I see it similarly. Of course, the weighting of the All World ETF would also change with market changes, but in my opinion you are better positioned with a world portfolio of various regional ETFs than with a single one, also because you can then practise timing much better. Because timing is everything. :) Of course, the one ETF solution is convenient and for some it is the best solution.
•
11
•
4Wk
@Iwanowitsch Time in the market beats timing the market.
••
@Iwanowitsch I wouldn't justify it with iming either, that's exactly what I want to avoid. Always investing the same amount in everything and timing becomes irrelevant, I'm not interested in returns but in risk neutrality
••
@Metis yeah, that's what they all preach and I preach, timing is everything. :p
••
4Wk
@Iwanowitsch You can no more see into the future for years and decades than anyone else before you and consistently outperform the global market for 30 years ;)
You are neither the first nor will you be the last to believe this and fail.
You are neither the first nor will you be the last to believe this and fail.
•
11
•@leveragegrinding The timing is not my reason, but the positive side effect. Hence the introduction with "also"
•
11
•@Metis nana, don't be so pessimistic ;)
It's possible, it just takes MUCH more time
It's possible, it just takes MUCH more time
•
22
•@Metis I have not claimed to be able to do this or to have it under control. But I do believe that timing makes the ultimate difference and that ongoing savings plans are nonsense or the least of all evils.
••
4Wk
@leveragegrinding The statistics show that not even professionals who do the stock market full-time can do this for decades. :D In what way should private investors be able to do that?
•
11
•@Metis Show me the statistics
The only statistics available show that funds never outperform. However, this is largely due to the cost structure.
As an example, just think how simple it has been in recent years; if you bought US tech (IcH mAg IPhoNeS, KauFe AppLe shares), you outperformed.
It's not a question of whether it's down to skill afterwards, it's just a question of having outperformed afterwards :)
The only statistics available show that funds never outperform. However, this is largely due to the cost structure.
As an example, just think how simple it has been in recent years; if you bought US tech (IcH mAg IPhoNeS, KauFe AppLe shares), you outperformed.
It's not a question of whether it's down to skill afterwards, it's just a question of having outperformed afterwards :)
•
11
•4Wk
@leveragegrinding Well. Who puts together the funds? That's right, people who do the stock market full-time. Do you think they would still be working in such companies if they were permanently so successful on the stock market? And it's always easy to say afterwards what was easy. But nobody knows what will be successful in the future.
••