Great article, with actionable information on the ETF selectons! Very happy subscriber – keep up the great work!
Hi Stock Rover More terrific STUFF as you guys continually give us new tools to further prove the value of being a Stock Rover subscriber I like the broad approach of the ETF portfolio’s but I would have appreciated one or two which were focused on US Bonds, i.e. LQD With the future being questioned I for one am buying Bond ETF’s when some of my names trigger my Trailing Stop Loss Regards Allen M. Oliver metal_trader@msn.com
Interesting information. However, Porfolio 100% of USMV – minum volatility provides proctically the same results with much less drawdown than all other porfolios. Level 3 porfolio contains EQAL, RSP, and VONE. Their correaltion is about 0.95-0.98. What are the advantages to use so closely correalted 3 ETFs? Addition of VNQ enhace diveticifaction. I backtesting just RSP (80%) or VONE (80%) and the results are clearly better. What am I missing? Dr. Reisman please comment.
I’m not a fan of putting all portfolio assets into a single ETF, but maybe that is just me. The Level 3 portfolio is one favored by AAII so I included it in this blog as it is a popular portfolio. It is not my personal favorite. They would really need to speak to its construction.
I completely agree with Dr. Reisman that portfolio with one USMV (or any other “brilliant” ETF) without a bond ETFs is a prudent idea. I consider that all those allocations created by Faber, Svensen, are just Strategic Asset Allocation (SAA) and (in my opinion) should be complemented by Tactical Asset Allocation (TAA). I back testing Fidelity Balnced Fund (50-70%) allocation, and as SAA it performs almost as good as a prominent Swensen Endowment. I also backtesting Capital Mangement Porfolios and they performs worse thatn FBALX. Again, what I am missing? Thanks you very much. Yefim
I have no knowledge of Capital Management or their portfolios so I can’t comment on why they perform worse than FBALX, but if they are comparable as far as their investment objective goes, I certainly would look at both their holdings and the management expense of their products vs. Fidelity.