Well, I consider the PP to be a somewhat conservative allocation portfolio. I have a long investing time horizon, so I'm willing to take higher risks with some of my portfolio (the VP portion). Since the longer the time horizon you have the more risk you can afford to take, it stands to reason that when I'm young my VP should be larger than my PP, and as I approach retirement I should shift funds from my VP to my PP.Thomas Hoog wrote:Your strategy on ratio VP and PP seems to me a bit weird. VP is some strange invention to satisfy your emotional behaviour. If your behaviour is related to your age, it make sense. But I doubt that.
For me, I don't use a VP. I really have no idea what the future brings.
I'm not recommending that everyone do that, mind you. It's just the approach I've come up with that fits my investing style. If my PP repeatedly outperforms my VP over the next 5-10 years, I may reconsider this tactic and start shifting my VP funds into my PP at a faster rate.