Not sure if it helps. It’s mostly about thought process and not a detailed analysis of each fund per say
1 Like
I more or less converged on a simple rule of thumb: the more taxable income (dividends and coupons), the more advantaged it is to move this asset/segment to 3a. I think that the “avoidance” of income tax is the main effect of 3a advantage.
2 Likes
Fair enough, that’s likely close enough, just not as satisfying when setting it up once. 
I’m only looking at stocks, where a 1 – 1.5% difference in dividends would make some 0.3% - 0.5% difference at 30% tax.
However, if you assume un-reclaimable withholding taxes in the taxable account, those could result in another 0.3% - 0.5% difference and change the picture.
Then maybe up to 0.15% relative difference in fees for some markets, not that big. Haven’t looked whether the prominent VB providers do any shenanigans with FX fees, so I ignore that part.
On top, one could add assumptions on future dividends, capital gains and taxation.
Well, to close the loop, another, very related rule of thumb could be “anything but US”. 
When looking at Stocks, I agree EM, Europe, CH are better placed inside the 3a vs US stocks