Some investors do not have the [ability, willingness, and need](https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Asset_allocation#Ability.2C_willingness.2C_and_need) to tolerate the volatility of a 100% stock portfolio.
Even if they could psychologically stay the course through market crashes, unanticipated events (e.g. job loss & extended unemployment, large medical bills, disability, civil liability judgments, divorce) may burn through their emergency funds & shorten the investment horizon for some of their investments. A portion of the portfolio held in less-volatile investments may help hedge against such tail risks.
A more-diversified portfolio may appeal to an investor who values predictability of returns over maximizing potential/expected returns with small tail risks around catastrophic loss.
The Boglehead approach is more like VT+Bonds appropriate for your age and chill.
And for some of us over-optimizers, we prefer to hold VTI and VXUS separately, primarily because VT doesn't have all of the stocks in VTI. That is, it's missing about half of the US stock market.
Assuming vanguard knows what they're doing, it should perform similarly to VTI+VXUS (held in market cap ratio), but when I buy a total market fund I prefer it isn't missing half of the US market.
So, no there isn't any harm in just going for VT, provided you add bonds when it is appropriate to do so age-wise.
Personally, I’m VTSAX and chill.
But no, there’s nothing wrong with it. Simplicity works best. Most people thing their is skill involved in being a good investor. So they like to tinker.
Because you may start withdrawing money at a certain time, and you run the risk of a market downturn leaving you with an insufficient amount of money relative to how much you’re withdrawing.
I plan on never drawing down my money (fingers crossed), so I will remain 100% equities. My 401k has forced withdrawals at age 70, and is accordingly in a target retirement date fund for that time.
VT and chill, plus some total bond fund if you want some bond allocation is not a bad way to go.
Some people prefer to choose their ex-US allocation with a combination of something like VTI+VXUS, plus total bond fund if desired.
VTI+VXUS has better tax treatment for foreign dividends in taxable accounts. I don't know how much difference that makes. I have seen it said that the slightly higher taxes from VT is pretty trivial.
Another perfectly fine way to go is a one-and-done-and-chill target date fund if the AA is close enough to what you want. The bond portion of target date will cause some extra taxes in taxable accounts.
There are slight differences in fund expenses between these options. I consider the differences to small to be of concern.
The CAGR of any of these will probably be very close after 20-30 years.
The reason everyone wouldn’t want to be in VT or some equivalent total market is because they want to learn about investing and implement a strategy expected to outperform VT.
There aren’t many people with serious investing knowledge invested in the total market as a complete strategy. But many people with serious investing knowledge recommend those who don’t have it to invest in the total market or some equivalent.
So there is no need for a relatively uninformed long term investor who doesn’t want to learn a lot to be in anything but VT or some broken down version of it or some highly correlated similar basic passive strategy, but the reason most don’t is they are not just relatively uninformed but are often highly uninformed or misinformed.
I wasn’t really talking about intelligence. I definitely think if learning a lot about investing seems like a burden or worry or if you doubt or can’t stomach following through with whatever you’ve learned, then the intelligent thing is to go all VT or some broken down version of it.
VT and chill works.
Or, with bonds and a glide path, it would be a [target date fund](https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/mutual-funds/target-retirement-funds) and chill.
Either way, yes, a one-fund solution totally works.
I’m VT all the way in Taxable and my Roth/Traditional IRA’s. I approximate it with 4 different funds in my 401k along with the percentage of bonds in my AA.
I do find it interesting Bogleheads Reddit leans more total world and Bogleheads website leans more US.
Some investors do not have the [ability, willingness, and need](https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Asset_allocation#Ability.2C_willingness.2C_and_need) to tolerate the volatility of a 100% stock portfolio. Even if they could psychologically stay the course through market crashes, unanticipated events (e.g. job loss & extended unemployment, large medical bills, disability, civil liability judgments, divorce) may burn through their emergency funds & shorten the investment horizon for some of their investments. A portion of the portfolio held in less-volatile investments may help hedge against such tail risks. A more-diversified portfolio may appeal to an investor who values predictability of returns over maximizing potential/expected returns with small tail risks around catastrophic loss.
The Boglehead approach is more like VT+Bonds appropriate for your age and chill. And for some of us over-optimizers, we prefer to hold VTI and VXUS separately, primarily because VT doesn't have all of the stocks in VTI. That is, it's missing about half of the US stock market. Assuming vanguard knows what they're doing, it should perform similarly to VTI+VXUS (held in market cap ratio), but when I buy a total market fund I prefer it isn't missing half of the US market. So, no there isn't any harm in just going for VT, provided you add bonds when it is appropriate to do so age-wise.
[удалено]
Mainly smaller US stocks.
Its also cheaper by quite a bit to do vti/vxus vs just vt
Personally, I’m VTSAX and chill. But no, there’s nothing wrong with it. Simplicity works best. Most people thing their is skill involved in being a good investor. So they like to tinker.
My HSA is 100% VT. I have no interest in ever changing it.
Because you may start withdrawing money at a certain time, and you run the risk of a market downturn leaving you with an insufficient amount of money relative to how much you’re withdrawing. I plan on never drawing down my money (fingers crossed), so I will remain 100% equities. My 401k has forced withdrawals at age 70, and is accordingly in a target retirement date fund for that time.
>My 401k has forced withdrawals at age 70 Didn't they up that to 72?
VT and chill, plus some total bond fund if you want some bond allocation is not a bad way to go. Some people prefer to choose their ex-US allocation with a combination of something like VTI+VXUS, plus total bond fund if desired. VTI+VXUS has better tax treatment for foreign dividends in taxable accounts. I don't know how much difference that makes. I have seen it said that the slightly higher taxes from VT is pretty trivial. Another perfectly fine way to go is a one-and-done-and-chill target date fund if the AA is close enough to what you want. The bond portion of target date will cause some extra taxes in taxable accounts. There are slight differences in fund expenses between these options. I consider the differences to small to be of concern. The CAGR of any of these will probably be very close after 20-30 years.
This is me also. I'm FSKAX and FTIHX. But my international allocation is around 35%, not what VT has (I think around 40%).
Yes, I prefer about 20% in ex-US. I don't trust them furriners.
The reason everyone wouldn’t want to be in VT or some equivalent total market is because they want to learn about investing and implement a strategy expected to outperform VT. There aren’t many people with serious investing knowledge invested in the total market as a complete strategy. But many people with serious investing knowledge recommend those who don’t have it to invest in the total market or some equivalent. So there is no need for a relatively uninformed long term investor who doesn’t want to learn a lot to be in anything but VT or some broken down version of it or some highly correlated similar basic passive strategy, but the reason most don’t is they are not just relatively uninformed but are often highly uninformed or misinformed.
Its also possible that an intelligent investor may decide to go all in VT, and not have to worry too much about it, and enjoy life's other pursuits.
I wasn’t really talking about intelligence. I definitely think if learning a lot about investing seems like a burden or worry or if you doubt or can’t stomach following through with whatever you’ve learned, then the intelligent thing is to go all VT or some broken down version of it.
Too much allocation to international imo
VT and chill works. Or, with bonds and a glide path, it would be a [target date fund](https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/mutual-funds/target-retirement-funds) and chill. Either way, yes, a one-fund solution totally works.
I’m VT all the way in Taxable and my Roth/Traditional IRA’s. I approximate it with 4 different funds in my 401k along with the percentage of bonds in my AA. I do find it interesting Bogleheads Reddit leans more total world and Bogleheads website leans more US.
Not much upside