Can't disagree with that. Also not the point of the video to "champion" individual portfolios. The goal is to stimulate critical thinking about what people use as guidance for their retirement investing - my base case is that asset allocation based investing allows lazy financial advisors to build lazy portfolios, and profit driven brokerages to annuitize their fees via simple ETFs. But hey , I could be wrong and the industry could be completely magnanimous and in it for the end user (retiree's) best interests, just like big pharma is so generously helping us achieve better health outcomes 🤔🤔🤔. Somehow I doubt both of those things...
I agree. Part of the challenge is that many ETFs don't have lifespans longer than 5-10 years - so back testing further then that becomes less possible and less accurate... One of the trade offs we don't realize we accept when we use ETFs is that there is a lack of historical data for many of them, especially as they get more specific or more niche. The only way to truly back test longer time periods would be to use single stock portfolios ..
This was interesting analysis. I was thinking the 96% portfolio would have had the highest gain. I would have never thought the 60/40 would have had best return.
Yes. Pretty fascinating stuff to dive deeper into some of the performance metrics. It certainly dispels some of the "conventional wisdom" that we are told to just take for granted....
Want to schedule a consultation? Click here:
app.thepeakfp.com/YTWWU
It’s easy to pick great portfolios looking back.
Can't disagree with that.
Also not the point of the video to "champion" individual portfolios.
The goal is to stimulate critical thinking about what people use as guidance for their retirement investing - my base case is that asset allocation based investing allows lazy financial advisors to build lazy portfolios, and profit driven brokerages to annuitize their fees via simple ETFs.
But hey , I could be wrong and the industry could be completely magnanimous and in it for the end user (retiree's) best interests, just like big pharma is so generously helping us achieve better health outcomes 🤔🤔🤔.
Somehow I doubt both of those things...
@@ThePeakFPWell said. I couldn’t agree more with your response. Excellent topic and new subscriber to your fine channel.
Fascinating stuff.
Agreed!
It would be nice to see same portfolios but out at 10-15-20 years or more.
I agree. Part of the challenge is that many ETFs don't have lifespans longer than 5-10 years - so back testing further then that becomes less possible and less accurate...
One of the trade offs we don't realize we accept when we use ETFs is that there is a lack of historical data for many of them, especially as they get more specific or more niche.
The only way to truly back test longer time periods would be to use single stock portfolios ..
This was interesting analysis. I was thinking the 96% portfolio would have had the highest gain. I would have never thought the 60/40 would have had best return.
Yes. Pretty fascinating stuff to dive deeper into some of the performance metrics. It certainly dispels some of the "conventional wisdom" that we are told to just take for granted....
Ot doesmt have the best return 100 % stocks does !
Unfortunately, Portfolio Visualizer has changed massively. And definitely NOT for the better!
Yes - I agree - not a big fan of the PV changes... Pretty disappointing actually.