Paywall…
Use archive.is 
I see no paywall here … . I see no direct alternative source discussing exactly the same sentiment so you may want to try archive.is, but e.g. another article about the law is Legislative update: Ways and Means Chairman reintroduces bill to impose additional tax if foreign jurisdiction adopts discriminatory or extraterritorial tax
1 Like
What does it change for VT? Anyone can confirm that they are no ADR on their Holdings?
Anyway seems that oversimplification of “VT and chill” is over maybe should I switch to VTI + EXUS + EM IE Fund
I miss the Corona times, you just had to check that website with the numbers going up and up and that’s it. Now you see so many lies here and there and no clear path for anything at all.
I can’t wear a mask to hope that the dollar won’t go down anymore.
I think I might going to sell some USD cash I have lying around. The FX won’t go back. Maybe if @Cortana buys sells some usd?
4 Likes
Better buy assets denominated in USD, that’d be more productive (that’s what I’m doing, doesn’t mean it’s right).
Either convert to CHF and take the hit or atleast invest them in US MMF or US bonds to not lose further value
I wouldn’t say that oversimplification is over. I think it’s still there
But the way world stock market has evolved, it has made VT very exposed to one country. When world ETF is exposed 65% to one country, it makes you wonder if we can really call it a world ETF.
So yeah if proportion of US in VT is not for your taste / comfort (i am of same opinion), then you might need to split the ETFs to balance the exposure
I did buy some BOXX a while ago with a chunk on a test account. I did check BND and was still too jumpy. MMF is still an unknown thing to me. I did read some posts here and there but it doesn’t look that safe. I might have to buy more boxes maybe.
BND is indeed more jumpy, if it’s a short term thing I’d buy BIL (BOXX is more tax efficient, apparently, but I don’t claim to understand it so I stayed away), in fact I was close to buy BIL but then decided to buy ZGLD as I don’t want more US/USD exposure than I already have.
BND has a very long duration. You need to hold it for a very long time to lock in the yield.
Indeed! Thanks for correcting me.
I think the concept behind “VT and chill” is that you own the world’s market. If money moves out of US stocks and towards other stocks, you still capture the move and aren’t worse off. You do loose if money moves out of publicly traded stocks and into other asset classes, though.
Part of the idea behind long term investing in stocks is that over the longer run, money that moves out of publicly traded stocks should regain confidence in them and get back in (another, maybe more convincing part, is that stocks represent ownership of productive companies whose value should go up in time as they produce more things/services).
The reasoning is different if you believe some markets represent other risks that can’t be accurately compensated for (like your assets being seized), in which case, “VT and chill” is probably not the right approach indeed. For full disclosure, I’d be in Dev ex-US myself, right now (though I don’t have investable money so am instead a lucky bast*rd sitting on the sidelines).
1 Like
Money cannot move out of stocks. Because for every seller there is a buyer.
Assets get re-priced though
I think what you mean is that #of stocks don’t change but their value can change
So if the total value change, this means some money is moved out to other assets. Isn’t it?
2 Likes
Not exactly. Money cannot move from the stock market. For every buyer there is a seller.
Money can move from a fund, sure. But not from the market.
Stocks get repriced when there is a mismatch between demand and supply.
Okay so let’s say
I hold a stock for which I paid 100 CHF. So my 100 CHF is the market. You bought from me the same stock at 80 CHF because I got desperate and had to sell.
So now you have the same stock but you had to pay 80 CHF to participate in the market. You still have 20 CHF left. This 20 CHF stays in cash
So we moved from 100 CHF in market to 80 CHF in market. Isn’t it?
The money was not moved from the market. Because there is no money in the market. When you bought the stock for 100, someone got 100 from you. Those 100 CHF have not left the bank. You exchanged one asset for another.
When you sold that stock for 80 to me, you repriced that stock and hence the value of the market. But there is no outflow from the market. I put 80 into it, and you got 80 from it.
Stockmarket is not a fund.
This very simple concept appears not so easy to explain.
1 Like
Okay I get it. Nothing is moving in or out.
It’s just how much the pot is worth. And the worth is changing based on supply demand or earnings that companies generate
3 Likes
Exactly. It’s a common misconception, reiterated by financial media.
I can get how factually correct that framing is.
I’m not sure it makes a big practical difference, though. What matters to me are the assets I have and the ability I have to trade them for other assets I might want which, for stocks, happens on the stock market.
Let’s say I can sell my assets for 100 CHF today and those 100 CHF buy me X amount of other desirable goods, and now we’re tomorrow, and I can sell my assets for 80 CHF that buy me X-Y amount of other desirable goods. If I am not intrinsicly interested by my stock assets for their own sake but for what they allow me to achieve at different points in time, if my prospects at time T is that they’ll allow me to achieve more at time T+Z, then I might be interested to hold them for a period of time. If my prospects are that whatever future time T+N might be, they’ll allow me to achieve less than I could now, then I may not be so interested in keeping them.
There are scenarii that would just take away my ability to trade my assets for more ability to purchase other things. They can be permanent (confiscation of assets or loss of ability to trade them) or temporary (temporary freeze). There are other scenarii that would lead to me potentially being able to trade my assets for a lesser ability to purchase other things in a shorter timeframe but could allow me a better ability to do so in an arbitrarily longer timeframe.
I would handle these sets of scenarii differently. In one, “VT and chill” would give me peace of mind and I wouldn’t mind the gyriations of the world’s dynamics no matter how dire their framing (because bigger drawdowns in the value of stocks as an aggregate tend to happen with dire gyriations of the world’s dynamics and, on a worldly diversified scale, they’ve tended to still work out well in the end for the investors who held their stock assets long enough). In the other, I might have more peace of mind holding a different portfolio. What scenarii we consider plausible for the future and what allocation gives us the most peace of mind varies from person to person.