ma0 - you are asking impossible question. No one knows what it will be tomorrow. If you have VT in your portfolio - then you also agree to carry a risk that having such asset may impact your overall financial health.
Murphy’s Law mate.
You may not be prepared for it, but I tell you this - it’s fully prepared for you.
Kind of like people saying - ‘I am not really interested in politics’ - which immediately makes politics interested in them, because they are easy target.
If you own WEBG, 64% is exposed to US and if US decides to freeze US assets then 64% would be in scope
If you own VT, 64% is exposed to US companies but 100% is exposed to freezing of US assets because VT is US domicile fund (i.e US asset)
From the FT: “Investors and analysts pointed to the misfiring of popular trades that aim to exploit differences in price between Treasuries and associated futures contracts, known as the “basis trade”, or between Treasuries and interest rate swaps. As hedge funds cut back on risk and exit those trades, they have been selling Treasuries, piling pressure on markets.”
The basis trade is usually leveraged between 50x to 100x times. Basis trade also unwound in march 2020.
It would be different for different domiciles
If you assume US market is illiquid, then its not just stocks, also ETFs. So everything will be illiquid - GOOG, BRK, VT, VOO etc
Now let’s say you own non US ETF like VWRL. In this case, the issue VWRL will have is that they cannot buy-sell underlying stocks in US. This means they cannot redeem or create new units. In this case, VWRL can only be traded in secondary market at the price which market participants decide to assign to it.
Market value of VWRL = weighted Market value of Foreign stocks + discounted value for US stocks (discount may range from 0% to 100%)
Yep, that’s what I thought too, thanks!
So at least 1 good reason to move to non-US domiciled fund in this scenario (again, disregarding tax implications).
Has anybody considered switching from VT to VWRL/WEBG for this reason?
It still doesn’t answer your question of exposure to USD. Only to exposure to US law.
Which, could be argued, is an inevitable and necessary risk that one must bear when investing in a total market fund, which by definition includes the US.
If you assume US market is illiquid, then its not just stocks, also ETFs. So everything will be illiquid - GOOG, BRK, VT, VOO etc
That would be a big plus for UCITS vs US funds, no?
Not for this reason , but because of US estate tax jurisdiction, I decided to move away from US ETFs (VT, VTI, VXUS) to UCITS ETFs (WEBG, SPDR ACWI, WRDUSY+XMME etc)
From being primarily 100% in US ETFs, now I have majority of my assets in UCITS range
I am fully aware I would lose about 0.1% due to WHT on underlying US dividends. But it’s alright.
I never knew this new drama will unfold but kind of happy that I have reduced my exposure over time. Maybe it doesn’t mean anything but who knows
You’re talking about the exodus to Mars scenario?
Sorry, couldn’t resist, I’ll show myself out.
(I’m afraid, Prosecco is the only thing we’ve got in stock in our fridge)
Actually, some of us are already halfway there.
Its just that your and my perception of time, and definition of now - are different 
For me now was approximately 6 months ago.
Indeed. But I’m sensing that there is no good answer, apart from a hedged fund, which is still too expensive.
So, if:
(a) - the assumptions behind an AA which includes total world funds like VT or VWRL remains valid; *
(b) - exposure to USD in total world funds cannot be reduced, except for very expensive hedged funds;
(c) - US becomes a risk country from a foreign investor’s perspective, which was not the case before;
are true, it seems to me there are - today and likely in the coming months - more advantages from purchasing UCITS than US funds.
What am I missing?
*It could as well be argued that the current situation might justify shifting an entire AA away from US stocks, but I guess it’s a different argument.
You can do it yourself - with almost none-existing fees for FX. You can hedge. I know you know how to do it.
Edit: But if you don’t - ask the question.
I wouldn’t say advantageous. I would say maybe a bit more safer (UCITS) against asset freezes.
It all boils down to one key question when selecting VT vs WEBG
What’s more important ? Peace of mind or 0.1% of your annual performance per year.
He is doing clever thing - he conditions a market to his whim.
He spokes…
Market awaits…
What the hell is this green thing in my chart? 
I
just
can’t.
I missed my TQQQ buying opportunity!
Trump said today people should keep cool and keep buying stocks and then came the 90 days pause
This is such a drama
I feel this move is designed to do two things
Now the 10% would sound like good deal to most countries (versus the made up higher tariffs) and they might not retaliate and US gets 10% universal tariff. US will see this as a win because it’s still a loss for other countries
Singled out China to ensure other countries don’t support China.
Wait until next week, you’ll be happy you did