Gyroscopic Investing

Any ideas on VT over VTI for the 25% stock portion of the PP?

I think this has come up before, not sure. I don't think it's a terrible choice. Still, thinking about pp's set up for different countries.
A pp won't work in corrupt countries, but for those nations & economies that do qualify, I think the general idea is to invest in the  prosperity (stock market) where you're going to be spending your money. Treasuries, too. Live in the UK, buy British treasuries (gilts?)

I don't know how scientific this is, but I feel like gold is my international allocation.

VTI is more "pure PP", but I think either will be fine at the end of the day.  Pick whichever you'll be less inclined to mess with later; or do a little of both.

dualstow wrote: I think this has come up before, not sure. I don't think it's a terrible choice. Still, thinking about pp's set up for different countries.
A pp won't work in corrupt countries, but for those nations & economies that do qualify, I think the general idea is to invest in the  prosperity (stock market) where you're going to be spending your money. Treasuries, too. Live in the UK, buy British treasuries (gilts?)

I don't know how scientific this is, but I feel like gold is my international allocation.

I agree to Dualstow's points above. Having the full U.S. Market is diversified enough, and that your international diversification comes out of your gold supply. The only reason I'd say to go with VT versus VTI would be if we expect other countries to be more productive overall than the U.S. when it comes to growing business and their stock markets. It also boils down to how productive are the citizens of each respective country and whether one set of citizens is more productive than another. I normally think it's a wash and you assume they can be interchanged and if they aren't, that's where gold equalizes.

I will echo the other posters, on gold being your international hedge.  Using VT instead of VTI just adds more currency risk to your portfolio.

If you want to diversify out of the US, consider opening a PP fully in Japan, Germany, or a northern European state.  At least that is what I would do.  What other foreign economies are trustworthy?

Lowe wrote: If you want to diversify out of the US, consider opening a PP fully in Japan, Germany, or a northern European state.  At least that is what I would do?

How about a vp that holds VEU or some other ex-US stock index fund?

The problem is in a deflationary world (like Japan) where all home country assets are giving subpar returns due to overvaluation or bubbles or moribund economy or what not, you're going to miss out on the emerging markets where all the growth will be.  The correct answer is to use only currency hedged funds, but there's not many so far.

Actually I think I will create my stock  portion as 2/3 VXF and 1/3 VT.  This will give me about 5% international exposure.

There have been thoughts floated here on reducing your gold and holding international stocks. I've been considering reducing my gold to 20% and increasing my stocks to 30%, and maintaining a 65-35 US-Int ratio within the stocks.

I prefer 75-25 US-Intl equity split, I inherited that idea from the Schwab Moderate allocation model I had for years, and don't want to step out farther than that. My ex-employer's 2025 target fund was 70-30 FWIW. So for me, 65-35 a bit much.

If this were the boglehead forum, people would be pointing out that international stocks have been beating American ones and that gold has been doing poorly. And they'd be right.

dualstow wrote: If this were the boglehead forum, people would be pointing out that international stocks have been beating American ones and that gold has been doing poorly. And they'd be right.

They'd be right, but that being said, they'd also agree that you can't chase last year's winners. That's a very common error, One needs a rule-based strategic plan (PP or other) that one is capable of sticking to through thick and thin. Because the international equities only "woke up" in Dollar terms in early January 2015, before that time THEY were the trash to be avoided. You can't run a portfolio that way.

Not only do I agree, Ochotona, but that is my whole point.

Added: Bogleheads are quick to notice a preponderance of threads on what is currently doing well. Once upon a time it was TIPS. For at least a year now, it's been all-stock portfolios. Now, international stocks are starting to see a lot of new threads.