Datasets:

allenai

/

compred

like 2

Follow

Ai2 1,590

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

cad1cb6f9c0a427a87861001e6805e17

05bcc363021e434486ff64470e4453ca

Checks TSLA: P/E = 109 Seems fair. /s

Couldn’t agree more. Looks at these S&P 500 returns: 2019 +28.88% 2020 +16.26% 2021 +26.89% 90% cumulative return over 3 years and now it is down around 20-25%? Seems very reasonable - you are still up over 40% from Jan 2019. Nothing crazy and actually makes me feel more comfortable to see valuations finally coming back to earth.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

cad1cb6f9c0a427a87861001e6805e17

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

Checks TSLA: P/E = 109 Seems fair. /s

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

7877ff7b3c7548f6816d21417d3fb012

64b7c95d9f86450982a32a1c6c284513

I'm surprised to see this sub still use P/E to determine whether to invest or not.

Tin foil hat time. During COVID, the stock market grew at an insane pace while not making sense as to why. This "recession" is a correction to the overinflated prices that happened during COVID

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

7877ff7b3c7548f6816d21417d3fb012

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

I'm surprised to see this sub still use P/E to determine whether to invest or not.

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

0b77c3bede04436aaa19192a45cc8581

64b7c95d9f86450982a32a1c6c284513

I'm surprised to see this sub still use P/E to determine whether to invest or not.

Tin foil hat time. During COVID, the stock market grew at an insane pace while not making sense as to why. This "recession" is a correction to the overinflated prices that happened during COVID

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

0b77c3bede04436aaa19192a45cc8581

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

I'm surprised to see this sub still use P/E to determine whether to invest or not.

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

64b7c95d9f86450982a32a1c6c284513

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

Tin foil hat time. During COVID, the stock market grew at an insane pace while not making sense as to why. This "recession" is a correction to the overinflated prices that happened during COVID

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

93248eaf3d4d41e08f5082a77b14cae7

de6010fea4e043b5850ccf2738408924

"Things are going back to normal" just doesn't gather the same clicks as "EVERYTHING IS ON FIRE"...

Tin foil hat time. During COVID, the stock market grew at an insane pace while not making sense as to why. This "recession" is a correction to the overinflated prices that happened during COVID

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

de6010fea4e043b5850ccf2738408924

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

Tin foil hat time. During COVID, the stock market grew at an insane pace while not making sense as to why. This "recession" is a correction to the overinflated prices that happened during COVID

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

05bcc363021e434486ff64470e4453ca

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

Couldn’t agree more. Looks at these S&P 500 returns: 2019 +28.88% 2020 +16.26% 2021 +26.89% 90% cumulative return over 3 years and now it is down around 20-25%? Seems very reasonable - you are still up over 40% from Jan 2019. Nothing crazy and actually makes me feel more comfortable to see valuations finally coming back to earth.

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

826efc1865c34143892be068758a2c20

1356bedd9e74419f928ebce8b9398e9b

Bogleheads (at least the subculture on Reddit) become too accustomed to equating current share prices with portfolio value. These are the same ones who pretend that dividends are "irrelevant". The true Boglehead way is to look at a portfolio in terms of future total returns, diversify in a low-maintenance way, and not stress in the meantime.

Checks TSLA: P/E = 109 Seems fair. /s

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

826efc1865c34143892be068758a2c20

3d79232b22b14585814dffa2fbde14ad

Bogleheads (at least the subculture on Reddit) become too accustomed to equating current share prices with portfolio value. These are the same ones who pretend that dividends are "irrelevant". The true Boglehead way is to look at a portfolio in terms of future total returns, diversify in a low-maintenance way, and not stress in the meantime.

Couldn’t agree more. Looks at these S&P 500 returns: 2019 +28.88% 2020 +16.26% 2021 +26.89% 90% cumulative return over 3 years and now it is down around 20-25%? Seems very reasonable - you are still up over 40% from Jan 2019. Nothing crazy and actually makes me feel more comfortable to see valuations finally coming back to earth.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

826efc1865c34143892be068758a2c20

dd480a80885e428ba4a21c8bd3714b23

Bogleheads (at least the subculture on Reddit) become too accustomed to equating current share prices with portfolio value. These are the same ones who pretend that dividends are "irrelevant". The true Boglehead way is to look at a portfolio in terms of future total returns, diversify in a low-maintenance way, and not stress in the meantime.

There are reasons to be concerned. I am one of those people who believe that the current crisis stems from non-economic and non-fiscal causes. We are faced with two major black-swan events - Covid and Ukraine - that disrupt supply chains, consumption, globalization and many other factors. Climate change is another major phenomenon that can have a severe impact on valuation and stock markets. Unlike Covid and Ukraine, climate change fall-outs are likely to last many decades.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

826efc1865c34143892be068758a2c20

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

Bogleheads (at least the subculture on Reddit) become too accustomed to equating current share prices with portfolio value. These are the same ones who pretend that dividends are "irrelevant". The true Boglehead way is to look at a portfolio in terms of future total returns, diversify in a low-maintenance way, and not stress in the meantime.

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

1356bedd9e74419f928ebce8b9398e9b

3d79232b22b14585814dffa2fbde14ad

Checks TSLA: P/E = 109 Seems fair. /s

Couldn’t agree more. Looks at these S&P 500 returns: 2019 +28.88% 2020 +16.26% 2021 +26.89% 90% cumulative return over 3 years and now it is down around 20-25%? Seems very reasonable - you are still up over 40% from Jan 2019. Nothing crazy and actually makes me feel more comfortable to see valuations finally coming back to earth.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

1356bedd9e74419f928ebce8b9398e9b

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

Checks TSLA: P/E = 109 Seems fair. /s

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

3d79232b22b14585814dffa2fbde14ad

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

Couldn’t agree more. Looks at these S&P 500 returns: 2019 +28.88% 2020 +16.26% 2021 +26.89% 90% cumulative return over 3 years and now it is down around 20-25%? Seems very reasonable - you are still up over 40% from Jan 2019. Nothing crazy and actually makes me feel more comfortable to see valuations finally coming back to earth.

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

fc7497691ad24a4fbe600661a6d0660e

dd480a80885e428ba4a21c8bd3714b23

Man, people are shitting bricks, when they see correction. Absolute insanity, meanwhile I'm just chilling with some leveraged S&P500 ETFs and see like 50% losses. I think that before Bogling, peopel should hold some leveraged ETFs and only then hold international+bond ETFs, so that they learn to stomach volatility and don't freak out so easily.

There are reasons to be concerned. I am one of those people who believe that the current crisis stems from non-economic and non-fiscal causes. We are faced with two major black-swan events - Covid and Ukraine - that disrupt supply chains, consumption, globalization and many other factors. Climate change is another major phenomenon that can have a severe impact on valuation and stock markets. Unlike Covid and Ukraine, climate change fall-outs are likely to last many decades.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

fc7497691ad24a4fbe600661a6d0660e

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

Man, people are shitting bricks, when they see correction. Absolute insanity, meanwhile I'm just chilling with some leveraged S&P500 ETFs and see like 50% losses. I think that before Bogling, peopel should hold some leveraged ETFs and only then hold international+bond ETFs, so that they learn to stomach volatility and don't freak out so easily.

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

xqc539

I’m not saying stocks were priced “wrong” before, the prices people were paying were at least fair. But certainly they were high. Now prices are much more in line with where they ought to be with an overall P/E of about 18. They may go much lower, into oversold territory. That will still represent “fair” pricing. Good buying opportunity if it happens. But it seems like headlines should be proclaiming stocks are better priced now, yet it’s all doomscrolling about how we’re in a bear market. Yeah, that’s what happens when stock prices rise too much and too quickly. CNBC should be saying, “finally, stocks aren’t stupid expensive.”

Finally stocks are priced about where they should be. I don’t see why people freaking out

dd480a80885e428ba4a21c8bd3714b23

236bfae6b9594ec591f143b72228aa25

There are reasons to be concerned. I am one of those people who believe that the current crisis stems from non-economic and non-fiscal causes. We are faced with two major black-swan events - Covid and Ukraine - that disrupt supply chains, consumption, globalization and many other factors. Climate change is another major phenomenon that can have a severe impact on valuation and stock markets. Unlike Covid and Ukraine, climate change fall-outs are likely to last many decades.

Easy to say when you’re able to stomach the losses. Which, fortunately, I am. Frankly the lower this goes, the better it is for me. But not everyone is in that situation.

bogleheads

10x5ana

We currently have our 401k, Roth IRA, Joint Account, and Solo 401k with an advisor using Schwab. I use Fidelity for my work 401k. We plan to get out from the management fees and move to self directed bogle funds. I like the interface at Fidelity and the idea of the Fidelity zero funds for our 401k's but is it worth the hassle of moving everything from Schwab or just have advisor release the accounts back to us and keep using Schwab as self directed bogelheads?

Schwab vs. Fidelity for the long term...

242b7d1a591d4e47af01042f4adf293a

f223e47df6b84658833f5996ba6163d3

Thank you for the advice!! I think I will keep both for now and re analyze in a few months. Do I just tell my current advisor that I want my accounts transferred to my independent ownership in kind?

Personally I don’t think it is worth the hassle. There isn’t much of a major gain of moving from Schwab to Fidelity. I generally follow the idea of if the option is not 10x better I don’t bother. Schwab and Fidelity are both excellent. And on Schwab, as you said, you still have access to low cost funds to achieve your goal. And it isn’t like you are having major issues with Schwab at the moment, or at least that is what I am assuming. So why not keep both? Having diversity of financial institutions can be a positive thing. If you have issues with one, then the other will be readily available. Or on the opposite spectrum, these institutions periodically introduce new features which you may want access to. Having both Schwab and Fidelity will give you access to these new features when they come out on either platforms. Pigeon holing into one institution means you only have access to their features.

bogleheads

10x5ana

We currently have our 401k, Roth IRA, Joint Account, and Solo 401k with an advisor using Schwab. I use Fidelity for my work 401k. We plan to get out from the management fees and move to self directed bogle funds. I like the interface at Fidelity and the idea of the Fidelity zero funds for our 401k's but is it worth the hassle of moving everything from Schwab or just have advisor release the accounts back to us and keep using Schwab as self directed bogelheads?

Schwab vs. Fidelity for the long term...

242b7d1a591d4e47af01042f4adf293a

f5c8d0dbe6f94d9aa9ae9636289bcc41

Thank you for the advice!! I think I will keep both for now and re analyze in a few months. Do I just tell my current advisor that I want my accounts transferred to my independent ownership in kind?

Both Schwab and Fidelity are great, and will be fine as your only brokerage. The things that annoy me about Schwab are 1. more paper (fido you can do most anything online) 2. whole etf shares (fido you can buy with $1 increments) 3. super low cash yield (fido you can buy MMF with 4.3%+ and auto-liquidates to cover withdrawals) 4. mobile app hides features, must use web Things that annoy me about Fidelity: 1. they follow their 'rules' to a tee, while schwab can be flexible 2. fewer in-person branches (I've never needed one, but you never know) 3. no transfer bonus <$1mil 4. I loved the fully featured mobile app but they mess with it every week or two, and break or hide something I was using

bogleheads

10x5ana

We currently have our 401k, Roth IRA, Joint Account, and Solo 401k with an advisor using Schwab. I use Fidelity for my work 401k. We plan to get out from the management fees and move to self directed bogle funds. I like the interface at Fidelity and the idea of the Fidelity zero funds for our 401k's but is it worth the hassle of moving everything from Schwab or just have advisor release the accounts back to us and keep using Schwab as self directed bogelheads?

Schwab vs. Fidelity for the long term...

242b7d1a591d4e47af01042f4adf293a

e1b7ac55245a43e09b11da9529b1d283

Thank you for the advice!! I think I will keep both for now and re analyze in a few months. Do I just tell my current advisor that I want my accounts transferred to my independent ownership in kind?

Keep both. As you get older you may want to start tipping your allocation toward fixed income and they both have vastly different inventory if you ever want to start buying individual treasuries. They're both great.

bogleheads

10x5ana

We currently have our 401k, Roth IRA, Joint Account, and Solo 401k with an advisor using Schwab. I use Fidelity for my work 401k. We plan to get out from the management fees and move to self directed bogle funds. I like the interface at Fidelity and the idea of the Fidelity zero funds for our 401k's but is it worth the hassle of moving everything from Schwab or just have advisor release the accounts back to us and keep using Schwab as self directed bogelheads?

Schwab vs. Fidelity for the long term...

242b7d1a591d4e47af01042f4adf293a

cc95313e7f854ae9af675f4699faf056

Thank you for the advice!! I think I will keep both for now and re analyze in a few months. Do I just tell my current advisor that I want my accounts transferred to my independent ownership in kind?

Both Schwab and Fidelity are great, and will be fine as your only brokerage. The things that annoy me about Schwab are 1. more paper (fido you can do most anything online) 2. whole etf shares (fido you can buy with $1 increments) 3. super low cash yield (fido you can buy MMF with 4.3%+ and auto-liquidates to cover withdrawals) 4. mobile app hides features, must use web Things that annoy me about Fidelity: 1. they follow their 'rules' to a tee, while schwab can be flexible 2. fewer in-person branches (I've never needed one, but you never know) 3. no transfer bonus <$1mil 4. I loved the fully featured mobile app but they mess with it every week or two, and break or hide something I was using

bogleheads

10x5ana

We currently have our 401k, Roth IRA, Joint Account, and Solo 401k with an advisor using Schwab. I use Fidelity for my work 401k. We plan to get out from the management fees and move to self directed bogle funds. I like the interface at Fidelity and the idea of the Fidelity zero funds for our 401k's but is it worth the hassle of moving everything from Schwab or just have advisor release the accounts back to us and keep using Schwab as self directed bogelheads?

Schwab vs. Fidelity for the long term...

242b7d1a591d4e47af01042f4adf293a

03e7c7159b82418db576b344e495c21d

Thank you for the advice!! I think I will keep both for now and re analyze in a few months. Do I just tell my current advisor that I want my accounts transferred to my independent ownership in kind?

Fidelity manages my Dad's pension. My Mom is an alzhiemers patient. I have POA. They were horrible to work with. My lawyer couldn't even get through to their legal department. And no one would call him back. That went on for two weeks. We finally got things straightened out. But, they made a difficult time even worse. I will never do business with them again if I have a choice.

bogleheads

10x5ana

We currently have our 401k, Roth IRA, Joint Account, and Solo 401k with an advisor using Schwab. I use Fidelity for my work 401k. We plan to get out from the management fees and move to self directed bogle funds. I like the interface at Fidelity and the idea of the Fidelity zero funds for our 401k's but is it worth the hassle of moving everything from Schwab or just have advisor release the accounts back to us and keep using Schwab as self directed bogelheads?

Schwab vs. Fidelity for the long term...

f223e47df6b84658833f5996ba6163d3

f5c8d0dbe6f94d9aa9ae9636289bcc41

Personally I don’t think it is worth the hassle. There isn’t much of a major gain of moving from Schwab to Fidelity. I generally follow the idea of if the option is not 10x better I don’t bother. Schwab and Fidelity are both excellent. And on Schwab, as you said, you still have access to low cost funds to achieve your goal. And it isn’t like you are having major issues with Schwab at the moment, or at least that is what I am assuming. So why not keep both? Having diversity of financial institutions can be a positive thing. If you have issues with one, then the other will be readily available. Or on the opposite spectrum, these institutions periodically introduce new features which you may want access to. Having both Schwab and Fidelity will give you access to these new features when they come out on either platforms. Pigeon holing into one institution means you only have access to their features.

Both Schwab and Fidelity are great, and will be fine as your only brokerage. The things that annoy me about Schwab are 1. more paper (fido you can do most anything online) 2. whole etf shares (fido you can buy with $1 increments) 3. super low cash yield (fido you can buy MMF with 4.3%+ and auto-liquidates to cover withdrawals) 4. mobile app hides features, must use web Things that annoy me about Fidelity: 1. they follow their 'rules' to a tee, while schwab can be flexible 2. fewer in-person branches (I've never needed one, but you never know) 3. no transfer bonus <$1mil 4. I loved the fully featured mobile app but they mess with it every week or two, and break or hide something I was using

bogleheads

10x5ana

We currently have our 401k, Roth IRA, Joint Account, and Solo 401k with an advisor using Schwab. I use Fidelity for my work 401k. We plan to get out from the management fees and move to self directed bogle funds. I like the interface at Fidelity and the idea of the Fidelity zero funds for our 401k's but is it worth the hassle of moving everything from Schwab or just have advisor release the accounts back to us and keep using Schwab as self directed bogelheads?

Schwab vs. Fidelity for the long term...

e1b7ac55245a43e09b11da9529b1d283

cc95313e7f854ae9af675f4699faf056

Keep both. As you get older you may want to start tipping your allocation toward fixed income and they both have vastly different inventory if you ever want to start buying individual treasuries. They're both great.

Both Schwab and Fidelity are great, and will be fine as your only brokerage. The things that annoy me about Schwab are 1. more paper (fido you can do most anything online) 2. whole etf shares (fido you can buy with $1 increments) 3. super low cash yield (fido you can buy MMF with 4.3%+ and auto-liquidates to cover withdrawals) 4. mobile app hides features, must use web Things that annoy me about Fidelity: 1. they follow their 'rules' to a tee, while schwab can be flexible 2. fewer in-person branches (I've never needed one, but you never know) 3. no transfer bonus <$1mil 4. I loved the fully featured mobile app but they mess with it every week or two, and break or hide something I was using

bogleheads

xstel3

Caveats aside, if a bond fund or bond hold until maturity, the principal is returned along with the interest. Why is there panic about the price in bond funds or bonds? Are the caveats that impactful? Is holding to maturity that rare? Is the media that sensationalized? Equity panic makes more sense since you never know when it will recover.

Bond Panic Why

16b0c9a095964df6945b3f514a921f8e

04dab18cd6604ffab8c1c46ae237d2f3

Buy bonds. Use that bonds as collateral for asking money to banks. Use that money for buying other bonds. Use that other bonds as collateral for asking money to banks. And so on. If bonds price drops too much your collateral becomes worthless and banks can force you to close your position (sell your bonds at loss).

Bond prices have been reduced mainly because of interest rate risk and not default risk. OP you are right that there is inherently less risk with bonds. Additionally, bond holders get paid before shareholders so even more security in case of bankruptcy. The issue is when rates rise the value of bonds decrease. Don’t sweat it though, since now you’re getting a higher rate on new bonds and rates won’t rise forever

bogleheads

y6owrx

Pretty much title. Only 29, and this is my plan for a while until I get older.

Every month I invest 80% into VTI and 20% into VXUS in my ROTH. Good idea?

b900d2af321a47ea930d7c9c32bb3b4f

c6e33c030413443ca40409fc1fcb6522

I'm new in all these, I was reading months ago about vtsax, so now I have $3000 to buy vtsax, am I good ? or do I need to do like the OP ? Invest into VTI and VXUS.

Yup; that’ll work. Every 2 to 5 years do a larger rebalance if one fund super out paces the other

bogleheads

y6owrx

Pretty much title. Only 29, and this is my plan for a while until I get older.

Every month I invest 80% into VTI and 20% into VXUS in my ROTH. Good idea?

dd2f0815e8ba4925871e6c5f034a6e08

c6e33c030413443ca40409fc1fcb6522

I think market cap weight is more like 65/35, but it probably doesn’t matter that much.

Yup; that’ll work. Every 2 to 5 years do a larger rebalance if one fund super out paces the other

bogleheads

y6owrx

Pretty much title. Only 29, and this is my plan for a while until I get older.

Every month I invest 80% into VTI and 20% into VXUS in my ROTH. Good idea?

d7ebbd281faf4d8c8d183790831995e9

c6e33c030413443ca40409fc1fcb6522

I'm new in all these, I was reading months ago about vtsax, so now I have $3000 to buy vtsax, am I good ? or do I need to do like the OP ? Invest into VTI and VXUS.

Yup; that’ll work. Every 2 to 5 years do a larger rebalance if one fund super out paces the other

bogleheads

y6owrx

Pretty much title. Only 29, and this is my plan for a while until I get older.

Every month I invest 80% into VTI and 20% into VXUS in my ROTH. Good idea?

60f3a52e82d8439da9d1d40a08c33f52

f944dd885fd84be3bf21bdbdd4fa6a08

Can someone tell me the Fidelity equivalents to these? They still FZILX and FZROX?

I'm new in all these, I was reading months ago about vtsax, so now I have $3000 to buy vtsax, am I good ? or do I need to do like the OP ? Invest into VTI and VXUS.

bogleheads

y6owrx

Pretty much title. Only 29, and this is my plan for a while until I get older.

Every month I invest 80% into VTI and 20% into VXUS in my ROTH. Good idea?

f944dd885fd84be3bf21bdbdd4fa6a08

12294e40051e487bb85381e9b9d2e372

I'm new in all these, I was reading months ago about vtsax, so now I have $3000 to buy vtsax, am I good ? or do I need to do like the OP ? Invest into VTI and VXUS.

Yup; that’ll work. Every 2 to 5 years do a larger rebalance if one fund super out paces the other

bogleheads

ysdm7s

I'm 45, my wife is 50; annual income $125k; $225k in retirement; not fully-funded EF The OOO would have us fully-fund our EF and pay off car loans ($45k total, each right around 6%) before maxing out our Roths. I understand the notion of paying off debt being a guaranteed return on that money, but I'm inclined to try to max out Roths before tackling the car debt. Is this still a reasonable plan?

Order of Operations question

6c35c13c26b344e8837ce57fe96941d4

da6a66d909d547e4a1ab28643773d141

What is the apr on the debt? If it's under 7-8% I would absolutely max out my IRA first.

Car loans pay themselves off over time. You only have limited time to fund your Roth. In a pinch Roth can also be used as an emergency fund, although I would suggest having a more liquid one in HYSA. Just my opinion.

bogleheads

ysdm7s

I'm 45, my wife is 50; annual income $125k; $225k in retirement; not fully-funded EF The OOO would have us fully-fund our EF and pay off car loans ($45k total, each right around 6%) before maxing out our Roths. I understand the notion of paying off debt being a guaranteed return on that money, but I'm inclined to try to max out Roths before tackling the car debt. Is this still a reasonable plan?

Order of Operations question

6c35c13c26b344e8837ce57fe96941d4

30936865dda74390af1e9d578e16d7f5

What is the apr on the debt? If it's under 7-8% I would absolutely max out my IRA first.

Car loans pay themselves off over time. You only have limited time to fund your Roth. In a pinch Roth can also be used as an emergency fund, although I would suggest having a more liquid one in HYSA. Just my opinion.

bogleheads

ysdm7s

I'm 45, my wife is 50; annual income $125k; $225k in retirement; not fully-funded EF The OOO would have us fully-fund our EF and pay off car loans ($45k total, each right around 6%) before maxing out our Roths. I understand the notion of paying off debt being a guaranteed return on that money, but I'm inclined to try to max out Roths before tackling the car debt. Is this still a reasonable plan?

Order of Operations question

762f4e03b7fd494c9972e95f6f15a537

30936865dda74390af1e9d578e16d7f5

That’s a lot of car loan, but I’d still use the Roth space while you can. (If you hit a real emergency sort of emergency and need to access your Roth contributions, you can do that.) How much EF do you have and how close are you to fully funding that? I guess that’s probably the first question.

Car loans pay themselves off over time. You only have limited time to fund your Roth. In a pinch Roth can also be used as an emergency fund, although I would suggest having a more liquid one in HYSA. Just my opinion.

bogleheads

ysdm7s

I'm 45, my wife is 50; annual income $125k; $225k in retirement; not fully-funded EF The OOO would have us fully-fund our EF and pay off car loans ($45k total, each right around 6%) before maxing out our Roths. I understand the notion of paying off debt being a guaranteed return on that money, but I'm inclined to try to max out Roths before tackling the car debt. Is this still a reasonable plan?

Order of Operations question

5abbcf66ac484d86927b727b1734bf55

30936865dda74390af1e9d578e16d7f5

That’s a lot of car loan, but I’d still use the Roth space while you can. (If you hit a real emergency sort of emergency and need to access your Roth contributions, you can do that.) How much EF do you have and how close are you to fully funding that? I guess that’s probably the first question.

Car loans pay themselves off over time. You only have limited time to fund your Roth. In a pinch Roth can also be used as an emergency fund, although I would suggest having a more liquid one in HYSA. Just my opinion.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

1bb1c7f355a04ca0820cb8e99099fc53

34a61f2414de4ce79daf545bf73e8a39

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

1bb1c7f355a04ca0820cb8e99099fc53

b8daa9f1eb664ad4b51d00068833114b

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

VT and chill. Nothing wrong with VTI or VOO if you believe that US only investing will maximize your future returns.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

1bb1c7f355a04ca0820cb8e99099fc53

b688847343ac47b6bcfbc8b8ce1e3a75

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

1bb1c7f355a04ca0820cb8e99099fc53

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

1bb1c7f355a04ca0820cb8e99099fc53

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

420e47b4e1ff46938e60240f5bb4336b

b8daa9f1eb664ad4b51d00068833114b

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

VT and chill. Nothing wrong with VTI or VOO if you believe that US only investing will maximize your future returns.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

420e47b4e1ff46938e60240f5bb4336b

b688847343ac47b6bcfbc8b8ce1e3a75

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

420e47b4e1ff46938e60240f5bb4336b

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

420e47b4e1ff46938e60240f5bb4336b

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

40ff7da4724b45ecbea2cc17cc34cd47

b8daa9f1eb664ad4b51d00068833114b

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

VT and chill. Nothing wrong with VTI or VOO if you believe that US only investing will maximize your future returns.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

40ff7da4724b45ecbea2cc17cc34cd47

b688847343ac47b6bcfbc8b8ce1e3a75

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

40ff7da4724b45ecbea2cc17cc34cd47

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

40ff7da4724b45ecbea2cc17cc34cd47

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

511d14bf3ea64695b9ef4b07240e8c0b

b8daa9f1eb664ad4b51d00068833114b

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

VT and chill. Nothing wrong with VTI or VOO if you believe that US only investing will maximize your future returns.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

511d14bf3ea64695b9ef4b07240e8c0b

b688847343ac47b6bcfbc8b8ce1e3a75

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

511d14bf3ea64695b9ef4b07240e8c0b

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

511d14bf3ea64695b9ef4b07240e8c0b

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

f0c69b7b7bd0487db039e78cae537f22

412b13b75a354e8cbb9f7a96c55b7a78

I'm not very financially literate but can someone explain to me what happens when millions of people that have contributed to the same few index funds all start to retire and need to pull out money around the same timeline? Does the value not drop significantly for everyone?

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

f0c69b7b7bd0487db039e78cae537f22

45bc5563099843b49fc18b1aa23ad36d

I'm not very financially literate but can someone explain to me what happens when millions of people that have contributed to the same few index funds all start to retire and need to pull out money around the same timeline? Does the value not drop significantly for everyone?

How about VTI and VXUS?

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

f0c69b7b7bd0487db039e78cae537f22

04667df48d1144d5b754130122c76fd5

I'm not very financially literate but can someone explain to me what happens when millions of people that have contributed to the same few index funds all start to retire and need to pull out money around the same timeline? Does the value not drop significantly for everyone?

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

f0c69b7b7bd0487db039e78cae537f22

2e29fbfa7fc94c9cb452284af9f3e0ad

I'm not very financially literate but can someone explain to me what happens when millions of people that have contributed to the same few index funds all start to retire and need to pull out money around the same timeline? Does the value not drop significantly for everyone?

Even the best of bogleheads are filled with recency bias and performance chasing. VT and VTI are not the same. The saying "pick VTI/VOO one and stay the course". How do you tell a U.S. only investor to stay the course if/when ex-US outperforms for 10 years or more? I guarantee a high percentage will move money into VXUS when its too late. Those with VT are still chilling.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

b8daa9f1eb664ad4b51d00068833114b

b688847343ac47b6bcfbc8b8ce1e3a75

VT and chill. Nothing wrong with VTI or VOO if you believe that US only investing will maximize your future returns.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

11dc6e9a98a843ceb0f442366d787508

7401a548dba44266b5a94687a51217fe

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

VT and chill. Nothing wrong with VTI or VOO if you believe that US only investing will maximize your future returns.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

11dc6e9a98a843ceb0f442366d787508

b688847343ac47b6bcfbc8b8ce1e3a75

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

11dc6e9a98a843ceb0f442366d787508

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

11dc6e9a98a843ceb0f442366d787508

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

11dc6e9a98a843ceb0f442366d787508

2e29fbfa7fc94c9cb452284af9f3e0ad

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

Even the best of bogleheads are filled with recency bias and performance chasing. VT and VTI are not the same. The saying "pick VTI/VOO one and stay the course". How do you tell a U.S. only investor to stay the course if/when ex-US outperforms for 10 years or more? I guarantee a high percentage will move money into VXUS when its too late. Those with VT are still chilling.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

7401a548dba44266b5a94687a51217fe

b688847343ac47b6bcfbc8b8ce1e3a75

VT and chill. Nothing wrong with VTI or VOO if you believe that US only investing will maximize your future returns.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

d928f4cd1dc643fbb2765e41421636c6

b688847343ac47b6bcfbc8b8ce1e3a75

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

d928f4cd1dc643fbb2765e41421636c6

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

d928f4cd1dc643fbb2765e41421636c6

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

7ebbe37051bd488f9887a382ce6b17e6

04667df48d1144d5b754130122c76fd5

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

7ebbe37051bd488f9887a382ce6b17e6

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

7ebbe37051bd488f9887a382ce6b17e6

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

7ebbe37051bd488f9887a382ce6b17e6

2e29fbfa7fc94c9cb452284af9f3e0ad

VOO...... and dont look at it till your 59 i like a mix of pre tax post tax and regular account

Even the best of bogleheads are filled with recency bias and performance chasing. VT and VTI are not the same. The saying "pick VTI/VOO one and stay the course". How do you tell a U.S. only investor to stay the course if/when ex-US outperforms for 10 years or more? I guarantee a high percentage will move money into VXUS when its too late. Those with VT are still chilling.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

c21693b8d5954f2f9a1c02a42001a803

45bc5563099843b49fc18b1aa23ad36d

Going against the grain here and buying a lot of VXUS. I think international markets will outperform American markets in the next decade, and perhaps beyond. The ratio of the US's market cap to the world's market cap is much higher than the US's share of the global GDP, so it's much easier for it to grow slower than the global markets.

How about VTI and VXUS?

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

c21693b8d5954f2f9a1c02a42001a803

01a62d3923ed489ba8fd78391b69d8b2

Going against the grain here and buying a lot of VXUS. I think international markets will outperform American markets in the next decade, and perhaps beyond. The ratio of the US's market cap to the world's market cap is much higher than the US's share of the global GDP, so it's much easier for it to grow slower than the global markets.

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

c21693b8d5954f2f9a1c02a42001a803

04667df48d1144d5b754130122c76fd5

Going against the grain here and buying a lot of VXUS. I think international markets will outperform American markets in the next decade, and perhaps beyond. The ratio of the US's market cap to the world's market cap is much higher than the US's share of the global GDP, so it's much easier for it to grow slower than the global markets.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

c21693b8d5954f2f9a1c02a42001a803

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

Going against the grain here and buying a lot of VXUS. I think international markets will outperform American markets in the next decade, and perhaps beyond. The ratio of the US's market cap to the world's market cap is much higher than the US's share of the global GDP, so it's much easier for it to grow slower than the global markets.

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

c21693b8d5954f2f9a1c02a42001a803

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

Going against the grain here and buying a lot of VXUS. I think international markets will outperform American markets in the next decade, and perhaps beyond. The ratio of the US's market cap to the world's market cap is much higher than the US's share of the global GDP, so it's much easier for it to grow slower than the global markets.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

c21693b8d5954f2f9a1c02a42001a803

2e29fbfa7fc94c9cb452284af9f3e0ad

Going against the grain here and buying a lot of VXUS. I think international markets will outperform American markets in the next decade, and perhaps beyond. The ratio of the US's market cap to the world's market cap is much higher than the US's share of the global GDP, so it's much easier for it to grow slower than the global markets.

Even the best of bogleheads are filled with recency bias and performance chasing. VT and VTI are not the same. The saying "pick VTI/VOO one and stay the course". How do you tell a U.S. only investor to stay the course if/when ex-US outperforms for 10 years or more? I guarantee a high percentage will move money into VXUS when its too late. Those with VT are still chilling.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

45bc5563099843b49fc18b1aa23ad36d

01a62d3923ed489ba8fd78391b69d8b2

How about VTI and VXUS?

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

45bc5563099843b49fc18b1aa23ad36d

04667df48d1144d5b754130122c76fd5

How about VTI and VXUS?

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

45bc5563099843b49fc18b1aa23ad36d

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

How about VTI and VXUS?

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

45bc5563099843b49fc18b1aa23ad36d

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

How about VTI and VXUS?

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

45bc5563099843b49fc18b1aa23ad36d

2e29fbfa7fc94c9cb452284af9f3e0ad

How about VTI and VXUS?

Even the best of bogleheads are filled with recency bias and performance chasing. VT and VTI are not the same. The saying "pick VTI/VOO one and stay the course". How do you tell a U.S. only investor to stay the course if/when ex-US outperforms for 10 years or more? I guarantee a high percentage will move money into VXUS when its too late. Those with VT are still chilling.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

01a62d3923ed489ba8fd78391b69d8b2

04667df48d1144d5b754130122c76fd5

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

01a62d3923ed489ba8fd78391b69d8b2

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

01a62d3923ed489ba8fd78391b69d8b2

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

Recency bias gives the impression that the current pattern will last forever. Just over a decade of zero to negative interest rates “forced” investors globally into the US stock market, but when it corrects, if Reddit still exists in a decade, this board will likely be filled with VT and VXUS only advice. Japan was unstoppable in the 80s and has been largely flat ever since despite its technological advancements. Many investors were overweighting the Nikkei 225 to maximize returns and paid a price. Concentration risk is present depending upon which ETF is selected. Select whatever you desire and accept the consequences - desired or undesired.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10o6gro

There’s obviously no “perfect” plan, it’s not like someone has to pick only VT, or only VTI etc Since being a boglehead means riding it out for the long term, there’s basically nothing really to talk about. So it seems like some try and find anything to start some little argument over. Pretty surprising how so many talk about just one, yet the performance has been extremely similar to another You can’t really go wrong with any of them supposedly, since everyone here says “if it’s not way up after 35 years then there’s even bigger things to worry about!” Lol So remember to VT and chill! Or VOO and chill Or have a little bit of VXUS sprinkled in! Lol doesn’t matter

Boglehead style leaves very little to argue about. Anyone else think the main debate between VT or VTI or VOO is hysterical? Just pick one

d44b35b2fe7b4a91a36bf7ecf16e79ca

adb25dd23b054ba194843905243af8cf

As I predicted a few years ago, good to see that ppl are finally writing VT VTI VOO instead of VTWAX VTSAX VFIAX.

On VOO vs VTI I agree, the returns over both decades and multiple decades are so close it does not matter. I see VT vs (VOO or VTI) as a different consideration. Over the very long haul, VT has significantly underperformed by a lot. During certain decades VT has overperformed. That means they are not equivalent and you do have to make an educated guess on US or Worldwide and stick with it because you likely will end up in a very different place in 35 years. Nobody knows! It would be so much easier if the long-term performance between those 2 options was closer. Making a choice today, you are effectively choosing which one you think will be the winner vs. simply choosing a different flavor of the exact same thing.

bogleheads

10faiz9

Newbie here. I purchased VGSH instead of BND a few month back. I didn't know what I was doing.. Can anyone help me understand the differences or at least point me in the right direction?

BND vs VGSH

49e498ba62d34bfd9d42696020a256e2

12a83c334f74456faea82fb1149cfa6d

I like the strategy of buying something, then asking why I did it and what the difference is between it and another investment.

Bonds vary on two axis: duration (interest rate risk) and quality (or default risk). VGSH is composed of 1-2 year treasuries. So it has almost no default risk (because they are govt debt and the govt prints money to repay them), and they are fairly short in duration. The longer your duration the more you are exposed to interest rate risk (rates go up, bonds go down - and vice versa.. but the magnitude of the impact is driven by how long the bonds at the old interest rate.. so shorter durations care less about rate moves than longer durations). 1-2 is fairly short, but you can get treasuries measured in days (SGOV) or in decades to give you a sense of things. BND is composed of 4-8 year bonds.. a mix of treasuries and corporate. So you have some more default risk, but still not a lot. A lot would be something like JNK. (JNK has more risk, so pays higher interest to compensate you for the risk). More importantly you have more duration.. BND got killed when rates went up quickly last year because of its duration. But it will hold up better if rates drop for the same reason. VGSH is the more conservative of the two choices. They are both pretty main stream. If you hold a bond fund longer than its average duration then the interest rate changes basically wash out - they cause price changes but also yield changes to offset that.

bogleheads

apinaw

Hi all, new investor here. I am coming here cause I heard a planet money episode that was praising Jack Bogle's work to create an index fund investment for passive investing and how Warren Buffet won a $1million bet that the S&P 500 index would outperform any hedge fund over 10 years. ​ Honestly, it feels stupidly simple and I wished I started long ago sooner. I was looking at vanguard admiral shares and etfs and it started feeling more complex again. I want to invest in a nice mix of passive investments, how should I get my feet wet with investing?

vanguard admiral shares, etfs and beginner questions

ba7d582c8cc6417d9b2776fb401d315b

90e6e321e3bd42739fe90aaf9cd8ed7d

Does your employer offer a 401k or similar retirement plan? If so, contribute enough to get any employer match. Then, if you are eligible (i.e. didn’t make money over the income limit of $120,000 single or $189,000 married), contribute to a Roth IRA. If you contribute by April 15, you can designate your contribution as 2018, so you still can contribute up to $5,500 (or the max of your earned income) for 2018. Then you can contribute another $6,000 (the limit goes up with inflation) for 2019. As for what to invest that money in (inside the Roth IRA account), start with a Vanguard Target Retirement fund for your expected retirement year. You can adjust that later once you read the Boglehead’s book or learn more. Since it is in a Roth IRA, there are no tax consequences for switching funds.

Let me echo /u/jerschneid's advice. Start by putting everything in VTSAX (if you are young and/or the total amount you'll invest is small relative to your annual savings) or else in a target fund that is close to when you expect to retire. Then spend a few months understanding things well enough that you feel confident running your own 3- or 4-fund portfolio. (Or don't--sticking it all in VTSAX is not a bad strategy.) It's also not a mistake to use a robo-service, if that gives you the confidence to invest instead of waiting on the sidelines, but I have not found robos to be any better than stupid simple DIY indexing. The key is to get your retirement savings invested in index funds, instead of sitting as individual stocks or (much worse!) cash.

bogleheads

115synz

I heard it’s better to put emergency money in money market? Or bond etf? Because you don’t pay or less tax vs HYSA in bank. Is this correct and if so what are the options and risks?

Schwab and fidelity where to park emergency money

f12f32283aca4862a246145e0fbec551

b68ae07b1d814c87add0f36beaee6dda

Don’t do a bond ETF, NAV can fall due to rates. Go for a government money market fund, you can avoid state tax. I use FIGXX at Merrill which has a 7-day yield of 4.22%.

I have both Fidelity & Schwab. Fidelity’s SPAXX which is in a CMA. If needed it’s tied to a debit card. Then more funds in SWVXX.

bogleheads

115synz

I heard it’s better to put emergency money in money market? Or bond etf? Because you don’t pay or less tax vs HYSA in bank. Is this correct and if so what are the options and risks?

Schwab and fidelity where to park emergency money

f12f32283aca4862a246145e0fbec551

21f23dbbf3c046ccb8c36444f46daccf

Don’t do a bond ETF, NAV can fall due to rates. Go for a government money market fund, you can avoid state tax. I use FIGXX at Merrill which has a 7-day yield of 4.22%.

I do SWVXX at Schwab, it’s currently at 4.48% 7 day yield. Fidelity’s is slightly lower but you can auto-invest into their money market fund which you can’t at Schwab

bogleheads

115synz

I heard it’s better to put emergency money in money market? Or bond etf? Because you don’t pay or less tax vs HYSA in bank. Is this correct and if so what are the options and risks?

Schwab and fidelity where to park emergency money

f12f32283aca4862a246145e0fbec551

63b2e120dc624699885f35817bf63f1e

Don’t do a bond ETF, NAV can fall due to rates. Go for a government money market fund, you can avoid state tax. I use FIGXX at Merrill which has a 7-day yield of 4.22%.

Im personally not a fan of the Fidelity MM funds. I feel their expense ratios are a bit high. I have both a fidelity brokerage and Vanguard and I hold most of my emergency fund in the Vanguard Treasury MM fund (.09 expense). VUSXX. State tax free for me.

bogleheads

115synz

I heard it’s better to put emergency money in money market? Or bond etf? Because you don’t pay or less tax vs HYSA in bank. Is this correct and if so what are the options and risks?

Schwab and fidelity where to park emergency money

b68ae07b1d814c87add0f36beaee6dda

21f23dbbf3c046ccb8c36444f46daccf

I have both Fidelity & Schwab. Fidelity’s SPAXX which is in a CMA. If needed it’s tied to a debit card. Then more funds in SWVXX.

I do SWVXX at Schwab, it’s currently at 4.48% 7 day yield. Fidelity’s is slightly lower but you can auto-invest into their money market fund which you can’t at Schwab

bogleheads

115synz

I heard it’s better to put emergency money in money market? Or bond etf? Because you don’t pay or less tax vs HYSA in bank. Is this correct and if so what are the options and risks?

Schwab and fidelity where to park emergency money

b68ae07b1d814c87add0f36beaee6dda

63b2e120dc624699885f35817bf63f1e

I have both Fidelity & Schwab. Fidelity’s SPAXX which is in a CMA. If needed it’s tied to a debit card. Then more funds in SWVXX.

Im personally not a fan of the Fidelity MM funds. I feel their expense ratios are a bit high. I have both a fidelity brokerage and Vanguard and I hold most of my emergency fund in the Vanguard Treasury MM fund (.09 expense). VUSXX. State tax free for me.

bogleheads

115synz

I heard it’s better to put emergency money in money market? Or bond etf? Because you don’t pay or less tax vs HYSA in bank. Is this correct and if so what are the options and risks?

Schwab and fidelity where to park emergency money

bc0f7d2d4b0d40049722fb182cf69b0c

21f23dbbf3c046ccb8c36444f46daccf

Don’t do a bond ETF, NAV can fall due to rates. Go for a government money market fund, you can avoid state tax. I use FIGXX at Merrill which has a 7-day yield of 4.22%.

I do SWVXX at Schwab, it’s currently at 4.48% 7 day yield. Fidelity’s is slightly lower but you can auto-invest into their money market fund which you can’t at Schwab

bogleheads

115synz

I heard it’s better to put emergency money in money market? Or bond etf? Because you don’t pay or less tax vs HYSA in bank. Is this correct and if so what are the options and risks?

Schwab and fidelity where to park emergency money

bc0f7d2d4b0d40049722fb182cf69b0c

63b2e120dc624699885f35817bf63f1e

Don’t do a bond ETF, NAV can fall due to rates. Go for a government money market fund, you can avoid state tax. I use FIGXX at Merrill which has a 7-day yield of 4.22%.

Im personally not a fan of the Fidelity MM funds. I feel their expense ratios are a bit high. I have both a fidelity brokerage and Vanguard and I hold most of my emergency fund in the Vanguard Treasury MM fund (.09 expense). VUSXX. State tax free for me.

bogleheads

xqqf3j

So I have some excess emergency funds that I’ve already bought some more VTI with to help my existing three fund eventually recover a bit quicker. With some of the remaining cash I was considering doing a 1 year treasury ladder. I’ve played with the Schwab tool for it and it seems straight forward but was curious how people found doing the equivalent on treasurydirect. Are there any gotchas with either I should watch out for?

Treasury Ladder through Schwab or TreasuryDirect.gov - your experience?

19446182ae354b62aa775efd5fe31d1d

22cb81ded429438a907b12fc147c99b2

I was thinking the same. Is this also easy with Fidelity?

Probably not what you are asking but the TD site is awful and super easy to accidentally lock yourself out of your account. Which to remedy requires sitting on hold for 90+ minutes. If you go through them be very deliberate with passwords and security questions. Not a lot of room for mistakes/fat fingers.

bogleheads

zwtr5x

I made 151k this year. Filing single, so I'm above the threshold for a Roth IRA. I work in commission based sales, and I honestly didn't expect to make this much. Was expecting around 115k-120k. I contributed 6k to a Roth IRA last January, so I'm in a position where I've already contributed, but don't qualify for the Roth due to making more than anticipated. Are there any guides, or can anyone give me any advice on how to convert this to a traditional IRA, then back to a Roth IRA in the next few days? Is this legal/possible? I know it's extremely late in the year, and I shouldn't have waited this long, but I wasn't sure I was going to make over the limit until a couple weeks ago... and yeah I put off taking care of this. Thanks for any help.

Backdoor Roth guide for someone who already contributed 6k to Roth?

257245e4407b4558872edadbd860dc09

b0d4ae31861b45b09452e739fbef8e2b

Did you make any traditional 401k contributions? They can offset your AGI.

I wasn’t warned about this because I don’t follow every post ever posted on this subreddit. I have other things to do. With all the downvotes this thread is getting, I wish this subreddit would be more open to helping less experienced investors. Just answer the question if you feel like you want to, but don’t downvote or post snarky comments to threads that could benefit many other people, especially around this time of year. DCA investing clearly makes sense, and newbies should feel welcomed into this community. Obviously I know my question has been asked many times before, I just wanted a simple step by step guide, and for it to be visible during the last days of the year for others. Maybe the mods should consider pinning a thread with simple instructions on how to set up a back door Roth.

bogleheads

zptz9b

I’m currently holding a $1 million (for a real estate purchase in the next three months to 24 months. ) In the meantime where could I hold this or would you suggest to earn higher than 2% interest? I’m currently getting 2% at my bank account. I also want to diversified among bank accounts for FDIC insurance reasons. Can I put it in Vons? Is there a bond ETF that you’d recommend for under two year hold

Where to put cash for high yield ? For 3 months to two years.

d266143f205449008017c87274b9c94c

76f2bcd147694c64bc7713fa475adc83

For low risk but reasonably high yield: 1) could put it in money market fund that tracks the fed funds rate such as SHV which currently yields around 4% annually. This has limited interest rate risk but if the fed cuts rates will go down given its duration is 0-3 months. 2) could put in slightly longer duration government bond etf which yields around 4.5%. VGSH has duration of around 2 years so it carries some rate risk but if you hold for the duration mitigates that risk somewhat. 3) Could do corporate / government short term bond mix such as BSV which yields more than VGSH given the corporate allocation mix but carries similar duration risk. 4) Could do any combination These suggestions stick to low risk ideas assuming you dont want to branch out on risk curve. FWIW I currently am doing similar thing and have combination of SHV/VGSH for the money I have set aside to purchase a home next year.

I’d go with tbills. You can buy 3 month and keep rolling them. And you get to skip on the state and local taxes.

bogleheads

zptz9b

I’m currently holding a $1 million (for a real estate purchase in the next three months to 24 months. ) In the meantime where could I hold this or would you suggest to earn higher than 2% interest? I’m currently getting 2% at my bank account. I also want to diversified among bank accounts for FDIC insurance reasons. Can I put it in Vons? Is there a bond ETF that you’d recommend for under two year hold

Where to put cash for high yield ? For 3 months to two years.

a081411b18a444248bf7eae076b2fdca

76f2bcd147694c64bc7713fa475adc83

High yield savings because you’ll need the money soon. Ally just bumped their rate to 3.3%. You don’t want to find a good deal on a property and not be able to get to your cash and lose the deal

I’d go with tbills. You can buy 3 month and keep rolling them. And you get to skip on the state and local taxes.