Gyroscopic Investing

I'm curious how people decide how much to allocate to their VP vs. PP.  Since my 401k contributions are much larger than my Roth contributions, I basically need to count a bunch of extra money as my VP.  This will probably be all stocks, broken out as: 40% stocks, 20% LTT, 20%, Gold, 20% Cash.  I'm a bit nervous, however, that I may be biased in favor of stocks due to their great run-up last year.

30%. After renovation loan & bills are paid, it will be closer to 40%.

Around 90% I would say. All but our Roth IRA's which are invested in VWINX.

Somewhere between 80-90%.

82.4% give or take a bit depending on the day. I'll eventually have everything set up as PP so that I don't have to think about investments all the time (unless I change my mind!).

About 80%.

Just a little under 2/3's of our total investments.

Not counting home equity, I'm 100% PP.

HB Reader wrote: Just a little under 2/3's of our total investments.

Ditto for me.

100%

The PP comprises 35% of my overall portfolio (taxable, t-IRA). Looking at my investments as a whole, I am 50% equity, 40% fixed income and 10% PM&M (gold, mining stocks).

60%. But a big chunk of my VP sits in PRPFX in a taxable account. I should admit that I think more and more about shifting almost everything to PP.

I think that a PP percentage equal to one's age makes a lot of sense.

Reub wrote: I think that a PP percentage equal to one's age makes a lot of sense.

"Age in PP" surely sounds cool! Our response to Bogleheads' "Age in bonds".

Reub, you should register a trademark. 

Reub wrote: I think that a PP percentage equal to one's age makes a lot of sense.

But, using this scenario, what would comprise the VP for the remainder of your portfolio?

goodasgold wrote:

Reub wrote: I think that a PP percentage equal to one's age makes a lot of sense.

But, using this scenario, what would comprise the VP for the remainder of your portfolio?

If I were doing this, I'd use VTI or VT.

I'm using nonstandard implementations of the PP, so depending on how you define it, either 0% or 100%

PP #1 (taxable account):

25% SPY
25% GLD
25% TLT
25% UUP

PP #2 (IRA), the leveraged PP:

1/3 UGL
1/3 SSO
1/3 UBT

Interested in what your current %'s is and if some of the original posters' %'s have changed.

Vinny

Thanks for reviving this, yankees60. I've been thinking about this lately as well.

For me, it's about 80%. I have a chunk in Vanguard Wellesley as well (VWIAX) -- about 15%, and then another 5% here and there in CDs and an angel investment.

I'm currently in the lucky position of being able to save a lot of cash each month/contribute to savings. I've been putting it to Wellesley over the past year, but been thinking about how to allocate new savings going forward.

100%

Close to 100% for almost 10 years now.

How does owning primary residence influence this. If you could sell if you needed to

it doesn't .... a home is a consumption item that cost you money as it provides your housing , until you sell it and convert it to invest able assets . it should be kept totally separate from conventional portfolio allocations .

even in retirement it is never used to base a draw on as you would a portfolio value ... it can act as collateral for costly loans but once the equity is in it is a one way funnel and can't come out without just borrowing money , the same as someone could who rented and had other assets to use as collateral .. even a reverse mortgage is a balloon payment loan ... you just have the choice of leaving them the house to pay it off.

so when it is cash and sold then you re-evalute with it otherwise it plays no role

I wish it were 100%, but it's about 40%. The rest is in employer tax-deferred (403b) accounts where I can't buy gold, so I put those into a Boglehead-style 3 fund portfolio. That will be fixed when I retire, and I'll be a "100%-er" then!

100%