International stocks (credit, purchase, lend, fund)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
she won't tell you . forget it .we had this conversation . my guess is 20-30% . anything more and i would be very surprised . of course she can tell us any percentage that is higher but i would not think it was higher .
so yeah pull out all the bonds and cash on any of us and only count our equity portions and we would all have great returns in a bull market .
Some of the model portfolios in your beloved newsletter do just that at times. Perhaps, we should ignore your returns..
the income model is always 25-30% equities ... that is the allocation . but i would never use it alone nor would i recommend anyone use it alone for all their money .
you should balance out that portfolio with either the growth and income model or the growth model so TOTAL ALLOCATION is in at least a total portfolio in the 40-60% range .
what funds i would bucketize for short term money or long term money in the two models is a personal choice but i certainly always look at both models combined for an overall portfolio balance .
i never report just one model because that is not the total portfolio . either model only makes up part of the portfolio.
my 50/50 mix was based on all the funds in BOTH MODELS . my returns were calculated on the entire portfolio as well . i would never pull out just the growth model and say i am 100% in equities and my return is almost 12% . it would always be all the liquid assets that make up the allocation . otherwise i am lying to myself because that return is much less overall on all my invested assets , plus i would not have a way of comparing my total portfolio to others ..
Last edited by mathjak107; 09-15-2018 at 01:22 PM..
the income model is always 25-30% equities ... that is the allocation . but i would never use it alone nor would i recommend anyone use it alone for all their money .
you should balance out that portfolio with either the growth and income model or the growth model so TOTAL ALLOCATION is in at least the 40-60% range .
what funds i would bucketize for short term money or long term money in the two models is a personal choice but i certainly always look at both models combined for an overall portfolio balance .
i never report just one model because that is not the total portfolio . either model only makes up part of the portfolio.
my 50/50 mix was based on all the funds in BOTH MODELS . my returns were calculated on the entire portfolio as well . i would never pull out just the growth model and say i am 100% in equities and my return is almost 12% . it would always be all the liquid assets that make up the allocation . otherwise i am lying to myself because that return is much less overall ..
I continue to question why anyone would place so much of their financial future in the hands of a single newsletter. Simply not prudent..
because so far it has worked just fine for more than 30 years and there is nothing in the diversified models that can really hurt you . at worst you may do a bit worse than the total market . the sector model has done the best but i don't consider that a diversified portfolio . in the mean time the models are fine .
so why bother wasting my time on something i don't have to bother with . you keep mentioning it but it is not an issue and i doubt it ever will because they are just everyday diversified funds .nor do you sit with most forever .
Using the new method of reporting portfolio returns, every allocation model returns the same; 40/60, 50/50, 60/40, 100/0, they all return exactly the same. I never realized it could be so easy.
Someone needs to tell the people at Portfolio Visualizer that they have been doing it wrong all these years.
Using the new method of reporting portfolio returns, every allocation model returns the same; 40/60, 50/50, 60/40, 100/0, they all return exactly the same. I never realized it could be so easy.
Someone needs to tell the people at Portfolio Visualizer that they have been doing it wrong all these years.
i know our mix usually contains some great performers as well as some laggards and at the end of the day while the models beat their benchmarks usually it is not by a lot and when they miss it is by a little bit as well , but keep in mind my comment was in regards to the newsletter models which is what liz is trying to attack .
i am not referring to every fund out there or portfolio .
that can vary greatly .
i mean i can come up with a 50/50 mix right in the newsletter between the income model and the growth and income model vs the income model and the growth model . both 50/50 yet the 50/50 mix with the growth model will have a much higher beta and higher potential for gains . so the model volatility that makes up that percentage is important
i know our mix usually contains some great performers as well as some laggards and at the end of the day while the models beat their benchmarks usually it is not by a lot and when they miss it is by a little bit as well , but keep in mind my comment was in regards to the newsletter models which is what liz is trying to attack .
i am not referring to every fund out there or portfolio .
that can vary greatly .
i mean i can come up with a 50/50 mix right in the newsletter between the income model and the growth and income model vs the income model and the growth model . both 50/50 yet the 50/50 mix with the growth model will have a much higher beta and higher potential for gains . so the model volatility that makes up that percentage is important
I't was a failed attempt at sarcasm. I wasn't responding to you, rather I was commenting on the other poster stating YTD returns but neglecting to mention that the claimed return was only for the equity portion of the portfolio. The last dozen pages wouldn't have been necessary if the poster had said I'm up X% YTD on the equity portion of my portfolio instead of just stating I'm up X%.
Well we can always start something new and report on the individual asset classes , like just give returns as 100% bonds and cash . Then give equity returns as 100% equities.
Of course though we can never tell each other the percentages of our investment capital each one accounts for either .
We just list it as 100% bonds and cash since that portion is shorter term,100% equities since that is long term money ,maybe 100% in reits since that can be intermediate term money .
I can even say I am 100% in crypto because the 1/2% I have in gbtc is all I want in crypto so that bucket is maxed out and stands at 100% of what I want in crypto so i am 100% crypto.
I think most here would find reporting our allocations and returns this way would be pretty useless and meaningless to each other in any discussion.
Are we lying ? No ,not if we report each bucket individually , but does it have meaning to anyone in a forum as far as discussing allocations and returns ? Nope
Last edited by mathjak107; 09-15-2018 at 03:09 PM..
Well we can always start something new and report on the individual asset classes , like just give returns as 100% bonds and cash . Then give equity returns as 100% equities.
Of course though we can never tell each other the percentages of our investment capital each one accounts for either .
We just list it as 100% bonds and cash since that portion is shorter term,100% equities since that is long term money ,maybe 100% in reits since that can be intermediate term money .
I can even say I am 100% in crypto because the 1/2% I have in gbtc is all I want in crypto so that bucket is maxed out and stands at 100% of what I want in crypto so i am 100% crypto.
I think most here would find reporting our allocations and returns this way would be pretty useless and meaningless to each other in any discussion.
Are we lying ? No ,not if we report each bucket individually , but does it have meaning to anyone in a forum as far as discussing allocations and returns ? Nope
Again disagree. I have always been transparent that our ROTH IRAS are 100% invested aggressively in equities and when giving ytd returns, I usually reference equity indexes, such as s&p 500. Similarly, you should reference the appropriate index, but not an equity index, as you are more conservatively positioned.
But Liz why bother talking French when we all here speak english . Those of us who partake in discussions here are straightforward and talk in terms we all relate to and understand .
We only talk in terms here in the investing forum when discussing portfolios , in liquid assets and total allocations of all capital that can be invested and it is done this way for a number of reasons .
The allocation means something to those here ,plus it identifies the type of investor you are and it is something someone can mimic if they like your style and reasoning .
Discussing things in vague abstract non meaningful ways adds no value to a discussion about allocations or returns. It may mean something to you but the rest of us speak a different language.
We all have short ,intermediate and long term money if we are preparing to retire or retired . But non of us break each piece out and report on each segmant separately . At the end of the day it is all one pile of money allocated to different investments . We all speak in term of that main pile and how it is allocated , not the order we choose to spend it
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
