Professor Jemery Siegle says: OWN THE WORLD video
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:35 am
Permanent Portfolio Forum
https://www.gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/
https://www.gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4085
Yep. If I wanted total world stock ownership and no hassles I'd use VT.Bean wrote: Take a look at VT, it takes the guess work out of "own the world"
Not surprising because a lot of markets outside the U.S. are tremendously more volatile. I guess as they say: "When the U.S. catches a cold the rest of the world gets the flu."BP wrote: I took a quick look at the proposed world portfolio at etfreplay.com. About a 60% maximum drawdown.
VT only has 13.6% emerging market. If the growth in 20 or 30 years is outside the developed nations than VT will lag vs the Professor.craigr wrote:Yep. If I wanted total world stock ownership and no hassles I'd use VT.Bean wrote: Take a look at VT, it takes the guess work out of "own the world"
Well here's where I disagree with the Professor. I think most emerging market economies stink. They stink because they are in very corrupt countries with very corrupt cultures and a way of doing business that is going to keep them very volatile and low-performing. So I personally would only put into emerging markets what the total weighted markets says should be there. Other than that, I wouldn't overweight them in the slightest. They are a bad bet and will always remain that way.modeljc wrote:VT only has 13.6% emerging market. If the growth in 20 or 30 years is outside the developed nations than VT will lag vs the Professor.craigr wrote:Yep. If I wanted total world stock ownership and no hassles I'd use VT.Bean wrote: Take a look at VT, it takes the guess work out of "own the world"
His allocation is probably +3% to +4% over SPY for 30 or 40 years??
If you are young and can handle volatility and big drawdowns and the world hold together it will beat the PP maybe.
At least, not without fundamentally changing more than just their economy.craigr wrote: Simply, we can come back in 50 years and I'm willing to wager most emerging market economies today will still be emerging market economies then. They face tremendous headwind and they are unlikely to change.
Yes very Corrupt but they offer the biggest rebalance deal out there because of the volatility. A hard ride but so is the S & P.craigr wrote:Well here's where I disagree with the Professor. I think most emerging market economies stink. They stink because they are in very corrupt countries with very corrupt cultures and a way of doing business that is going to keep them very volatile and low-performing. So I personally would only put into emerging markets what the total weighted markets says should be there. Other than that, I wouldn't overweight them in the slightest. They are a bad bet and will always remain that way.modeljc wrote:VT only has 13.6% emerging market. If the growth in 20 or 30 years is outside the developed nations than VT will lag vs the Professor.craigr wrote: Yep. If I wanted total world stock ownership and no hassles I'd use VT.
His allocation is probably +3% to +4% over SPY for 30 or 40 years??
If you are young and can handle volatility and big drawdowns and the world hold together it will beat the PP maybe.
Simply, we can come back in 50 years and I'm willing to wager most emerging market economies today will still be emerging market economies then. They face tremendous headwind and they are unlikely to change.
VT does not adjust the weight of each market as they vary in size?modeljc wrote:VT only has 13.6% emerging market. If the growth in 20 or 30 years is outside the developed nations than VT will lag vs the Professor.craigr wrote:Yep. If I wanted total world stock ownership and no hassles I'd use VT.Bean wrote: Take a look at VT, it takes the guess work out of "own the world"
VT is cap weighted and so it is probably the best representation of the global equity market. I think modeljc just thinks EM has better prospects than the rest of the world.escafandro wrote: VT does not adjust the weight of each market as they vary in size?
Sure, but "If the growth in 20 or 30 years is outside the developed nations..." Then VT should adjust their relative weights to reflect this change, right?melveyr wrote:VT is cap weighted and so it is probably the best representation of the global equity market. I think modeljc just thinks EM has better prospects than the rest of the world.escafandro wrote: VT does not adjust the weight of each market as they vary in size?
However, I find the simplicity of VT to be very compelling.