Skip to main content

Lazy portfolios

 

Lazy portfolios are designed to perform well in most market conditions. Most contain a small number of low-cost funds that are easy to rebalance. They are "lazy" in that the investor can maintain the same asset allocation for an extended period of time, as they generally contain 30-40% bonds, suitable for most pre-retirement investors.[note 1]

Note: Historical performance for many of the "lazy portfolios" is available on our site's blog. See Portfolios - Financial Page.

Two-fund portfolio

It is possible to retain access to the broad US and International markets, as well as bonds, using only two funds. Rick Ferri has proposed a two-fund portfolio containing the total world stock market, and a diversified US bond market index fund as follows.[1] Expense ratios are shown in parentheses.

Rick Ferri's Two-Fund Portfolio[1]
%
Allocation
Asset Class Using Mutual Funds Using ETFs
Vanguard Vanguard SPDR
60% Total World Stock Market VTWAX (.10%) VT (.08%) SPGM (.09%)
40% Total Bond Market VBTLX (.05%) BND (.035%) SPAB (.03%)

Three-fund lazy portfolios

There are a number of popular authors and columnists who have suggested 3-fund lazy portfolios. These typically consist of three equal parts of bonds (total bond market or TIPS), total US market and total international market. Note that while the "% allocation" is different from those listed below, these funds typically make up the core of Vanguard's Target Retirement and Lifestrategy funds.[note 2] Expense ratios are shown in parentheses.

Taylor Larimore's Three-Fund Portfolio[note 3]
%
Allocation
Asset Class Using Mutual Funds
Using ETFs
Vanguard Fidelity Schwab[note 4] Vanguard iShares
Total US Stock Market VTSAX (.04%) FSKAX (.015%) SWTSX (.03%) VTI (.03%) ITOT (.03%)
Total International Stock Market VTIAX (.11%) FTIHX (.06%) SWISX (.06%) VXUS (.08%) IXUS (.09%)
Total Bond Market VBTLX (.05%) FXNAX (.025%) SWAGX (.04%) BND (.035%) AGG (.04%)

                Lazy3.PNG                      Ferrithreefund.png

Scott Burns' Margarita Portfolio / Andrew Tobias' Three-Fund Portfolio[2]
%
Allocation
Asset Class Using Mutual Funds
Using ETFs
Vanguard Fidelity Schwab[note 4] Vanguard iShares
34% Total US Stock Market VTSAX (.04%) FSKAX (.015%) SWTSX (.03%) VTI (.03%) ITOT (.03%)
33% Total International Stock Market VTIAX (.11%) FTIHX (.06%) SWISX (.06%) VXUS (.08%) IXUS (.09%)
33% Inflation-Protected Securities VAIPX (.10%) FIPDX (.05%) SWRSX (.05%) --- [note 5] TIP (.19%)

Rick Ferri's Lazy Three-Fund Portfolio[1][note 6]
%
Allocation
Asset Class Using Mutual Funds
Using ETFs
Vanguard Fidelity Schwab[note 4] Vanguard iShares
40% Total US Stock Market VTSAX (.04%) FSKAX (.015%) SWTSX (.03%) VTI (.03%) ITOT (.03%)
20% Total International Stock Market VTIAX (.11%) FTIHX (.06%) SWISX (.06%) VXUS (.08%) IXUS (.09%)
40% Total Bond Market VBTLX (.05%) FXNAX (.025%) SWAGX (.04%) BND (.035%) AGG (.04%)

In addition, consider that there are several close alternatives to these funds, especially when purchasing through Vanguard. For example, consider that the "Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund" also has a short term alternative, "Vanguard Short-Term Inflation-Protected Securities Index Fund" (tickers VTIPX or VTAPX) which can offer slightly less volatility in NAV.

Core four portfolios

As proposed by Rick Ferri on the Bogleheads® forum, the Core Four are four funds which form the "cornerstone" of a portfolio. Low-cost, total market fund examples are shown below (with expense ratios in parantheses).

Rick Ferri's Core Four Portfolio[1]
Asset Class Using Mutual Funds
Using ETFs
Vanguard Fidelity Schwab[note 4] Vanguard iShares
Total US Stock Market VTSAX (.04%) FSKAX (.015%) SWTSX (.03%) VTI (.03%) ITOT (.03%)
Total International Stock Market VTIAX (.11%) FTIHX (.06%) SWISX (.06%) VXUS (.08%) IXUS (.09%)
Total Bond Market VBTLX (.05%) FXNAX (.025%) SWAGX (.04%) BND (.035%) AGG (.04%)
Real Estate Investment Trusts (REIT) VGSLX (.12%) FSRNX (.07%) --- [note 7] VNQ (.12%) USRT (.08%)

Rick proposes that investors first determine their bond allocation. With the remaining funds, allocate 50% to US stock, 40% to international and 10% to REIT.[3] For example, for 60/40 and 80/20 portfolios, you would end up with the following [1]:

Core Four Portfolio, Asset Allocations
Desired Stock/Bond Allocation Total US Stock Market Index Fund Total International Stock Index Fund Total Bond Market Index Fund REIT Index Fund
60 / 40 30% 24% 40% 6%
80 / 20 40% 32% 20% 8%
Core Four 60 40.PNG     Core Four 80 20.PNG

Rick stresses that the exact allocation percentages aren't important, to the nearest 5% is fine.[4]

The core-four is just a low cost foundation for your portfolio. You could add a slice of value stocks (US and/or International). You could split the bond portion between Treasury Inflation Protected Securities and nominal bonds, which would result in a slightly more conservative version of David Swensen's model portfolio (less international stock and less REIT, but otherwise the same four base funds plus TIPS.

More lazy portfolios

Beyond the simple 3- and 4-fund lazy portfolios are more complex portfolios. These are still "lazy" in that they contain enough bonds (typically 30-40%) to allow the investor to maintain the same AA for much of the accumulation phase of their lives. The more complex funds add REITs, and 'slice and dice' the US and/or International stocks, adding large and small value to the mix. It is worth noting that in some of the cases outlined below, a simpler portfolio may be able to accomplish similar goals. For example, a small and value tilt away from the market may be accomplished by adding a small cap value fund, thus 'tilting' from a total stock market fund.

Bill Schultheis's "Coffeehouse" portfolio

This simple 7-fund portfolio was made popular by Bill Schultheis' book The Coffeehouse Investor. He advocates 40% in a total market bond fund and 10% each in various stock funds. More information can be found at The Coffeehouse Investor. The Coffeehouse Portfolio contains only 10% international stocks (17% of total equities). It slices up the domestic portion, but uses a total international fund.[note 8]

Asset Class %
Allocation
Using ETFs
Vanguard iShares
Large Blend 10% VOO (.03%) IVV (.03%)
Large Value 10% VTV (.04%) IUSV (.04%)
Small Blend 10% VB (.05%) ISCB (.04%)
Small Value 10% VBR (.07%) ISCV (.06%)
Total International 10% VXUS (.08%) IXUS (.09%)
REIT 10% VNQ (.12%) USRT (.08%)
Total Bond 40% BND (.035%) AGG (.04%)
CoffeeHouse Portfolio.PNG

William Bernstein's "Coward's" portfolio

William Bernstein is the author of several books including The Intelligent Asset Allocator and The Four Pillars of Investing. He introduced the Coward's Portfolio in 1996. The "coward" refers not to the investor's risk tolerance but to the strategy of hedging one's bets and having slices of a number of asset classes. This portfolio is similar to the Coffeehouse Portfolio except that short term bonds are used, and the international portion is divided into equal slices of Europe, Pacific and Emerging markets.

Asset Class %
Allocation
Using ETFs
Vanguard iShares
Total Stock Mkt 15% VTI (.03%) ITOT (.03%)
Large Value 10% VTV (.04%) IUSV (.04%)
Small Blend 5% VB (.05%) ISCB (.04%)
Small Value 10% VBR (.07%) ICSV (.06%)
Europe 5% VGK (.08%) IEUR (.09%)
Pacific 5% VPL (.08%) IPAC (.09%)
Emerging Markets 5% VWO (.10%) IEMG (.11%)
REIT 5% VNQ (.12%) USRT (.08%)
Short Term Bond 40% BSV (.05%) ISTB (.06%)
Bernstein Coward Portfolio.PNG

Frank Armstrong's "Ideal Index" portfolio

Frank Armstrong, author of The Informed Investor, proposed this portfolio for an MSN Money article. It contains a smaller allocation to bonds, and a much larger allocation to international stocks (in fact the equities, excluding REIT, are split 50/50 between domestic and international). Like Bernstein he advocates short term bonds. If the domestic slices were replaced by a total market fund, this portfolio would be very close to the 3-Fund portfolios, with a slice of REIT added.

Asset Class %
Allocation
Using ETFs
Vanguard iShares
Large Blend 7% VOO (.03%) IVV (.03%)
Large Value 9% VTV (.04%) IUSV (.04%)
Small Blend 6% VB (.05%) ISCB (.04%)
Small Value 9% VBR (.07%) ICSV (.06%)
Total International 31% VXUS (.08%) IXUS (.09%)
REIT 8% VNQ (.12%) USRT (.08%)
Short Term Bond 30% BSV (.05%) ISTB (.06%)
Armstrong Ideal Index Portfolio.PNG

David Swensen's lazy portfolio

David Swensen is CIO of Yale University and author of Unconventional Success. His lazy portfolio uses low-cost, tax-efficient total market funds, a healthy dose of real estate, and inflation-protected securities (TIPS).[5][note 9]

Asset Class %
Allocation
Using ETFs
Vanguard iShares SPDR
Total Stock Market 30% VTI (.03%) ITOT (.03%) SPTM (.03%)
Intl Developed Market 15% VEA (.05%) IDEV (.05%) SPDW (.04%)
Emerging Markets 10% VWO (.10%) IEMG (.11%) SPEM (.11%)
Real Estate 15% VNQ (.12%) USRT (.08%) XLRE (.12%)
US Treasury Bonds 15% VGIT (.05%) GOVT (.05%) SPTI (.06%)
TIPS 15% --- [note 5] TIP (.19%) SPIP (.12%)
Swensen Lazy Portfolio2.PNG

Permanent Portfolio

The Permanent Portfolio was devised by free-market investment analyst Harry Browne in the 1980s as a buy-and-hold portfolio that contains a healthy allocation to gold. The portfolio holds equal allocations of domestic stocks, gold, short-term treasury bonds, and long term treasury bonds.[6][note 10]

Forum members Craig Rowland and J. M. Lawson have written a book, 'The Permanent Portfolio: Harry Browne's Long-Term Investment Strategy, detailing every aspect of the Permanent Portfolio.

The portfolio can be implemented with an investment in a low cost US total stock market index fund, along with direct investments in gold bullion coins, US treasury bills, and US treasury bonds. It can also be implemented with low-cost exchange-traded funds. See Blackrock iShares for an ETF version of the portfolio.

US Permanent Portfolio
%
Allocation
Asset Class Using ETFs
Vanguard iShares
25% US Total Stock Market VTI (.03%) ITOT (.03%)
25% Gold Bullion --- [note 5] IAU (.25%)
25% US Treasury Bills VGSH (.05%) SHY (.15%)
25% US Long-Term Treasury VGLT (.05%) TLT (.15%)
USpermport.png

Notes

Comments

  1. 可惜前面那么多年一直在为生
    活,身份奔忙,无暇顾及投资。现在看来,投资越早越好。而且就躺平死皮即可,不用
    任何花哨,也不用加杠杆。

    ReplyDelete

  2. 租金相当于股票的分红
    房价上涨相当于高科技股价上涨

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

https://gengwg.blogspot.com/

Popular posts from this blog

CKA Simulator Kubernetes 1.22

  https://killer.sh Pre Setup Once you've gained access to your terminal it might be wise to spend ~1 minute to setup your environment. You could set these: alias k = kubectl                         # will already be pre-configured export do = "--dry-run=client -o yaml"     # k get pod x $do export now = "--force --grace-period 0"   # k delete pod x $now Vim To make vim use 2 spaces for a tab edit ~/.vimrc to contain: set tabstop=2 set expandtab set shiftwidth=2 More setup suggestions are in the tips section .     Question 1 | Contexts Task weight: 1%   You have access to multiple clusters from your main terminal through kubectl contexts. Write all those context names into /opt/course/1/contexts . Next write a command to display the current context into /opt/course/1/context_default_kubectl.sh , the command should use kubectl . Finally write a second command doing the same thing into ...

OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigations Exam - Single Select

Last updated 4 Aug 11 Course Title: OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigation Exam Questions - Single Select 1) Which of the following consequences is most likely to occur due to an injection attack? Spoofing Cross-site request forgery Denial of service   Correct Insecure direct object references 2) Your application is created using a language that does not support a clear distinction between code and data. Which vulnerability is most likely to occur in your application? Injection   Correct Insecure direct object references Failure to restrict URL access Insufficient transport layer protection 3) Which of the following scenarios is most likely to cause an injection attack? Unvalidated input is embedded in an instruction stream.   Correct Unvalidated input can be distinguished from valid instructions. A Web application does not validate a client’s access to a resource. A Web action performs an operation on behalf of the user without checkin...