What ETF portfolio do you use?
- Thread starter Baptiste Wicht
- Start date
superkikim
New member
Hi.
I just opened a Zak account from Cler bank (formerly Coop bank). They offer a new saving account at 1.3% up to 100'000CHF with a 10´000chf a year limit without notice, or a three months notice for more (by phone).
Good option if you can bear the 3 month notice. I use it for my car leasing where I have put two years of leasing rate in advance (667.80/Month) and I add every month 1120chf to cover the missing month + the residual value to buy back the car at the end of the leasing (still 29 months to go). Ideally I would sell some stocks to cover the 29 time 1120 and put them on that account in advance. For now the stocks have been more rewarding. But too risky for the short term.
I have then a recurring transfer from the saving account to the Zak account and then two days later another one from the Zak account to the leasing bank.
The leasing has a 0.99% rate. The residual value will be 26700. I will be able to give a three month notice. This should allow me to cover the cost of the leasing and a little more.
Have to say in this specific case, my goal is to not worry about the leasing and forget the zak account altogether.
I would say you are doing good, as long as you have the risk capacity to go 100% stocks.
You're mentioning your property: do you mean the cash (20% of the price of your house/apartment) you paid to the bank when you opened the mortgage?
Exactly. I talk about the part of the house I really own (the rest is owned by the bank). This part plus the second pillar now make for a significant enough portion of our net worth to not need 20% of our portfolio in CHF.
So you consider the part of the house you really paid for as a "home bias"? I'm still new and learning here, thus my (eventually stupid) question: is this the correct way to look at "home bias"?
I try to look at the home bias holistically, by considering all my assets. Some people consider it only on their stocks, it mostly depend on personal preference. Some people do not want a home bias.
there are a myriad of possibilities. nobody can know the optimum allocation for the next 40-50 years.
@CM: TER seems super.
keeping everything simple often helps.
whereas a X/Y mix (70/30 f.ex.) of stocks/bonds was/is somehow a classic industry standard,
for myself with a super-longterm perspective I always avoided fixed income (bonds or bond ETFs),
what in 25 y retrospect was the right decision.
though global allocation of stocks/ETFs seems more prudent and TER-cheaper, my personal equity country allocation
would be more restricted, but always super-longterm and without rebalancing into what I feel are 'the winner countries':
U.S, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, Singapore, Taiwan (technology sector ETF),
South Korea ... and ... 10-15% China/Hong Kong. Also (5) - 10% physical gold seems prudent.
as said, the country ETFs often have a high TER.
Some rare U.S. domiciled country ETFs from Franklin, just as an example, seem acceptably cheap:
FLTW (MSCI Taiwan) TER 0.19%
FLKR (MSCI South Korea) TER 0.09%
Maybe nothing to recommend to others, but this is my perspective.
China is here to stay an investing mystery.
Only days before, Franklin Templeton chief strategist Stephen Dover called China a "dead cat bouncing", haha.
Maybe at the time of his writing, possibly the cat was only near-dead.
China does not come only with high volatility and political risk, but also moral question marks, of course.
What will politically happen to Taiwan in the 'Indopacific' is also unknown.
good luck !
@CM: TER seems super.
keeping everything simple often helps.
whereas a X/Y mix (70/30 f.ex.) of stocks/bonds was/is somehow a classic industry standard,
for myself with a super-longterm perspective I always avoided fixed income (bonds or bond ETFs),
what in 25 y retrospect was the right decision.
though global allocation of stocks/ETFs seems more prudent and TER-cheaper, my personal equity country allocation
would be more restricted, but always super-longterm and without rebalancing into what I feel are 'the winner countries':
U.S, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, Singapore, Taiwan (technology sector ETF),
South Korea ... and ... 10-15% China/Hong Kong. Also (5) - 10% physical gold seems prudent.
as said, the country ETFs often have a high TER.
Some rare U.S. domiciled country ETFs from Franklin, just as an example, seem acceptably cheap:
FLTW (MSCI Taiwan) TER 0.19%
FLKR (MSCI South Korea) TER 0.09%
Maybe nothing to recommend to others, but this is my perspective.
China is here to stay an investing mystery.
Only days before, Franklin Templeton chief strategist Stephen Dover called China a "dead cat bouncing", haha.
Maybe at the time of his writing, possibly the cat was only near-dead.
China does not come only with high volatility and political risk, but also moral question marks, of course.
What will politically happen to Taiwan in the 'Indopacific' is also unknown.
good luck !
VT seems very prudent.
I find UBS ETF (CH) SLI interesting, performance-wise and allocation-wise
Attachments
Welcome to the forum.
I like VTI/VXUS, but I wonder if holding US bonds is really what you want. Why do you hold bonds for? If you hold for reduced volatility, you may not be well served by US bonds because they are in USD and we use CHF in Switzerland. Unless you are in US, of course.
Yes, it's a nice index. I like the fact that they avoid having more than 9% for any company from the SMI, it helps diversification.
Is it only prudent, because very diversified, but not performing a lot? Or how should we look at "100% VT" investments? I myself am also 100% VT invested right now - my horizon is 15-20 years.
It's for reducing volatility and some kind of inflation hedging as well. I also consider 2nd pillar to be my Swiss "bond" portfolio, and my emergency fund is on a ZKB savings account
maybe physical gold to an extent could be the stability (and even emergency) part of a super-longterm portfolio
i feel, one can be happy with VT performance. If I'm correct the swiss Pensionskassen (= professional money managers, client-oriented, 'safe' investments) on longterm achieve an averaged annual performance of 'only' 3-5% in CHF before inflation ? This could be used as a real world benchmark of serious investing, possibly. The current high annual returns of the S&P500 (7-10%, or even more) and also of the U.S.-loaded 'global' indices will return to their means (for U.S. around 6-7%), I believe. So we experience luxury times on the stock market currently and we should never take 10% annual net returns for granted.
10% per year (in USD) is probably something that the best professional, client-oriented money managers in the U.S. achieved, like Harvard University Endowment and MiTIMCo. But even for Harvard the times have changed.
more info here:
Harvard Endowment Underperformance, part MMXXIV - The Big Picture
I used to spill a lot of ink about how terrible the Harvard Endowment was, especially their heavy overweight in Hedge Funds. I stopped not because they got any better, but simply because the annual performance disaster was boring to keep writing about. Worse still, this was a self-inflicted...
ritholtz.com
bye all ! go out into nature.
