Maybe write down which actual risks you have in mind, what the pro/cons are and ideally what would make you revisit your decision.
6 Likes
I donât think thereâs a consensus at all (is this period good, is it bad? is FWRA better than VT? keep US$ assets? go long gold? go bonds? MMFs? cash in the mattress? buy beans and guns?) other than the idea that making decisions under stress is a bad idea 
A @nabalzbhf says, it may help to spell it out to facilitate you approaching what risk means to you in a structured way.
3 Likes
I believe you need to think about this rationally and decide what is actually your concern.
- Are you worried about US broker
- Are you worried about US ETF domicile
- Are you worried about American fund house
- Are you worried about underlying US investments
For example -:
IBKR + VT + CHILL = all of the above come into play
Swiss broker + SPDR ACWI + Chill = #1 & #2 are eliminated but #3 â 4 still in play.
Swiss broker + WEBG + CHILL = #1, #2 and #3 are eliminated but #4 still in play
There is literally no way to eliminate #4 if you want to invest in market weighted world ETF.
1 Like
For me, the main risk is Trump himself. However, I am not knowledgeable enough to fully understand what actions he might take that could impact my VT investments. I am not worried about a third world war, as in that scenario, it wouldnât matter whether you are invested in VT or FWRA. I am also not concerned about a 30-50% market decline because I am in it for the long term. Additionally, I am not worried about a US debt default. My main concern is the possibility of not being able to sell or access my VT holdings in IBKR for some reason. Weâve been told multiple times to âVT and chill,â but I am not sure if that advice still holds true.
On the other hand, without being a member of this community, I would probably be less worried. However, reading comments from some members has made me realize how little I know beyond the âVT and chillâ strategy, and that I donât have a plan B. I donât even know how to start creating a plan B. When I compare the holdings of VT and FWRA, they look very similar. I understand the difference in TER and its impact, and I know that one is domiciled in the US and the other in Ireland. However, in the event of something happening in the US, both funds would still have over 60% of their investments at risk in the US.
- Using a Swiss broker with their high fees donât appeal to me at all, in fact I hate itâŠ
- I donât fully understand this risk vs an ETF domicile in Ireland for example if the underlying assets are essentially the same
- No, I am not
- No, I am not
1 Like
One could substitute the US part with synthetics. Though they come with their own set of uncertainties.
The easiest would be a swap based ETF. 2x leveraged could be even better, as your loss is capped at -100%.
S&P 500 futures or options at EUREX could also work. As retail you are quite protected from owing money in the event of a sudden drop to zero.
1 Like
But⊠isnât the idea of VT and Chill that you simply invest in VT regardless of what the politicians do, regardless of whether a crisis is coming or not, regardless of what happens? 
6 Likes
You might add âtemporarilyâ to your main issue.
If you are worried that you might temporarily not be able to access your VT funds, you can just spread your wealth to other funds like I do. I wonât sell my VT, I just invest somewhere else just in case.
May I add to this thread - even not checked if already discussed - that there is a Plan B which some of us are already following: Bitcoin. (And I understand that itâs probably not the answer to the original question here⊠so just ignore).
1 Like
I donât really envisage a scenario where this happens, but as you say, if you are in it for the long term, does it matter if you canât access for 4 years until the Trump term is over?
Weâre talking about people whose response when told âyou canâtâ is âhold my beerâ.
Wouldnât that be a sight to see.
If youâre not worried about a significant stock decline and youâre not worried about a US debt default, my understanding is you are worried about spoilation: the US appropriating your assets and you loosing them as a result.
If you are not worried about that either, my understanding is that you should not worry as I donât see a scenario detrimental to VT and chill that wouldnât fall into those categories (or WW III).
If you are indeed worried about spoilation by the US, they have it most easy regarding assets they control. That is primarily US stocks, US ETFs and secondarily assets held at a US broker.
With VT held at IBKR, you would loose it all.
With FWRA held at IBKR, you could loose the US part of it, or all, depending on how and where IBKR handles UCITS funds.
With FWRA held at a broker with low ties with the US, you would risk the US part of the assets of the fund.
The less US assets you hold, the more you are shielded against that specific scenario. Of course, the other side of the coin is that if US stocks outperform, you would participate less in that, or not at all, depending on how much US stocks you own.
Personally, I consider moving from VT to an UCITS ETF a pretty low cost measure (the TER and WHT difference doesnât matter THAT much). Anything more would require you inderstanding what you are trying to achieve with it.
If you hold significant assets, splitting the cake between VT and an UCITS fund, and potentially two brokers, might be worth the hassle.
8 Likes
This thread did make me wonder: if you ARE worried about a large drop in, say, the s&p 500 and want to sell. What would you put the proceeds into?
Well, itâs about aims and goals of each of us here, itâs not we lack where to put the proceeds, itâs why.
Objectively it seems to me that right now CHF and physical (not comedy) gold in Swiss banks to be the safest options. Sure neither are productive assets, gold is speculative but it tends to go up in times of volatility, like it has. Actually Iâm hovering my finger over buying gold for a while now, every time pulling back because a) itâs non-productive, b) itâs market timing, c) it had a huge runup (but maybe irrelevant?).
You canât deny many around the world as well as here are publicly and private very worried right now, even the biggest bulls(hitters), itâs a different tune to the âWeâre at historically high PEsâ.
1 Like
Is BTC really the perfectly shielded option here?
I think lots could happen to BTC if a super-powerful government wants to (going up or down).
Taking over the network forcefully (by getting 51% of mining power) seems unrealistic without people noticing it (buying up huge mining resources). But there are other options, mainly regulatory.
Much less risky than stocks, but it is not free from US influence, even though in the current sentiment, their (de-)regulations would likely have a positive influence on BTC.
Yes, I am mainly worried about spoliation by the US. It would be huge! Therefore, I think I will continue with VT. If it happens, as we say in Spain, âmal de muchos, consuelo de tontosâ (roughly translates to âthe misery of many is the comfort of foolsâ)
3 Likes
Well, even ignoring all of those, would you be willing to put the proceeds of selling stocks entirely into gold? If not, maybe you would put, say, 10% into gold. Then you get back to my capacity question of where could you put the remaining proceeds into. I guess if S&P 500 really tanks, a lot of other things are likely to tank too. Maybe in the end you go to cash? Then you have to eat the cost of inflation.
Honestly, if Iâm only starting to be worried enough to take action now, I wouldnât sell at all, burry my worries and keep my investments as is. Getting worried when the crowd worries isnât a winning strategy (be wary that that can mean riding the drop all the way to the bottom - be psychologically and financially ready for that).
If I were worried earlier and made my asset allocation reflect that, I would keep that now.
My personal choice would be a Developed ex US fund for stocks, a swiss bonds fund for half of my defensive assets and gold for the other half. Unfortunately, I donât have any assets to invest right now so the question is moot for me anyway.
6 Likes
The reality is that all the common wisdom so far has been about market timing, fundamentals and long term performance of equity investing where doing nothing is the best thing in times of fear.
However the current US administration has changed the paradigm and lot of people are wondering if US is now not the solution but the problem for the world. As they go after almost every country , normal rules of investing donât apply. From one day to another they can make anything legal or illegal, anything fair or unfair.
This aspect has nothing to do with market and investing fundamentals. But it is about arbitrary rules that come all of the sudden under pretext of America first. This is why itâs so difficult to deal with.
I understand your worry about VT. Itâs a US fund house, domiciled in US and if held at broker in US like IBKR, it is most dangerous situation to be in.
Personally my strategy is to diversify everything -: broker, domicile, fund house. But this has been the plan since last year
2 Likes
No. This is not possible anymore. There is the famous video of Andreas Antonopoulos from 2015 (or earlier)⊠must watch, funny but true.
And regulatory wise, they tried (everybody tried even China) and nothing. At moment, the biggest threat comes from the EU, but somehow I can feel their growing irrelevance here.
2 Likes