RetireJapan

akiaji wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 7:58 am The main KPI I have used when looking at these funds, including VT, is the lifetime return. If you look at the increase from start to current of the different funds, we see:

VTI +313.27% Jun 2001 -> present
VOO +318.26% Sep 2010 -> present
VUG +536.06% Jan 2004 -> present
VT +117.68% Jun 2008 -> present

I've just pulled these from searching the tickers on Google.
This shows that VTI and VOO are pretty in synch for the long-term. VUG stands out.
VT, despite being global, grows more slowly than the US-focused ones.

Is this a useful measurement, or am I totally off track--which is very possible.

You've compared completely different length time periods - I appended them in bold within the quote. To make a fair comparison you need to match the time periods.

Here's their 2019 market perspectives, bottom of p. 33 for a similar chart to the above, which again predicts global equities outperforming US equities.

https://pressroom.vanguard.com/nonindex ... 120618.pdf

captainspoke wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 11:11 am Here's their 2019 market perspectives, bottom of p. 33 for a similar chart to the above, which again predicts global equities outperforming US equities.

https://pressroom.vanguard.com/nonindex ... 120618.pdf

They are permabears

Just goes to show, the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent...

Thank you, all! Good discussion here.

adamu wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 7:10 am Overthinking. 100% VTI and forget about it.

Or even better buy the world with VT.

VTI is what I'm currently buying. And I'm sitting at 96% equities
A bit over the top, perhaps but I'm just getting started.

Just to add one additional comment. VUG is a large cap growth index with 287 companies. Essentially all of those stocks are in VOO which is (mostly) the 500 largest companies in the US and has become overweight growth in the past decade. In turn all of VOO is in VTI. By owning VUG + VOO + VTI you are essentially over-over-weighting the stocks in VUG because you hold them in all three ETF's. I have no idea what Growth vs Value will do in the future so it might even be wise to over-weight Growth, but you could do so more simply by dividing your holdings in VTI and VUG.

akiaji wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 12:11 pm Thank you, all! Good discussion here.

And if you want further pizzazz/risk--or to complicate and confuse things(!)--add VGT to your watch list.

Its holdings are different, but it seems to have a past performance that approaches QQQ (nasdaq).

Will also add that if you are investing for capital growth, i.e. reinvesting dividends, it is helpful to include dividends in the return calculations rather than just looking at the price growth of the ETFs. The following website has some data. Here are the respective results for Jan 2011 - Oct 2021:

VTI +346.45%
VOO +352.75%
VUG +481.27%
VT +185.79%
VGT +695.56%

Ideally you'd compare a much longer period than just the last decade, given the overweight growth of tech+USA stocks over the past 10 years. This can often be achieved by searching for historical data on the underlying indices that the ETFs are tracking.

We are all trying to read tea leaves here and pick a winner.

The obvious response would be to just buy the haystack with VT/VTI or their Emaxis equivalents.

However, I suggest a more fun approach. 60% UPRO/SPXL and 40% TMF. Rebalance quarterly.

Own 3x the haystack and therefore 3x the needles.

EmaxisSlim Cultist wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 5:59 am ... trying to read tea leaves here and pick a winner...

Yes agreed about trying to pick winners based on past performance. Next week tech stocks could go the same was as the emerging markets did in the 2008 financial crash
Was just posting to highlight that when looking at historical data, you need to match time spans, consider dividend yields etc. to get sensible comparisons. Ideally you'd consider investment tax structures as well, but things get more complicated then.