A popular etf over in Europe is the iShares Core msci World. It’s a developed world etf.

It is far from guaranteed that the US market will outperform the ex-US market over your investment window. For example, ex-US outperformed US from ~1969-2011 until the recent US bull market. In fact, US and ex-US have historically cycled and US has outperformed ex-US over only ~60% of all rolling 10-year periods.

However, certain asset classes (e.g., small cap & emerging markets) have historically outperformed their counterparts (i.e, large cap & developed markets) over almost all long rolling periods. Small cap and emerging markets carry a risk premium and should theoretically continue to outperform their counterparts over long periods.

I recently moved my small cap and emerging markets funds to my Roth for this reason, leaving bonds, developed markets*, and large cap in my pre-tax 401(k). I was comfortable making this move since my overall portfolio is diversified and I have plenty of large cap left in my Roth to help diversify and rebalance. This might be a reasonable option for you as well.

[*I do not keep ex-US in my taxable account because the foreign tax credit does not outweigh the costs of ex-US unqualified dividends at my marginal tax rate. You could consider putting emerging markets in your Roth and developed markets in your taxable brokerage instead of 401(k).]

I started out using Degiro, which is a discount broker that offers a once a month buy (or sell) of a list of ETFs. Over time I heard that it was reprimanded a few times by the market regulator. This made me somewhat uncomfortable, especially because our SPIC is EUR 20,000.

I switched to IBKR because of the low costs (not free) and because it has been around for ages together with being publicly listed (which comes with additional scrutiny).

I am using the web portal and don't really touch any of the other platforms that they offer. The UI itself is somewhat clunky and a bit unintuitive, but not really a hurdle. Commissions are fair (EUR 1.25 minimum) and while you have the opportunity to choose between tiered and fixed fees (PoorSwiss discussion on which is cheaper), for me the tiered fees are cheaper based on the amount I invest monthly.

As a European I am also limited in terms of what I can invest in, i.e., no US ETFs only UCITS.

Personally if I were an American, I would likely stick to my broker in the States. Better fee-wise and also the TER on US ETFs are generally lower (in EU: S&P: 0.07%, MSCI World: 0.20%, Emerging markets: 0.18%). Plus FATCA makes life more difficult for Americans in terms of banking and probably also for brokers (though someone may correct me on that).

Because you are located in Germany, one thing you may look into is the savings products in ETFs. AFAIK it is more of an automated savings plan into ETFs. This may be a cheaper way. r/Finanzen should be able to give you the specifics on that.

Hope this helps.

some of the finance nerds will get in arguments about MSCI indexes that Vanguard uses, vs. Dow Jones or in-house indexes that Fidelity uses.

but they're basically the same thing and long-term performance should be practically identical.

Long Term Investing

I am very young so I have a lot of time to invest. I believe it is important to distribute the investment so I decided to choose the MSCI ACWI index. However, I think I also want to bet on the technology sector in S&P 500. Do you think such a combination would be okay for long term investing?

MSCI is a damn steal at this price

Various stonks that have been steadily entering downturns this week I haven't seen much chat about:

% change since 1 week

STM -11%

SAN (Banco Santander) -10% notorious shitbank of the 2008s

ABBV -8.1% but also BMY -6% GILD -6.5%

UPS -8%

PBR-A (petro brazil) -10%

MBLY (mobileye) -15%

MRNA -8%

ILMN Illumnia -8.5%

MSCI -12%

I'm not a fan of 100% equities portfolios for anyone. I believe that bond exposure provides diversification benefits due to being imperfectly-correlated asset classes. Benjamin Graham championed the 75/25 rule, where you should never have less than 25% allocation to bonds. Bogle recommended a maximum of 80% equities (20% bonds) for people in the accumulation phase in his Little Book of Common Sense Investing. Most Target Date Funds (which are intended as a one-size-fits-all approach to investing) would have people your age at 10% bond allocation.

At 28, your entire investment timeframe has been during a US equity outperformance cycle over ex-US equities and bonds (link). If you go back to 2010, the previous decade would have different results (link).

I believe in CAPM investment approach. At the present time, US is about 60% of global market cap, while ex-US / International is 40%.

Personally, simplicity is a major part of my investment strategy, so where I can, I invest in methods that easily track global market cap. Where I can't do that, I prefer the 60/30/10 model of 3-Fund portfolio because it's very simple math. This has a 2:1 US to ex-US ratio on the equity side (60/30), with whatever allocation to bonds you want (10). Examples would include 60/30/10, 50/25/25, 40/20/40, etc. This is close enough to global market cap, where you'll get the diversification benefit, and it eliminates your allocation decision based on performance.

MSCI EAFE index isn't my ideal international index. With access to IRA and HSA tax-advantaged space, you can always view all accounts as one portfolio and use that to invest in a better fund (e.g., VTIAX, FTIHX, IXUS, etc.), while maintaining US equity (C/S in a 4-5:1 ratio to approximate US Total Market) and bonds (I'd opt for G-Fund personally) in your TSP.

Lol whoops. I was looking at MSCI from April 2022 and not 2023

thoughts on MSCI?

>is it statistically more likely to have a higher ending portfolio balance if I invest it all today regardless of market performance, or wait until the next down day?

https://investor.vanguard.com/investor-resources-education/news/lump-sum-investing-versus-cost-averaging-which-is-better

>Using MSCI World Index returns for 1976–2022, Finlay and Zorn calculated that LS outperformed CA 68% of the time across global markets measured after one year.

​

you are statistically more likely to outperform with lump sum investing than dollar cost averaging. not in every possible case, but 70% of the time feels like "time in the market" > "timing the market"

European, 33yrs old: 31% MSCI World 11% Apple 10% Google 9% Microsoft 8% ASML 6% NextEra 6% LVMH 5% Accenture 5% Pepsi 5% Blackrock 4% P&G

Recently sold: Stryker

Any portfolio that is 50%+ into broad ETFs is fine. I don't like every choice for example European Property Yield is way to high in my opinion. I would probably pick more companies for my single picks at least 10. Honestly I would probably just do 50% MSCI World, 20% Semi ETF and 10 companies each 3%. Simpler and in my opinion better. You can also make arguments about S&P 500 and other ETFs but that's choice and preference.

Assuming they know nothing about investing? Msci world index fund and leave it for 20+ years.

20% in IShares MSCI EAFE INTRNL

80% IShares S&P 500 Index Fund INSTL

You are young and going all in with equities is fine with the time horizon you are looking at. These are the lowest expense ratios you can get and provided some international exposure.

Current investment elections are 55% FXAIX, 20% BTC EXTND MKT IDX, 15% SP GLB EXUS IDX CL C, 10% FID FRDM INX Date Y

My target date fund has low fees at 0.06% (Class Y), which they just lowered from 0.07% (Class T).

Slowly moving out of higher expense funds. I will keep a couple fund positions I currently have but won't continue to put money into them, at least for now. For example, RNPGX, TRP Blue Chip Growth, BTC MSCI ACWI IMI, MIP II CL 4, BTC US Debt Index,

I wouldn't recommend that.

Target date funds work best when they are your only investment because they automatically adjust to become more conservative as you get closer to retirement. Once you start diluting the target date funds with other funds, you basically defeat the purpose.

If you believe the target date fund is too conservative, then build your own portfolio.

If you want a total world allocation at market cap, do something like this:

• 48% BLKRK EQUITY INDEX
• 12% BR MID CAP EQ IDX R
• 40% BR MSCI ACWI EX US R

See: https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Approximating_total_stock_market

That is an amazingly helpful article! Thank you!

Here are the options available through my 401(k):

Frst Egl GIbI

Invsc Dvipg Mrkts

Ishrs Msci Eate Intl Indx

Jns Hndrsn Glbl Eqty Incm

Mfs GIbI Eqty

Mfs Intl Growth (ER = 1.08) (Current Allocation = 15%)

Blkrk High Yld Bond (ER = .94) (Current Allocation = 15%)

Invsc Core Plus Bond

Nbra Bn Striac Incm

Alger Smcp Fes

Clmba Dvdnd Incm

Clmba Midcp Indx

Clrbrdge Lrgcap Grwth

Invsc Disc Midcp Grwth

Ishrs Russell 2000 Smcp Indx

Ishrs SP 500 Indx (ER = .35) (Current Allocation = 70%)

Mfs Midcp Valu

Undscvr Mngrs Bhvrl Value

Meb Faber posted this chart on his Twitter feed recently:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fsvt8ySX0AI1mLU?format=jpg&name=medium

~84-89, MCSI international outperformed MSCI US by 299% cumulatively.

~2000-2007, international beat US by 65% cumulatively.

iShares S&P 500 Index K - 0.03%

iShares MSCI EAFE International Index K - 0.04%

Vanguard Mid Cap Index Fund - Admiral - 0.05%

Vanguard Small Cap Index Adm - 0.05%

DFA Inflation-Protected Securities I - 0.11%

I'm a firm believer in allocating across all accounts, so you could cover all your bases by having some elements of your AA strictly in your Roth or a taxable account if you have one.

S&P 500 index is a good choice as a core fund for domestic stock. If you want to simulate a Total US stock market fund in your 401K you could add the VG small- and mid-cap index funds. Or you could add the VG extended market fund in your Roth IRA. This Boglehead Wiki article will help with the options and proportions.

If you want International exposure in your 401k, I would go for the IShares international index. I'm currently at a 70/30 ratio for domestic to international stocks. But anywhere from 80/20 to 60/40 is where most people will fall.

And if you want to add a bit of bonds, I would probably go with the DFA inflation protected Securities. The other bond funds have ridiculously high expense ratios.

Just my 2 cents...

Hi all,

I'm new to investing and I'm yet to make my first real investment. I'm hoping that you guys can give me some advice.

Despite never investing, I've been saving in cash ISAs for most of my life and currently have around £150k saved. I'm 30 years old and based in the UK. I have a background in economics but have never really delved into finance. As such, I have a limited understanding of the framework that I should be using to assess investment options.

I decided to experiment by kicking off my research with a conversation with chatGPT. I explained that I'm likely going to need to withdraw £100k within the next 2 years for a property purchase but the timing of this is uncertain, it may not even happen. I also explained that the remaining £50k can be invested longer-term (no foreseeable time limit).
I currently have an easy access cash ISA that pays 3.2% and any earnings are tax-free. I've also opened a 1-year fixed rate ISA that pays 4.25% but I'm yet to make a deposit. The withdrawal fee from the fixed-rate account is the equivalent of 60 days' interest on the amount withdrawn before maturity, which I may need to pay if I utilise this account and end up purchasing a property before it matures.

Based on this information, chatGPT recommended that I keep £100k of my funding in cash ISAs, for easy access in the event of a property purchase - with a split of £20k in my easy access ISA and £80k in my 1Y fixed ISA. For the remaining £50k, chatGPT recommended investing in ETFs. The latter recommendation is based on my low to medium risk appetite and my objective of maximising my return:risk ratio.

When asked which ETFs chatGPT would recommend, I was advised to invest £50k as follows:
- 40% in the Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (VXUS)
- 30% in the Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA)
- 20% in the iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG)
- 10% in the Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND)

I also plan on investing any future savings into the same portfolio.

Thought you guys might be interested in the advice that chatGPT is giving (with lots of sensible caveats, of course) and I'm definitely interested in hearing your opinions on this investment strategy.

ETF: (65.68%) MSCI World 44.39% MSCI EM 21.29% Stock: (34.32%) Microsoft 14.5% Vonovia 10.74% Northern Data AG 3.46% Unilever 2.7% Deutsche Post 2.41% Commerzbank 0.57%

I typed up the full list. Does this change anything for you in terms of recommendations?

iShares MSCI EAFE Indernational Index K DFA Real Estate Securities I DFA Inflation-Protected Securities I ClearBridge Large Cap Growth IS Empower Mid Cap Value Instl Empower T. Rowe Price Mid Cap Gr Inst Key Guaranteed Portfolio Fund Invesco Global R6 Invesco Oppenheimer Int'l Growth R6 Invesco Core Bond R6 Putnam Dynamic Asset Alloc Growth R6 Putnam Dynamic Asset Alloc Con R6 Putnam Large Cap Value R6 Principal High Yield R6 PIMCO Income Instl Putnam Small Cap Growth R6 Putnam Small Cap Value R6 TIAA-CREF Lifestyle Index 2010/2015/2020/2025/2030/2035/2040/2045/2050/2055/2060 Vanguard Real Estate Index Admiral Vanguard Mid Cap Index Fund - Admiral Vanguard Information Technology Idx Adm

Look, I've been long years in this business as a quant and professional asset manager. All i can say tlis that AI will not do much in stock market prediction. Most of the time, stock market (adjusted to long term growth) is moved by randomness. It could probably help average joe to cope with some behavioural biases and tell that based on statistics with, lets say 50 years data, at one time ornanother, it is better to hold more stocks in portfolio than usually.

For example, if msci world is down from peak more than 30%, change default 60/40 or 80/20 allocation to 80/20 or 90/10 etc. Pure and simple.

If it will generate signals based on some random technical analysis (which only works in the books) then its results also generate random outcomes. It's like predicting NBA game score based on some cloud formation two weeks ago. Sometimes it will tell the winner, sometimes even the score will be close. But it is just randomness.

If there were any robust, significant and sustainable advantage where AI could regularly predict next hour, next day or next week stock market outcome, it were already implemented somewhere. Look at hedge funds and banks. Those bastards regularly fail to predict if market will be up or down next year.

Why Google should burn money in some hardware like mobile phones production if their quantum computer can forsee the future? Just put cash in to stock market with leverage and bob is your uncle.

Problem is, short term market is mostly random and long term history has not enough data points to train AI correctly.

It will generate brilliant pictures with pope in puffy jackets and detect cancer from medical scans no problem. For everyday investments it will be just a resume of info you can find in the internet.

Ok, makes sense. After thinking about it 50% is a lot… I’ve had it like that for years lol.

It’s not Vanguard it’s T. Rowe price it’s composed of Russell 3000 Index, the MSCI All Country World ex-U.S. Index Net, the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index, and the Bloomberg U.S. 1-5 Year Treasury TIPS Index.

Your submission in /r/investing was automatically removed because your account has insufficient Karma. If you are new to Reddit - you can learn more at RedditHelp.com. If you have a beginner question, please ask your question in the daily discussion thread. Please read the rules and guidelines for r/investing.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Thanks for the advice! Here are the options available to me:

Frst Egl GIbI

Invsc Dvipg Mrkts

Ishrs Msci Eate Intl Indx (ER = .34)

Jns Hndrsn Glbl Eqty Incm

Mfs GIbI Eqty

Mfs Intl Growth

Blkrk High Yid Bond (ER = .94)

Invsc Core Plus Bond

Nbra Bn Striac Incm

Alger Smcp Fes

Clmba Dvdnd Incm

Clmba Midcp Indx

Clrbrdge Lrgcap Grwth

Invsc Disc Midcp Grwth

Ishrs Russell 2000 Smcp Indx

Ishrs SP 500 Indx (ER = .35)

Mfs Midcp Valu

Undscvr Mngrs Bhvrl Value

The 3 funds I chose and listed in my post have the lowest ERs in each of their respective categories - .35, .34, and .94, respectively.

Always look at valuations. Between 2003 and 2007, the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF ran up 380%. That's serious outperformance in a very short period of time. The problem is that the stocks became overvalued which led to underperformance over the next decade following the Great Recession. Emerging markets valuations are a lot more reasonable now and outperformance in the future is much more likely. These things go in cycles of optimism and pessimism.

2x MSCI USA

MSCI World stock market index

> The return on VWO has been consistently lower.

what are you talking about? VWO returned 29% in 2006, 37% in 2007 and 76% in 2009. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/VWO/performance?p=VWO

>in the past ~20 years VWO has sucked when compared to VOO.

from 1986 to 2016, emerging markets MSCI returned more than 2x MSCI world https://topforeignstocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Emerging-vs-Developed-Markets-Returns-since-1967.png

country by country, emerging markets can have spectacular performance. Brazil returned 79% in 2007 and 126% in 2009. https://topforeignstocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Emerging-Market-Returns-by-Country-Chart.png

It's pretty funny actually as US stocks outperform international over 50 years as well, https://www.longtermtrends.net/msci-usa-vs-the-world/

During the 80s and early 90s, international outperformed and I think that's where the adage came from. But since the 90s, the US has really taken off (my theory is there's not really any tech stocks internationally).

Msci emerging markets pe ratio is below 12. S&p is at 23 roughly. Time to get Chinese eyes

Well, the average retail investor is probably diversified through MSCI World or ACWI, so, yes, obviously they underperform the S&P 500, which has been the best performing single country index.

One remark - not all that important, but still - that I'd make is that, even though the index it tracks has more components than the one tracked by VWRA (9144 for MSCI ACWI IMI against 4147 for FTSE All-World), the fund itself has fewer holdings (1974 against 3.732) and, perhaps in part because of this, the tracking error is quite larger (over the last three years, 0.73% against 0.09%).

I don't think it's a matter of life or death - in the long run, I'd be genuinely surprised if one of these funds behaved very differently from the other - but still.

Personally, if I had to pick between these two funds I'd still prefer VWCE/VWRA, at least until the number of holdings of IMIE/IMID grows a bit more; but yeah, I don't think it's ultimately a big deal either way.

Those returns seem pretty similar to me considering that the S&P 500 has been performing at its best in recent years. Also, past performance does not guarantee future results.

You might like this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/mcrdwo/sp_500_vs_msci_world_index/

Thanks for this info. I did further research and S&P 500 has returned 11.66% annualized returns since 1978 while MSCI has returned 10.63% in the same time frame. Maybe I'm missing something?

https://curvo.eu/backtest/portfolio/msci-world--NoIgsgygwgkgBAdQPYCcA2ATEAaYoAyAqgIwDsAHMQKwAsxZAnDsQLptA#summary

https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/

Well we were comparing the S&P 500 to the total world funds, but whatever, let's take a look about your emerging markets theory.

SPDR S&P 500 ETF 10 year return 12%

VS

Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets Fund 10 year return 2%

iShares MSCI Emberging Markets 10 year return 1%

iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF 10 year return 2%

iShares JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF 10 year return 2%

SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF 10 year return 3%

Schwab Emerging Markets Equity fund 10 year return 2%

Schwab Fundamental Emerging Markets Large Company ETF 5 year return 0%

WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-State-Owned Enterprises Fund 5 year -1%

WisdomTree Emerging Markets High Dividend ETF 10 year return 1%

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF 5 year return 0%

Looks like you're full of shit.

> I have an individual account of like 100% VT.

Assuming you mean this is a taxable brokerage or CMA account, then you could in theory tax loss harvest this, but there isn't really a "gain" to be had here. If you sold with a $3,000 loss, you could write that off your taxes this year, spiffy! Except say in few years time you make back that $3k and need to sell for some reason. So you sell, and what do you pay taxes on? That $3k you just "made".

There could be tax arbitrage opportunities, assuming you know what your tax rate will be whenever you do sell again. Otherwise there is no win, except getting to take the tax today, knowing you will just end up paying it again down the road.

Some people think it's the bees knees, some people, like myself, think it's mostly busy work, to give someone something to do with their portfolio to make them feel like they are doing the right thing.

> Should I wait until I've held stock for a year so that it counts as long-term before selling?

This doesn't matter. You are selling at a loss, so no capital gains taxes apply.

> Can I get tax loss harvesting out of my 401k accounts?

No. They are a tax-advantaged account, the money in there doesn't have any tax consequences at all, until you decide to take money out of the account, and then it just depends on the circumstances at withdrawal(traditional is taxed, Roth is not).

> And what is my best strategy here to avoid wash sales, given that I am constantly purchasing VT?

Buy something similar to, but not substantially identical. SPGM is one such example.

Essentially in taxable you would sell all of your VT and buy SPGM and then only buy SPGM until your next TLH opportunity and then you would sell all of that and buy VT again.

see: Tax Loss Harvesting in the bogleheads wiki.

> I have an old 401(k) account with a mix of FSKAX/FTIHX, and a new 401(k) account with 100% VT.

Like /u/buffinita mentioned, you should consider combining them or doing a rollover, just to keep your accounts simplified.

Historically, GDP growth has had zero or slightly negative correlation to stock returns. See, for example, the studies linked in this whitepaper. One explanation of this is slippage - when a country experiences higher GDP growth, most of that growth tends to come from new companies entering the economy, and the profit earned by those companies doesn’t do anything to increase the earnings per share of the existing shareholders in that economy.

Lower growth could lead to lower stock returns, especially if the market underestimates how quickly growth slows. If the market has already priced this information, then returns might be right along expectations.

Good point! I just went back through and checked and sure enough... 2 years ago they switched from the MSCI EAFE index to the MSCI ACWI ex-US index. Seems like they haven't really changed their holdings much in the last 2 years as it still very closely resembles at EAFE fund.

We don't quite have enough information to tell you exactly what's going on, but there are a wide variety of MSCI ACWI indexes so perhaps it's only purporting to track an ACWI developed index. I also found a very similar fund online that looks like it switched from tracking an EAFE (Europe Asia Far East, Developed) index to an ACWI index; that may have happened in your case and is transitioning over time.

As to whether this is an issue or not - if you aren't interested in managing a separate fund or or a standalone emerging markets allocation, then the question becomes whether developed international market performance vs total international market performance is substantially different. I backtested two Vanguard funds - one is a developed international fund (VTMGX) and the other is all-world (VGTSX). The difference over the last 20 years is 0.01% in CAGR.

Although past results don't guarantee future performance, I don't think you should stress about trying to make this up.

Ditto!

And I wanna be clear on the nuance - I basically agree with everything you say. And I have a particular bee in my bonnet about dumb investment advice that relies on recency bias, so I can really relate to what you're saying.

I think my point is that it's almost a meta-rule that the World MSCI will trend up in the long run.

So you and I can both be right - there can be events that fuck all of humanity AND global equities will still rise.

To the best of my knowledge, sustained global de-growth has never been observed, either in the human economy or in nature.

​

Looking at the MSCI during COVID - it only took about 6 months to recover and ended positive for the year even in 2020. And despite the war in Ukraine, we're up about 30% since the start of 2020.

So despite a pandemic and a hot war with Russia, companies around the world still found ways to grow.

>None at all I believe.

Correct. The TSP I Fund tracks the MSCI EAFE index.

I think you're missing the crux of my argument though.

I'm not saying the world is in good shape, or that there aren't existential risks.

I'm saying there have always been existential risks and global disasters. Actually pretty damn regularly.

​

I think people make the faulty assumption that this is the first time things have looked grim, that all previous profits were made under global harmony.

​

The world is always pretty fucked up, the 20th century saw genocides, global conflict and nuclear war, and yet the world MSCI returned an average of over 10%pa since the 1900s.

​

The dark truth is that the global economy has always ended up with a net increase, no matter what dreadful stuff has been happening in various parts of the world.

Yep, this is straying into the philosophical, but the overall trend of life is always towards order and progress.

Humanity generally experiences a global disaster every decade, yet in aggregate we always build more and better.

And society =! the economy. For example, humanity can be fucked by war and disease, yet arms manufacturers and healthcare providers will be booming.

​

IMHO anyone concerned about the macro environment just needs to zoom out and look at the World MSCI and/or a history book.

If things are looking risky at the level you invest in, you need to abstract things up a level or two until you're at a scale where things will continue upwards even if risks occur.

Yep - this is a very old discussion in all investment forums (allocation/exposure to emerging markets).

While I'm by no means an expert, I've personally spent quite a lot of time reading & thinking about it. My conclusion: It's likely that sticking to an US-only S&P500 index fund can still be your best bet, even though we are aware of the recency bias thing. The large US-companies all operate globally anyway, so here you already have much "foreign exposure".

However my personal risk tolerance forces me to only invest more diversified (think Vangaurd VT/FTSE All World/MSCI World+Emerging Markets). This is because I fear, that many of the Twitter and Youtube Experts (of which many suggest the old S&P-strategy) still underestimate the transformational stuff that is currently happening: Remote global work allows us to work (and spend) anywhere we want. Just some weeks ago a company I work for (large US-company) laid of hundreds of remote US-colleagues and instantly rehired them in Mexico, Brazil and other lower cost-countries. I know: This US-company is part of the S&P - but still, all these emerging markets will profit in some ways from the high salaries that are now spent there locally.

Furthermore, I think that the concept of "peaceful" Western democracies is heavily challenged since the emergence of social media and disinformation - particularly in the US (which would favour the S&P-approach) but also in Europe.

Lastly, AI/Automation will also disrupt everything even further.

So my personal take would be: Damn, we are entering crazy crazy times, better make sure to diversify as much as possible, as I cant predict shit. Two book recommendations: "Principles for dealing with the changing world order" (Dalio) but also "The Sovereign Individual" (Davidson and Rees-Mogg).

I found out after my comment. My first child has iShares msci acwi ucits as his savings plan, my second will be born this summer, and I suppose they will have the SPDR msci acwi imi ucits etf in that case as the savings plan option (makes it easier to divide the money anyway, since it’s currently all in an account in my name).

If it’s available in ucits form for us European investors at the same TER, I would possibly start buying it instead of iShares msci acwi.

I felt lucky to have the brokeragelink option and automatically invest in FKSAX/FTIHX as is commonly recommended on this sub.

Now I'm looking back at the TDF option and getting my wires crossed.

Have any insight you could share as to how the fund's expense ratio could be less than the expense ratios of the funds it holds? Feels a bit too good to be true?

And even-so, I'm concerned by the relative lack of diversificatio:

• iShares Russell 1000 Large-Cap Index Fund obviously holds 1000 US companies
• iShares MSCI ACWI ex U.S. ETF holds 1,916 ex-US companies
• iShares Developed Real Estate Index Fund is a real estate index fund, which I'm wholly unfamiliar with and isn't broadly recommended on this sub

Compared to FSKAX (3,974 US) and FTIHX (5,079), it feels like I would be giving up significant diversification.

Here's my question - the expense ratio of this mutual fund is .045%, however the majority of the fund is invested in:

• Russell 1000 Index Fund F
• BlackRock MSCI ACWI ex-US IMI Index Fd E
• Developed Real Estate Index Fund E

All of which have significantly higher individual expense ratios. Does the all-up fund's expense ratio not take into account the expense ratios of the funds it holds?

worth mentioning:

Amundi Prime Global 0,05% TER - as MSCI world /FTSE developed world alternative

SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI UCITS ETF 0,17% TER - TER drop from 0,4% as MSCI ACWI and FTSE all World alternative

If you want VT equivalent in Europe, you buy Vanguard FTSE All-World or iShares MSCI ACWI ETF and thats it.

If you want S&P500 there are many S&P500 ETFs..

I just realized that when such change would happen China would be excluded from the MSCI Emerging Markets index and thus the funds tracking this index would have to sell their Chinese stocks... Which would then be bought by the MSCI World trackers... This probably makes such shift not so disruptive as I have formerly thought.

here's an example:

EEM -- MSCI Emerging Markets ETF

​

You can scan for ETFs by average daily trading volume:

https://etfdb.com/compare/market-cap/

When a stock gets included in a major index, there is indeed an uptick in buying interest because funds that track the index will buy that stock. Usually there are trading desks that forecast these inclusions and try to start building an inventory in the anticipation of increased buy orders so the jump in price isn't sudden, it gradually gets to its new value until the official rebalancing day.

I don't know enough about MSCI specifically to comment on what you're saying but it seems plausible.

Your submission in /r/investing was automatically removed because your account has insufficient Karma. If you are new to Reddit - you can learn more at RedditHelp.com. If you have a beginner question, please ask your question in the daily discussion thread. Please read the rules and guidelines for r/investing.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Countries by market cap %

MSCI All Country World Index including geographic allocations

You can use MSCI indexes.

| Index | Market Cap ($) | |:--------------|----------------:| | MSCI USA | 35.3T | | MSCI USA SC | 3.9T | | MSCI World | 53.4T | | MSCI World SC | 6.7T | | MSCI EM IMI | 7.5T | | MSCI ACWI IMI | 67.7T |

You just have to pick what index you want. For example, msci acwi uses a different regional breakdown than FTSE, different mkt cap cutoffs for small vs large etc.

If you just want the total, covered, listed global equity world and don't care about the index methodology then there's a few ways you might go about it. I think finding the holdings of the msci acwi imi index along with each holdings settlement currency would get you on the right track.

I don't know many good free resources off the top of my head but try the msci website, morningstar maybe, various world etf prospectuses. There's gotta be something out there that has country weights for global equity I would think

I don’t know what platform you’re using (IB, degiro, Swiss quote?) but you could always look towards the iShares msci ACWI or vanguard ftse all world etf and just go 100% in that. Simple.

VT+bond fund? I have a slightly different setup (European) as VT would generally be ok, but the costs are higher where I live, so breaking it down into separate ETFs saved me about .15% in TER. Other than that, going full ftse all world or msci acwi seems fine to me if you’re a young person.

January 1, 2002 - December 31, 2021

Russell 3000 Index: 9.7%

MSCI EM IMI Index (net div): 9.7%

https://squirewealthadvisors.com/resources/what-did-we-learn-about-investing-in-2022

You can verify independently.

I'm thinking of investing a larger sum of my savings into a mix of ETFs, any opinions would be welcome:

20% iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

25% iShares MSCI World Health Care Sector UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

40% Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF Distributing

15% Xetra-Gold

Accumulating world market ETFs domiciled in Ireland such as VWRP or IWDA. The advice is not specifically for Mexicans but rather an option that would work for anyone not living in the US.

https://www.vanguard.co.uk/professional/product/etf/equity/9679/ftse-all-world-ucits-etf-usd-accumulating

https://www.ishares.com/uk/individual/en/products/251882/ishares-msci-world-ucits-etf-acc-fund

Nothing else out there targets factors anywhere near as systematically in a method aligned with the academic research. If you look at vanguards value funds for example, they're much less valuey than DFA/Avantis' funds, and the SCV fund is much larger and also less valuey. The typical indexes' like MSCI and Russel are pretty bad when it comes to establishing a value index, they'll usually just make a fund thats the lower half of the market simply sorted by book to price and no other metrics, and they also re-balance yearly which means companies that don't belong in the index anymore can stick around much longer than they should, and companies that do belong there need to wait to the next year to be considered. Avantis and DFA have much much better systematic setups. There really is no comparison, unless you are looking for something much more niche like alpha architects or AQR, which I believe have much higher expense ratios than Avantis.

You can look into EWW - iShares MSCI Mexico ETF.

Excerpt from the linked content^1 by Martin Arnold, with further reading:^2,3

>Funds that invest in illiquid property assets and allow investors to pull out their money at short notice are exposed to a “liquidity mismatch” that could force them into “fire sales”, ECB officials warned in a macroprudential bulletin on Monday.

>“Policies should be developed to address the structural vulnerabilities” of such open-ended property funds, the officials said, “given the risks they pose to commercial real estate markets and wider financial stability”.

>Tighter rules would allow the funds to “manage spikes in liquidity demands and to internalise the cost of redemptions which can arise during market stress”, they said, adding that without sufficient liquidity management tools, property funds could “have to resort to asset fire sales, thus amplifying market stress”.

>The report comes after the MSCI Europe Real Estate index of large and mid-cap property companies tumbled 14 per cent in March to close to its lowest level since early 2009.

>The ECB cited how Blackstone Real Estate Income Trust had recently limited investor redemptions after a surge in requests to withdraw money out of its $125bn fund.

>It also gave the example of how UK property funds had imposed “gates” to limit outflows triggered by the sell-off in gilt markets that followed last year’s “mini” Budget.

>The ECB said the use of debt in property funds would magnify losses for investors during a downturn and increase contagion risks of any crisis to the banking system.

>The Financial Stability Board, which brings together top policymakers, said in December there had been “no measurable reduction in the degree of structural liquidity mismatch” since it issued recommendations for open-ended funds in 2017.

^1 Martin Arnold in Frankfurt, Financial Times/Nikkei, 3 Apr. 2023, https://www.ft.com/content/dc0216b3-3812-439a-ae8b-aeef5c1b8f55

^2 European Central Bank (2023) “The growing role of investment funds in euro area real estate markets: risks and policy considerations”, April. https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/financial-stability/macroprudential-bulletin/html/ecb.mpbu202304_1~4a07638376.en.html

^3 Financial Stability Board (2022), “Assessment of the Effectiveness of the FSB’s 2017 Recommendations on Liquidity Mismatch in Open-Ended Funds”, December. https://www.fsb.org/2022/12/assessment-of-the-effectiveness-of-the-fsbs-2017-recommendations-on-liquidity-mismatch-in-open-ended-funds/

One option is the iShares Healthcare Innovation UCITS ETF (DRDR), which invests in companies that are driving innovation in the healthcare industry. Another option is the SPDR MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF (WHEA), which tracks the performance of healthcare companies in developed countries.

Other healthcare-focused ETFs that are available in the EU market include the Invesco MSCI World Health Care UCITS ETF (HLTH) and the Lyxor Healthcare UCITS ETF (LYH).

23yo. 8k FHSA, 25k TFSA (tax-free savings accounts in Canada). Planned portfolio. Saving to buy a home in the next 10 years or so (we can withdraw whenever we want to). 25 companies total, which is roughly the number recommended by a couple books I've read. I'll never hold more than 30 or less than 20. Roughly reflects sector allocation of the S&P500 with a few tweaks (don't know enough about energy/materials, so I moved that weight to other sectors). Would appreciate some constructive criticism. Totally okay with downvotes, I just hope they come with an explanation!

FHSA:

100% VFV

TFSA:

15% aapl

12% msft

12% tgt, L (loblaws), cost

10% tmo dhr

6% v, ma, axp

6% bx, bn

5% goog

5% unh

5% de

4% spgi, msci

4% stag, vici

4% cp

3% td

3% dov

2% eqb

2% wm

2% dks

Here are a couple of Turkey based ETFs...

iShares MSCI Turkey ETF (TUR)

NASDAQ: TUR · IEX Real-Time Price · USD

32.62 -0.59 (-1.78%)

At close: Mar 31, 2023, 4:00 PM

iShares MSCI Turkey ETF (NASDAQ: TUR)

Created in 2008, the iShares MSCI Turkey ETF attempts to match the performance of the MSCI Turkey Investable Market Index. The 50-stock portfolio achieves this by typically investing 99.5% of its assets in securities that make up the benchmark index as of October 2020. This includes small-, mid- and large-capitalization Turkish stocks that trade on the Istanbul Stock Exchange.

*

ALPS Emerging Sector Dividend Dogs ETF (NYSEARCA: EDOG)

Launched in 2014, the ALPS Emerging Sector Dividend Dogs ETF aims to track the performance of the Network Emerging Sector Dividend Dogs Index. The ETF holds mostly large-cap emerging market stocks that pay a high dividend yield. Investors gain exposure to Turkish stocks through the fund’s 7.69% allocation to the country as of October 2020.

Seems like it went up on an USD basis too. See the 1Y chart here: https://www.blackrock.com/se/intermediaries/produkter/251879/ishares-msci-turkey-ucits-etf#/

Which... I don't really understand at all. USD/TRY went up about 33% in the same time frame.

Hi! People here love the 3-fund portfolio and rightfully so because it’s a great choice!

However, Etoro is a terrible choice of platform. First of all, it trades in USD and I assume you earn all your money in GBP.

Second, Etoro doesn’t offer an ISA (individual savings account). A stocks and shares ISA allows you to save money and invest (up to 20k per year) completely tax-free.

Third, Etoro doesn’t sell ETFs in the UK. Because of EU regulations, people in the UK cannot purchase American ETFs. Etoro UK still allows you to buy VOO for example but that is a CFD not an ETF and it is much riskier.

Last but not least, Etoro charges for spreads and for keeping positions open overnight so realistically, you would be losing a lot of money in backdoor fees as well.

My recommendation, whether you go for a 3-fund portfolio or not, is to open a stocks and shares ISA for the tax advantages. HL, Fidelity, AJBell, Vanguard, Halifax, etc are all mainstream great choices with reasonable fees and they allow you to buy real ETFs, mutual funds, and stocks. Vanguard however only allows you to buy Vanguard funds and ETFs.

In terms of allocations, if you want to go super lazy in your portfolio, you could put all your money in Vanguard Global All Cap Index Fund or Vanguard FTSE All World ETF or HSBC MSCI World ETF, and think about bond allocations when you’re older.

>But what's the doom scenario here? What's the absolute worst that can happen to your S&P500 investment?

The SP500 will always focus on the US. So if in the Next 50 years some other country will be something like the US in terms of stocks you're pretty much fcked.

You can mitigate that issue by simply taking any ETF on the MSCI World. It contains lots of the US anyways because it's weighted by market cap. But if companies from outside the US get bigger they'll get included into the MSCI World but stay out of the SP500

From the prospectus:

"In the next 3 months, Morgan Stanley expects to receive or intends to seek compensation for investment banking services from Morgan Stanley expects to receive or intends to seek compensation for investment banking services from Alphabet Inc., American Express Company, Blackstone Inc., Cheniere Energy Inc, Costco Wholesale Corp, Eaton Corporation PLC, Eli Lilly & Co., Estee Lauder Companies Inc, Exxon Mobil Corporation, Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc, Intuitive Surgical Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co, Linde PLC, Lululemon Athletica
Inc., MasterCard Inc, Microsoft, MSCI Inc., NextEra Energy Inc, Nike Inc., Northrop Grumman Corp., Novo Nordisk A/S, Old Dominion Freight Line Inc, Prologis, Inc., T-Mobile US, Inc., Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., UnitedHealth Group Inc, Visa Inc., and Yum! Brands, Inc."

To save yall a click: GOOGL, FWONK, TMUS, HLT, LULU, NKE, YUM, COST, EL, LNG, XOM, AXP, BX, JPM, MA, MSCI, V, LLY, ISRG, TMO, UNH, ETN, NOC, ODFL, RTX, MSFT, MSI, LIN, PLD, NEE

From a quick Google search, it looks like Spartan 500 is a low-fee (.01% ER) S&P500 fund, and the Spartan International fund is a low-fee fund that tracks the MSCI EAFE index. You could do better with international offerings, but you could also do worse (the TSP I-Fund tracks the same index).

As for maintaining allocation across accounts, there are a variety of ways, outlined in the wiki article: https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Asset_allocation_in_multiple_accounts

If you want a more comprehensive 3-Fund portfolio, there are ways to approximate Total US and Total International funds. Some people feel that S&P500 + EAFE/Developed is sufficient, but personally, I'd prefer to go for total, if possible. There are specific options to approximate international using an EAFE fund, but I would say that if you add an emerging markets fund, it should be close enough (the additional funds that would be used to approximate total international may not be worth the hassle of rebalancing and the fees associated); some might say "close enough for government work".

Another option would be to utilize Target Date Funds if they are low-fee (.15% ER or lower); these can be tailored to your desired equity/bond allocation and reduce the amount of legwork you need to do in terms of managing your portfolio. I love AIO funds like TDFs for their simplicity, and even though I can manage things on my own, using them can limit behavioral risks and actually come out ahead of slice/dice "DIY" portfolios.

Is this the comprehensive list of offerings? Typically, 401Ks will have Target Date Funds, which could be a great option if they're low-fee.

Russell 3000 is the "Total US market" for the Russell index. This fund would be comparable to VTI/VTSAX, FSKAX, SWTSX/SCHB, ITOT, etc.

MSCI ACWI ex-US fund is a pretty good replacement for FTIHX, VXUS/VTIAX, and IXUS. The MSCI ACWI ex-US IMI index is better, but the one you have is decent. With the crap ex-US offerings some employers have, this is still a pretty decent option.

The bond offerings listed here aren't great. Typically, there's some US Total / Aggregate Bond Index fund. It seems odd that's not listed.

I am only aware of Vanguard that offers a fund that tracks the FTSE Global All Cap Index. The UCITS is here - https://www.vanguardinvestor.co.uk/investments/vanguard-ftse-global-all-cap-index-fund-gbp-acc/overview

Most global equity funds that I've come across track the MSCI World Index - https://www.msci.com/World That index has about 1500 constituents - https://www.msci.com/documents/10199/178e6643-6ae6-47b9-82be-e1fc565ededb

The usual investment managers such as Invesco, Blackrock, SSgA all offer UCITS that track the MSCI World Index.

Do you have any reason to think that the FTSE Global All Cap is a better index? If you compare the 2 indices over the past 10 years, they track pretty similarly with the MSCI World Index out-performing over time.

iShares MSCI Global Metals & Mining Producers ETF (PICK) 

Go to holdings tab https://www.ishares.com/uk/individual/en/products/251882/ishares-msci-world-ucits-etf-acc-fund?switchLocale=y&siteEntryPassthrough=true

Just Google the ETF and find a holdings tab

MSCI World my friend. That’s all you need to retire comfortably. But if you wanna play trader, suit yourself.

Hey! I'm also from Germany.

I would suggest a portfolio of one world-diversified stock index ETF, and EU government bonds, the allocation depending on your risk tolerance.

iShares MSCI World or Vanguard FTSE Developed World are great picks. Pick one and forget about anything else stock-related.

For bonds, either choose a bond ETF or invest directly in bonds via your broker. German government bonds have good returns right now with non-existing currency risk for you. I would advise against buying bonds noted in a different currency (such as USD), as that exposes you to a lot of risk.

Also, if you know you'll need a sum of money in the next X years (e.g. for a real estate purchase), buy a bond with a fitting maturity. As has been seen recently, bond ETFs can be volatile due to long-term bond prices fluctuating with interest rates.

I would advise against investing in gold, silver, or other such commodities. They don't "work for you" like stocks do, but still have quite a lot of volatility. It's probably better to invest in bonds if you want some cash to be invested with minimal risk.

Professional portfolio managers will put you 50/50 in VT and VOO, and when the SP500 does better than MSCI ACWI, they’ll tell you how brilliant they are because their overweight to the S&P outperformed ACWI. When the opposite happens, they’ll tell you how brilliant they are because your allocation to ACWI helped you outperform the S&P.

MSCI WORLD.

https://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/ spdr sector funds based off of s&p500 sectors and only contain equities that are in the s&p500

https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/list/etfs?assetclass=sector_specialty

Vanguard sector funds use the MSCI sector indexes.

For example XLK holds 76 positions

VGT holds 367.

I am a bank, you want to invest in the MSCI World but your account can only hold national stocks.

You can buy your national index and come to me to exchange the performance of your national index for the performance of the MSCI World (the performance swap).

Say the MSCI World does +10% and your national index stay flat, I must give you 10. Say I go bankrupt, you would be in a bad position. To prevent that I will find a middle man (called a clearer) and give him a portion of the nominal (the initial margin) for example 20 so that he can give you 10 should you unwind the swap. The deal is collaterized (you will do the same thing of course).

ok, the main problem here is there's a lot of overlap. you're buying the same stocks in different packages, and you're mostly dominated by US larger company stocks. you could trim that down to just a few options to keep it easier.

VOO is an Exchange Traded Fund (ETF), so that means its a collection of stocks. VOO is about 500 US stocks, and it's mostly larger companies. so it already has Apple and T Rowe Price and Microsoft.

FXAIX is the 'mutual fund' equivalent of VOO, so no reason to have both. look here at the 'composition' and you can see the top stocks in this fund. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/315911750

FZROX is a US 'total market' fund, so it will have most major US stocks. VOO has about 80% overlap with this option, so you're just buying the same stocks again.

FZILX is a an international 'total market' mutual fund, so it will hold most major larger company international stocks. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/31635T609?type=o-NavBar stocks.

FSPTX is a mostly US technology-companies fund, so it has a lot of the same stocks as in the others. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/316390202

VT is a 'total world' ETF that holds most major stocks globally, so this is about 60% US and 40% internatioanl.

FBGRX is a 'blue chip growth' fund, so that means it's larger, stable US companies that have profits growing faster than average for their type. but it's mostly the same stocks as the others: Apple, Microsoft, Google, Tesla, etc. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/316389303?type=o-NavBar

ESGU is environmentally friendly companies but the same problem: apple amazon tesla etc: https://www.ishares.com/us/products/286007/ishares-esg-aware-msci-usa-etf

FXNAX is a bond fund, so this is not stocks. different opinions on if you should have bonds at your age but at least this one is different. I'd keep it to maybe 10-20% of the portfolio at your age. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/summary/316146356

you could do VT alone, or VT + ~10% the bond fund.

or you could do 10% bond fund + 50-60% FZROX and the rest in FZILX, which would be similar to VT.

you're solid now, but I'd keep the bonds and boost the international to 30-40%.

based on current valuations, US stocks are likely to perform worse than international over the next few years. TL;DR the higher the 'price to earnings ratio' for the overall market, the worse your results are likely to be over the next ~10 years. US stocks have been on top for a long time but it won't last forever. https://www.financialsymmetry.com/wp-content/uploads/MSCI.png

reddit skews very young and has this idea that you only needs bonds when you're old. in reality, bonds will beat stocks about 1 year out of every 3-4 historically or on average, and adding bonds can actually boost returns by smoothing out volatility and tending to go up when stocks go down (2022 was unusual, the first time since 1969 that bonds & stocks both went negative). bonds beat the S&P 500 by 10% a year from 2000-2002, and that type of thing is probably going to happen again, eventually. https://www.thebalancemoney.com/stocks-vs-bonds-the-long-term-performance-data-416861

MSCI and FTSE are benchmark providers. Both provide a huge variety of benchmarks that funds and ETFs can use.

For passive world/global trackers you have 2 decisions

• do I want developed markets only or do I want developed and emerging markets exposure combined?

• do I only want large companies or do I also want small companies?

In investing theory you want maximum diversification across all assets so you choose the include everything option. That would be the FTSE Global Total Cap or the MSCI ACWI IMI.

This link will explain in more detail far better than me.

https://www.bankeronwheels.com/best-international-etfs/

ETFs are preferable in a taxable brokerage because they minimize capital gains taxes while mutual funds do not.

ETFs are also fine in a tax-sheltered retirement account. but if you want to nitpick ETFs you will always pay the 'bid-ask spread' for ETFs (the gap between seller & buyer prices), and even if the spread is a penny you're potentially paying a higher fee than with a mutual fund.

>Is there any reason why Vanguard is so favored when Fidelity offers better expense ratio options?

mainly it's just tradition, Vanguard was the low-cost leader for decades. The hardcore Bogleheads have been tying themselves in knots the last few years since Fidelity and Schwab both have similar or even cheaper fees, trying to still justify Vanguard over the cheaper alternatives. there have been discussions about the merits of various indexes, like saying Vangaurd's MSCI indexes are somehow superior to Dow Jones or S&P Global indexes. it's kind of silly, like arguing over interpretations of scripture.

That only tracks MSCI developed world index which does not include emerging markets. You could pair it with EMIM which is an emerging markets fund. Or, you could use VWCE which includes developed and emerging markets in one ETF with no need to manage the weightings.

No TDF options? if not, the Vanguard Institutional Index is a great core equity fund. I had the same one in my 401k and it made up the bulk of my 401k. I'd recommend adding some international. maybe 10-20% of the Blackrock MSCI (double check that is indeed an international index. I didn't look it up but looks so)

bonds are optional at your age but I wouldn't see any harm in a 5-10% allocation increasing that as you get into your 30s-40s and beyond. The Vanguard instl total BND is great.

Is this smart?

Hello, I am 27 years old with a stable income and about 20.000€ in savings in the bank, no student loan and no other big payments besides rent and food. I habe been investing for 2 years now in ETFs, mostly the MSCI World. I put around 50.000€ in to this date, adding a couple hundred € every month. Unfortunately I have only seen the market drop. I don’t want to touch the money for the next 20 years. Should I stop putting in more money at the moment or should I keep paying in routinely?

German here as well and in no way to be considered any financial advice!

1. ING is as good as it gets when it comes to the Bank conditions around here. I also take the "loss" compared to interest offered at Trade Republic or elsewhere since I am not sure if the money might be accessable that fast since that is setup as a trust account. (Please also not that at Barclays your emergency fund might not be insured through the Germany regulators; ING on the opposite has that insurance for up to 100k deposits per account). Regarding the proposed ETFs, there is really no right or wrong way. I was looking at the HSBC and SPDR alternatives for the MSCI World but came to the conclusion that even though the iShares Core MSCI World costs 0,2% p.a. the negative tracking difference accounts for a better performance overall. That might change or might not change in future decades.
2. The ETF provider does not make a difference as long as there is enough liquidity in the fund and the provider is solid enough. Otherwise you would be forced to sell the fund in the liquidation process causing taxes or maybe not having access to your assets for a short period of time.
3. Ireland and accumulating ETFs are the choice to go since those bring the best tax advantages with them (from a German perspective).
4. Also keep in mind that most stocks included in the Momentum Factor ETF are already included in your other stocks and you are only allocating more portfolio weight towards those stocks which outperformed the market during previous decades thus bringing me back to the point, that past is no safe indicator for the future.
5. From a diversification point of view you could consider just buying the iShares MSCI ACWI IMI (that includes nearly every publicly listed stock, but costs 0,4 % p.a.)
6. Gold and REITS historically underperformed compared to a broad stock marked index fund. With enough time on your side there is no need for a cash flow or safety net for less volatility.
7. Too poor for that, therefore no tips on that front (yet) besides, that interests are at an all time high and prices for housing do not seem to have fallen the equivalent (at least in the cities here).
8. I think EM bonds are not considered a good option for the exposure in that region since the upside is way smaller compared to the stocks and the risk for a defaulting counter party is not far off compared to the risks of the stock ETFs.

Last comment: When it comes to the easiest way to manage your portfolio in Germany you can go for the Vanguard FTSE All World (Acc) or the iShares MSCI ACWI. Both cheap ETFs which account for most of the worlds publicly listed stocks. This is how most people on r/Finanzen (the German sub for saving money by just eating oats with tap water to invest as much as possible) manage their portfolio. Boring but effective and diversified enough for 99% of people. If you add a small position in an MSCI World Small Cap ETF you pretty much cash every stock there is.

>iShares MSCI ACWI IMI (that includes nearly every publicly listed stock (...)

But keep in mind that for 0,2 % p.a. more costs you can also get that in one single ETF.

MSCI China had 0 nominal EPS growth for the past 30 years, MSCI emerging market 0 nominal EPS growth for the past 20 years. What should be my time horizon, 100 years?

> are any of these other investments worth a percentage?

Yes, you want about 40% in the Fidelity International Index. That won’t fully diversify you since you’ll still be missing smaller US companies (not part of the S&P 500) and emerging markets (since Fidelity’s international index tracks the MSCI EAFE, which is developed ex-US only). However, it will be much better diversified than S&P alone, which is a good plan only when you don’t have any other reasonably priced options in the 401k.

Along those lines, if there’s a low cost target date fund in your options you might consider picking a far date one instead. It will have everything you need, including what you’re currently missing and the addition of a small amount of bonds won’t noticeably change your expected return.

While I have a few international companies in my portfolio (LVMH, ASML, Novo Nordisk), I think that this opinion is ignoring globalization. While globalization will likely not be the same as in the past 30 years, pretty much any major large cap company has international revenue.

As an example, Colgate-Palmolive (I don't hold it) is an american company that:

• Already has 45% of its net sales from emerging markets. 2021 Annual report

• Almost certainly will continue to grow its international revenue. I think something like 3/4 of population don't brush their teeth, but they will in time (most of them), and they'll probably use Colgate toothpastes (among other brands). There is still major population growth ahead in these markets.

There are still literally billions of people who will in a couple decades become consumers of major consumer brands, while many current consumer markets will continue transitioning to premium products. Those billions of people will in time use Colgate, Palmolive, Listerine, ob, Neutrogena, Nespresso, Pampers, Gillette, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Lay's, Oreo, and countless other brands, on a daily basis. I mean, not all of these brands are American, but you get the point. These are pretty much global companies with majority of revenue from international markets and that majority will contiue to grow.

Another example, a substantial majority of transactions happen in cash, which will continue to decrease in the future. Who will benefit from this? Probably many international companies, but most definitely Visa and Mastercard.

I have 30% of my portfolio in global ETFs (22% MSCI World, 4% MSCI World Small Cap, 4% MSCI EM), so it's not like I'm betting on US, but the rest of it is mostly US stocks, most of which will benefit from continuing growth in international markets regardless of US performance. Investing in US stocks is not a bet on US economy.