Maybe it would help if some people would just stop policing around other people on what opinions and investment ideas/approaches they may have, when they have to open another topic and when not, what investment approaches are legitimate or not and when they don’t agree that buying VT in DCA mode is the best approach then they are in this wrong forum and kindly gtfo.
Barely anyone who studied macro finance, economics, or whatever topic and is working professionally in wealth management or is researching investment topics in a University context is investing purely in VT in DCA mode. Maybe think why that is. And I don’t think that everyone here knows it better than those people. Not saying it’s a bad approach but I don’t get why here some people are so militantly intolerant.
I find the question quite legitimate and I guess it makes absolutely sense to apply tactical adjustments on your portfolio, be in 3a or otherwise, depending on economic cycles / macroeconomic circumstances etc.
DCA’ing VT surely is a good strategy especially for people who absolutely don’t care about investing at all, but many people here spend hours on this forum what begs the question what for if DCA’ing VT is the only thing that interests you.
They’re merely trying to help you staying the course, or at least that’s what they believe. There’s that.
Cos if investing was seen as too simplistic (which in reality it is), all those folks would be out of a job!
But yes a few geniuses will succeed in beating the markets constantly and they will generally make a good living off working for persons whose financials require more than dca’ing in VT.
The thing is you are not either of them. Keep it simple!
Many people stuff themselves with information for no reason other than fighting boredomness/emptiness, addiction to newsfeeds, internet and socials as well as FOMO. Especially nowadays where everyone is so desperately afraid of missing the train that will lead them to their fantasized dream life of getting rich fast, retiring early and traveling the world.
That’s a question worth it’s own thread, if you open it (or revive an existing one if there is one), I’ll be glad to participate. Common wisdom is to use age in bonds for a retirement glidepath but there are many alternatives to that common wisdom, including a more agressive path, liability matching ladders, bond tents, having different asset classes into the mix, lifecycle investing and probably other aspects I’m not thinking of right now.
For me, I’m willing to have a 100% conservative assets allocation (including more than just bonds) at the time of my death, but wouldn’t fret still having some agressive assets if I die earlier. Leaning on the conservative side, Edit: scratch this: [I’m using 125-age in bonds to establish my allocation.] Replace with either “age-25 in conservative assets” or “125-age in agressive assets”. Thanks Burningstone!
Continuing to make regular, steady investments regardless of market conditions has proven to be a good strategy from a historical perspective. One problem I’ve noticed with investment solutions being quickly accessible via app, etc. is that it’s easy to get “addicted” to tracking your investments non-stop as if it were a game of sorts. It kind of reminds me of what my mum used to say about our habit of peeking in the fridge non-stop for treats: “Opening the fridge door doesn’t make goodies appear.”
The alternative is to close investment positions and go with savings accounts or medium-term notes. Historically, just holding Swiss francs has often resulted in decent real returns over other currencies, particularly in times of crisis. That’s true even if you keep CHF banknotes under your mattress. If you are somewhat risk-averse, this is not a bad option.
To provide a good answer you would need to share more of your insights.
Why was it a no-brainer last year but not anymore? And why would it be different to holding index funds or shares elsewhere?
How will you determine that it touches the bottom?
Same as before, max amount paid in annually, invested in max equity. Every few years I will decide whether to repay mortgage with it, taking into account the funds development and interest rates. In that case, I will switch to cash until withdrawal but continue to make my annual payment. But the timeline is years, even decades, not months.
My reply to people asking me how would I judge “when the market touches bottom?”
No one can time the market, but I think it makes sense to switch back to Equity 100 strategy only when US inflation number gets significantly improved and the Fed stops to increase interest rate in the immediate future.
@dbu unless you are an admin OR you can show me the forum rule saying that we have to post under an existing thread/theme even I don’t find anything with my keywords search, I can’t promise you that. I generally search exisitng thread before posting but for my new threads I just didn’t find any existing relevant thread. I am open for discussion on this point.