As someone who builds non correlated models for a living, the difficulty with these low count packages is reconciling the fact that VTI and VEU, even over ~2.5 years, trade as a team. Sure: one's outperformed the other at times, and active trading could've benefited from this. But this kind of "domestic" vs "international" diversification is a misnomer: when the correlations are in the neighborhood of 97%+, that's not a diversified strategy.
DBC got you a little out of the norm (+) prior to May '08; VNQ got you a little out (-) through the same date. But a portfolio with so few elements really can't diversify into enough classes that would've generated positive returns when the majority (not all) of investable classes neared an r^2 of 1.
Asset Allocation ETFs: Low Expenses Are Nice, Losing Less Money Is Nicer [View article]
Donzelion,
Regarding your third point, there's also something to be said for DEM's outperformance over VWO. As a previous VWO owner - and "praise singer" - I switched because I felt DEMS's higher fees were justified. And I've been rewarded since converting: DEM has outperformed - buy a reasonably substantial margin - VWO over the past 1m, 3m, 6m, 1yr, and since DEM's inception (July 13, 2007). This has more than paid for the fee difference - .63% vs .25%. Oh - and I love the dividend on DEM, too: 5.98% vs. 5%.
A Low Cost, Fully Diversified All ETF Portfolio [View article]
I agree with LSGuy - If I'd recommended 30% bonds to some of the 30-ish and 40-ish folks I work with, they'd have been displeased with my modeling. For some folks this might be fine, given average-low risk tolerance, or unique circumstances. However, I'm curious as to how you came up with that figure.
I'm not disputing your picks, though - we also own VWO, VTI, and PCY...
I'm curious to learn what your results were when you backtested with different allocations - say, 75% equities, 15% reits, and 10% bonds (and associated other derivations).
One Basic Portfolio, 5 ETFs [View article]
DBC got you a little out of the norm (+) prior to May '08; VNQ got you a little out (-) through the same date. But a portfolio with so few elements really can't diversify into enough classes that would've generated positive returns when the majority (not all) of investable classes neared an r^2 of 1.
Multiple Asset Class Short-Term Returns [View article]
Asset Allocation ETFs: Low Expenses Are Nice, Losing Less Money Is Nicer [View article]
Regarding your third point, there's also something to be said for DEM's outperformance over VWO. As a previous VWO owner - and "praise singer" - I switched because I felt DEMS's higher fees were justified. And I've been rewarded since converting: DEM has outperformed - buy a reasonably substantial margin - VWO over the past 1m, 3m, 6m, 1yr, and since DEM's inception (July 13, 2007). This has more than paid for the fee difference - .63% vs .25%. Oh - and I love the dividend on DEM, too: 5.98% vs. 5%.
A Low Cost, Fully Diversified All ETF Portfolio [View article]
I'm not disputing your picks, though - we also own VWO, VTI, and PCY...
I'm curious to learn what your results were when you backtested with different allocations - say, 75% equities, 15% reits, and 10% bonds (and associated other derivations).
Best,
GL