Gyroscopic Investing

Here's an interesting thought to ponder:

Let's hypothetically said that PERM starts getting bigger and the expense ratio comes down to a reasonable level to the point that it is justifiable from a cost and ease of use standpoint to use that instead of the 4 funds (VTI, SHY, TLT, IAU, or something like that).

Would this approach potentially have lower tax burdens since you wouldn't be doing the rebalancing yourself and you would only be eventually paying taxes on the final capital appreciation (plus taxes on dividends).

For the sake of the argument, let's also say that the fund holds physical bullion and perhaps you hold physical bullion then outside of PERM by a certain percentage.

Would anyone switch into that or would you like the control of the 4-ish funds yourself?

I like to keep in mind that the PP is for defense against brokerage risks too, and not just the risk of your assets losing value. Avoiding rebalance costs in my taxable account would tempt me, but I'm not sure I could justify locking up all that money in one fund held by one brokerage. I feel kind of warm and fuzzy having everything split up between three Vanguard accounts, a Schwab account, and an Ameritrade account, with the individual assets being offered by different companies too.

I'd agree regarding the counterparty risk. Perhaps something like that would be better for if you wanted to get one of your friends into the PP without having to go with PRPFX. Ideally, I'm thinking I'd rather do the balancing on my own, much like most of the things I do.

I enjoy the control over my own finances versus someone else doing it for me. It was brought up by KevinW at one point though I believe about Folio investing and putting your money in there and having it rebalance itself. If an ETF did the same thing I would think that could potentially be preferable. Not sure though.