Give me some good buy and hold ETF portfolios Veeky Forums

>60% VOO 40% VTI it's not a meme.
VTI includes VOO, dumbass.

>Nothing else or ur cucking your gains
>except that small-caps and mid-caps historically outperform large-caps like VOO.
t. You're a fucking moron.

>>except that small-caps and mid-caps historically outperform large-caps like VOO.

[citation needed]

>[citation needed]
Google too challenging for you? Ask your mommy for help next time. I'm not here to do your homework for you.

Ok after some time of researching I've figured out the best portfolio:

25% VOO
20% VYM
30% QQQ
15% VTI
10% TQQQ

or

25% VOO
25% VYM
35% QQQ
15% VTI

if you dont want to hold a meme

r8 you can thank me later

Where did you find these?

I used portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio

In terms of gains TQQQ earns more since its leveraged then its QQQ>VYM>VOO>VTI. I guess you could do 100% QQQ but i added in the rest to diversify

Why isn't everyone investing in leveraged etfs and holding for 30 years? Seems foolproof.

pragcap.com/why-investors-still-lose-money-trading-leveraged-etfs/

I dont know I got the same question myself, I looked it up and the best answer i got was you risk losing 3x your money just as well as gaining them. Ones like TQQQ track something that will always go up though so i dont why you wouldnt just buy that instead, I guess if something like 2008 happens again though you would be screwed

That's not why.

Read this image.

TQQQ went up 600% in the last 5 years compared to QQQ which went up 100%. So if you bought TQQQ 5 years ago without rebalancing would you not make 600%?

Wouldnt the big gains it makes offset its decays?

dqydj.com/dont-use-leveraged-etfs-unless/

read.

That still doesnt answer my question, would you not have made 600% if you held it? Your articles talk about leverage decays but every time the market went down TQQQ recovered and went up higher percentage wise than its counterpart if you had bought it when it peaked before it crashed

I don't really know. I googled it and read what it says, seems like a risky idea for the reasons mentioned.

Im guessing the whole point is if theres a recession or the market goes down so low it'd probably take it a while to recover. I put at 10% in the list i made for that reason.

>Im guessing the whole point is if theres a recession or the market goes down so low it'd probably take it a while to recover.

Seems to say it's not a good choice long-term. And that you need to fully understand the point of leverage in your portfolio.

>VOO and VTI in the same portfolio
>QQQ and VOO in the same portfolio
>VYM before age 65

Jesus, what a shit show.

Can you explain what's wrong with it?

>Can you explain what's wrong with it?
VTI is an index of the entire U.S. stock market, in proportion to the capitalization of every listed company. Large caps are about 65% of VTI, mid caps about 25%, and small caps about 10%.

Adding VOO to VTI just increases the amount of large caps and dilutes the mid and small caps. That's going to lower you long term expected rate of return, as shown in .

QQQ is an index that tracks the NASDAQ exchange, and is already dominated by large caps that are also represented in the S&P 500. Of QQQ's 105 company's, 80% are already also in VOO. So by buying both, you're just adding overlapping investments together. Not particularly smart assuming you're trying to diversify.

40% bonds is unusual given how low interest rates are. A 60/40 split is "conventional wisdom" but that was pre-2008.

What a shame, not one reply to the the link I posted.

Not to toot my own horn but this aside from my post this entire thread is trash.

Even the guy who posted the classic 60/40 managed to fuck that up. (You meant to put fixed income for the 40)

>Not to toot my own horn
Please don't. The charts on that site are bad. Nor does its provide any guidance. You just post a bunch of meme charts.

A shitpost is a shitpost, even when you're too dumb to realize it.

You obviously didn't click the charts for the rest of the info. Everything you could ever need to know if right there.

Sincerely yours, actual rich investor.

It looks like this is somehow the exception to the usual rule about leveraged ETFs. I'm hardly an expert so I really can't say why.
You'll probably get cucked hard in the upcoming recession, though. Possibly "never recover" hard.

And why would anyone waste their time reading about 20 meme portfolios?

Sorry you got triggered, but you're a fucking idiot nonetheless. "rich investor" lmao.

Actually up until now your posts have been spot on. I apologize for not excluding you from my rant. But let's be honest, there's a reason you didn't properly refute my link. It's because you can't.

As far as portfolio management goes the only free lunch is diversification across "uncorrelated" asset classes.

Those still in the yield-chasing phase really need to understand this. You're not going to get higher yield than the tangency portfolio without taking on an unreasonable amount of risk.

Forget about yield. It's all about drawdown and safe withdrawal rates.

So out of the portfolios in that site you posted which do you recommend going with?

I'm going to make a huge generalization, but the more asset classes the better.

Personally I use something between the IVY league and the Merriman, with a very small allocation for meme stocks, speculations, etc.

I do believe the average Joe would do best with a low fee robo-advisor.

can someone tell me whats wrong with dividend and income investing, is it not a viable strategy?

It makes sense in some circumstances, particularly when there are tax reasons.

Long term retirement savings is not one of them.

Again, this is yield chasing behavior.

sure it is no way to create big savings but what about supporting frugal month to month living for a single person? id assume with so many wageslaves it would be a much more popular investment strategy and yet i rarely see it mentioned anywhere except for old retired people.

You absolutely could throw everything in SDIV or similar, but if the shit hits the fan you're fucked.

The problem is that the income strategies including ETFs are mostly built around equities. Equities tent to have the largest drawdowns. If you were to run a monte carlo simulation based on historical data you would find that a major downturn in the market would be devastating.

If you are going to do this there is a strong case for diversification, not just within asset classes(i.e. going global rather than just domestic) but also across asset classes including alternatives like MLPs.

Personally I wouldn't bother.

I am the frugal single person you mentioned. I find it's best to get yield from real assets like rentals and businesses. Of course they are more hands on but the earnings multiples are insane compared to anything in the market, and leverage is available. If you think that's unrealistic remember your hypothetical situation would require several hundred thousand just to live above the poverty line.

So for the ultimate portfolio diversify and include real assets. The best example I can give you of this would be the Yale and Harvard endowments, but for the average person substitute venture capital for houses, businesses, etc.

ok thank you thats more info than i expected and im not sure if i understand it all, youre basically saying the best way for income would be rent from real estate? i mean im sure real estate would be much more profitable but compared to just putting money into dividend EFTs it is far harder and requires a lot of knowledge footwork (or are you talking about REITs?). ive read 250k would be enough for 2-3k monthly dividend income but im not familiar with the effects of a market crash on dividends, all i know is that companys that start paying dividends almost never stop. im also not familiar with the yale/harvard thing but i will look into that, thanks for your advice.

>there's a reason you didn't properly refute my link
Yes, I agree, there is. It's because your link doesn't contain any advice or guidance. It's just a list of meme portfolios, most of which have little or specious value compared to standard portfolio models.

You can only refute an argument or an opinion. That site is just a list someone copied from somewhere else. There's nothing to refute, just as there's nothing to be learned there either.

>Is this your site, by chance. You seem to have an unhealthy allegiance to it.

I'm saying real world investments can have a much higher return(with no/low correlation to the equities market) than anything traded on the stock exchange.

With 250k in the market you're looking at 800-900 monthly, but that's perpetual. That's 4-5% draw. (Something to think about for those on neetbux, the value of that cashflow+other included entitlements.)

This is more of a rule of thumb but:

Real estate unlevered 6% , 1200 per month (also subject to market fluctuations but not like stocks)

Real estate levered 10%+

Local businesses unlevered ~30%

See where I'm going with this?

Jeeze where do I begin....

>It's because your link doesn't contain any advice or guidance.

CLICK THE FUCKING PICTURE OF THE PORTFOLIO!!!!!! It's all there.

>Standard portfolios

Bogle, Swenson, Swedroe, Shiller, Ferri. If those aren't the standard portfolios IDK what is.

>You can only refute an argument or an opinion

My opinion is you are a fucking moron.

>Is this your site?

No I found it on the bogleheads forum. I can give you a hundred other resources if you like.
I would love to see your portfolio, or these "standard portfolio models" you are talking about.

I don't know why you're getting so upset. It's a shitty site, objectively speaking. For the record, I hold the same opinion of the bogleheads lazy portfolio page (bogleheads.org/wiki/Lazy_portfolios). Just because they both have a large number of model portfolios doesn't make them helpful, useful, or informative.

Personally, I recommend starting with a four-fund portfolio, adding a REIT fund, and slightly over-weighting into small-cap value. Pretty simple stuff, and no need for a page full of retarded graphs.

>I would love to see your portfolio
I'm sure you would, but you'd probably faint.

>Personally, I recommend starting with a four-fund portfolio, adding a REIT fund, and slightly over-weighting into small-cap value. Pretty simple stuff, and no need for a page full of retarded graphs.

Agreed.
But you're still a moron.

Next time just admit that you're wrong. It's a skill that comes with adulthood.

Wrong about what?

Shilling a site full of useless charts. Or have you forgotten what we've been discussing for the last hour?

ETN's, not ETF's, but still worth a look
GLDI and SLVO. Gold backed and silver backed, respectively. Both at their 52 week lows because of the downward swing in metals, both solid "buys" right now.

I personally like to see things like drawdown, and I think the visualizations are pretty cool too. If you didn't find it useful so be it.

Seems like you know a little about the subject. It's a shame, you could be contributing rather than trolling.

>you could be contributing
I consider helping people avoid fundamental portfolio allocation decisions to be contributing.

I suspect you agree, but you're just a salty cunt because I made fun of you. No worries, its Veeky Forums. Get over it already.

What a retard.

Bury your money in a can in the backyard, if you own it. If not, bury it on a friend's land.

Its the only safe thing now.

>Bury your money in a can in the backyard, if you own it. If not, bury it on a friend's land.
>Its the only safe thing now.
What is inflation?
Now if you told me to bury gold or silver, I would agree. At least you would get some of your money back if you were wiling to give up gains for ultimate security.

Next time, browse the board before you actually shitpost.

Wouldn't old bills have more value since now they're considered antique?

IXJ

Good idea. Gold bits to barter if apocalypse. Antique to get a decent price if not apocalypse.