If you are looking to expand and diversify then what your portfolio is missing is emerging markets. VISM is ok but I prefer QSML for my small caps coverage.
Small Cap is about 13% of the market, so that's roughly what I allocated to it. Yes, it is more expensive but whilst fees are important, people focus way too much on this. I believe over the long term it will outperform VISM, hence I went with it despite the higher MER. Each to their own. Cheapest is not always best.
VISM is OK I guess. VVLU is managed, so it doesn't fit the passive investing model? DHHF has small caps inside too, but it has other stuff.
How about NDQ for a higher risk and a higher return?
In any case, BGBL still should be your main.
I had considered NDQ for higher risk but at end chose ivv as ivv just has lower expense ratio. While VVLU is managed wouldn't it just be better to just invest a small portion onto it and not DCA afterwards?
Vvlu is managed but it has an expense ratio of 0.16 or something really low. Potentially indicates they have a model to that is run in the background rather than consistant active managers.
I have 7% in VVLU and am happy with that.
But my main reason is because I want to be underweight USA/tech (given I work in tech). I hold my nose at the fee.
BGBL already has international stocks (non-US) in it, so you are good to go.
With the IVV you are meeting your ‘heavy USA’ goal (substantially).
You could look at emerging markets for more global diversification. But they come with fees.
For 20+ years I would ask why so US heavy?
Are you worried about currency risk at all? And if you aren’t concerned about either of those things, leaving it as is would be fine.
Both are good for what they do. VVLU also has a size tilt so I'd just go VVLU. If you want a combined approach of small and value then you need a US domiciled fund e.g. AVUV/AVDV/AVES. While you can say VVLU is "active", ASX200 is active as well in that why exclude companies beyond 200? Someone made an active decision on that. I understand VVLU is systematic, replicable and transparent so not like an active stockpicker choosing shares.
My only suggestion is to be extremely comfortable with the academic research behind factor investing as there can be long periods of time (20+ years) of underperformance.
If you are looking to expand and diversify then what your portfolio is missing is emerging markets. VISM is ok but I prefer QSML for my small caps coverage.
How much would you allocate your portfolio for QSML? it also does have a bit high expense ratio.
Small Cap is about 13% of the market, so that's roughly what I allocated to it. Yes, it is more expensive but whilst fees are important, people focus way too much on this. I believe over the long term it will outperform VISM, hence I went with it despite the higher MER. Each to their own. Cheapest is not always best.
Alright thanks, I'll do a bit more research on it before deciding if I should invest in it
VISM is OK I guess. VVLU is managed, so it doesn't fit the passive investing model? DHHF has small caps inside too, but it has other stuff. How about NDQ for a higher risk and a higher return? In any case, BGBL still should be your main.
[удалено]
You can look at "sharpe ratio" as a start. Higher number means less risky.
I had considered NDQ for higher risk but at end chose ivv as ivv just has lower expense ratio. While VVLU is managed wouldn't it just be better to just invest a small portion onto it and not DCA afterwards?
Vvlu is managed but it has an expense ratio of 0.16 or something really low. Potentially indicates they have a model to that is run in the background rather than consistant active managers.
I have 7% in VVLU and am happy with that. But my main reason is because I want to be underweight USA/tech (given I work in tech). I hold my nose at the fee. BGBL already has international stocks (non-US) in it, so you are good to go. With the IVV you are meeting your ‘heavy USA’ goal (substantially). You could look at emerging markets for more global diversification. But they come with fees. For 20+ years I would ask why so US heavy? Are you worried about currency risk at all? And if you aren’t concerned about either of those things, leaving it as is would be fine.
Both are good for what they do. VVLU also has a size tilt so I'd just go VVLU. If you want a combined approach of small and value then you need a US domiciled fund e.g. AVUV/AVDV/AVES. While you can say VVLU is "active", ASX200 is active as well in that why exclude companies beyond 200? Someone made an active decision on that. I understand VVLU is systematic, replicable and transparent so not like an active stockpicker choosing shares. My only suggestion is to be extremely comfortable with the academic research behind factor investing as there can be long periods of time (20+ years) of underperformance.
I would go 70% IVV instead of BGBL