument from authority, in the contexts generally addressed on these forums:

1) Its very hard to assess who is a valid, accurate authority. Track records? Except in extreme cases, hard to verify, and subject to a LOT of framing issues. Swedroe in particular has written a lot of books and even more articles, over a long time span, with shifting recommendations, that address varied audiences.

2) Audiences vary. Recommendations that may be appropriate for a modest 401K account might be quite unsuitable for a large taxable account or a college endowment or whatever.

3) The authority that we seek to evaluate is often based on successes rather removed from the key issues many here face (constructed a reasonably good, if not optimal, portfolio for an individual investor.) Bogle built a great investment company. Buffett compounded money in various investment vehicles at very high rates, but more recently is running, effectively, a large conglamerate. Swedroe helped build an asset management company, and wrote and marketed his persona and that of his company. None of these are, IMO, an exact match for what most here are trying to accomplish.

Finally, on research:

Evaluating academic financial research, which is primarily backwards looking (what has happened in the PAST) is difficult. Swedroe is far from the only one who reads such material, and others (including myself and I presume many others on these forums) have read a fair amount of it, and may place different weights on what research was important and what conclusions one might usefully draw from it.

But in general, one should I think be rather circumspect about the utility of such advice. Financial markets, comprising the types and specifics of instruments available, the valuations placed on them by various metrics, the tax framework that the universe of investors face, and so on, has changed TREMENDOUSLY over the years. And it's not just one variable changing, slowly or quickly. Many MANY variables, some relatively easily ascertainable, but many that are obscure, have changed and are changing. So if we want to analyze and say what will happen in, say, the 10 years ahead, recognize that we only have a limited number of (full) 10 year historical periods of at least semi-modern financial markets to analyze, and that the specifics of the current investment marketplace, as of October 2018, are different from those of October 2008, October 1998, and so on.

Imagine that you want to know how an investment in 10 year treasury bonds will perform. You could look at the history, and say that, over some past period, these have returned about 6% nominal. So they'll return about 6% nominal over the next 10 years, right? Of course that's transparently silly - most folks here know that present nominal yields are much lower, and that it would be quite difficult (though not impossible) to get a 6% nominal return, from here, over the next 10 years.

But as we move from the more fixed side of the ledger to the more uncertain realm of equities and subslices of them (value, small, etc.) or even greater exotica, too many folks rely, too much I think, on relatively simple extrapolation from the past (as detailed, perhaps, in academic research). OK, they won't necessarily say that some past outperformance margin of some factor, whether an old standard or the latest one from some academic paper, will hold EXACTLY, but there's often a sense that the future will look pretty much like the past, even if we don't really understand how the present differs from the past that generated the data underlying that academic research.
This is the quality of post that drew me to "DieHards" and eventually here. Very well done indeed!
Emotionless, prognostication free investing. Ignoring the noise and economists since 1979. Getting rich off of "smart people's" behavioral mistakes.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 67181
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Key differences between investing philosophies: Swedroe vs. Bogle

Post by LadyGeek »

This thread has run its course and is locked (topic exhausted, contentious, no progress in the discussion). See: Locked Topics
Moderators or site admins may lock a topic (set it so no more replies may be added) when a violation of posting policy has occurred. Occasionally, even if there are no overt violations of posting policy, a topic (or thread) will reach a point where the information content of the discussion has been essentially exhausted and further replies are much more likely to cause distress to the community than add anything of value.
Wiki To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
Locked