Roger, what I love about your articles is how they reflect a real understanding of how investors behave in the real world, as opposed to in theory or ideally.
When I wrote the ETF Investment Guide ( seekingalpha.com/artic... ) my goal was to prove to investors that they could do it themselves. But I received a ton of feedback from investors saying "I still need help, even wtih a portfolio of only a few ETFs".
That seems to be what you're saying in this comment -- that even managing a simple ETF portfolio and rebalancing it is too much for many people, and they might want to look at other options to reduce volatility.
On Apr 07 01:32 PM RogerNusbaum wrote:
> David, two ways to possibly address your question. > > One is how lazy does one want to be? also how often would someone > rebalance? I'm not sure it is economical for people to rebalance > based on a 5% move, for example. There is some number for each person > where it does makes sense. With $50,000 total 5% is probably no, > with $5 million it would be economical. > > Despite that it might not be economical people do feel, emotionally > a 5-10% decline so the right absolute fund could help. > > Another thing about rebalancing is that people seem to become reluctant > to buy more stock when the market drops, just normal human nature. > > > It is possible an absolute fund could lessen the blow for people > who are not good at rebalancing. > > Lastly, its just a theoretical example:-)
Update: We've added Roger Nusbaum's short article "Explore More Core" ( seekingalpha.com/artic... ) to the Further Reading section.
It's short, and asks more questions than it answers, but it touches on a crucial issue: Should you build a portfolio with an All World ETF as the core, supplemented by perhaps one other instrument?
Explore More Core [View article]
When I wrote the ETF Investment Guide ( seekingalpha.com/artic... ) my goal was to prove to investors that they could do it themselves. But I received a ton of feedback from investors saying "I still need help, even wtih a portfolio of only a few ETFs".
That seems to be what you're saying in this comment -- that even managing a simple ETF portfolio and rebalancing it is too much for many people, and they might want to look at other options to reduce volatility.
On Apr 07 01:32 PM RogerNusbaum wrote:
> David, two ways to possibly address your question.
>
> One is how lazy does one want to be? also how often would someone
> rebalance? I'm not sure it is economical for people to rebalance
> based on a 5% move, for example. There is some number for each person
> where it does makes sense. With $50,000 total 5% is probably no,
> with $5 million it would be economical.
>
> Despite that it might not be economical people do feel, emotionally
> a 5-10% decline so the right absolute fund could help.
>
> Another thing about rebalancing is that people seem to become reluctant
> to buy more stock when the market drops, just normal human nature.
>
>
> It is possible an absolute fund could lessen the blow for people
> who are not good at rebalancing.
>
> Lastly, its just a theoretical example:-)
Broad International ETFs [View article]
It's short, and asks more questions than it answers, but it touches on a crucial issue: Should you build a portfolio with an All World ETF as the core, supplemented by perhaps one other instrument?
Explore More Core [View article]
Broad International ETFs [View article]
BGI's All World ETF Could Fundamentally Change the Way People Invest (Matt Hougan)
seekingalpha.com/artic...
Total Stock Market ETFs vs. Slice 'n Dice (Murray Coleman)
seekingalpha.com/artic...
Broad International ETFs [View article]