3Settimana·

Ecco il mio nuovo Pac da 8k al mese

Oggi verranno immessi a mercato i primi ordini del mio nuovo piano di accumulo automatico. Ogni mese, il primo e il quindicesimo giorno, il mio broker effettuerà ordini per 4.000 euro, ribilanciando automaticamente le quote in portafoglio di questi strumenti secondo i seguenti pesi:

$IWDA (-0,11%) 50% | $XDEV (+0,43%) 37,5% | $IEMA (-1,21%) 12,5%

Perché ho scelto questi ETF?

◾ In questo momento il mio portafoglio è composto per il 98% da strumenti a distribuzione. Questo PAC, interamente ad accumulazione, mira a correggere questa deriva, almeno parzialmente.

◾Per riallineare il portafoglio al mercato con un leggero tilt value: credo che alcuni segmenti del mercato siano sopravvalutati e avranno rendimenti inferiori nei prossimi anni. Allo stesso tempo, però, credo nell'investimento passivo e non voglio discostarmi troppo dal mercato con tilt eccessivi. Oggi questo tilt nel mio portafoglio esiste già - pensate che Nvidia pesa solo lo 0,5% della mia esposizione totale.

Come finanzio il mio piano da 8.000 euro al mese?

Non è un'eredità, non una vincita, non vendo corsi né faccio scam. Nel prossimo post vi spiegherò nel dettaglio le mie idee e le mie perplessità a riguardo.

#etfs
#etfs #iwda

#pac
#fire
#fireitalia
#portafoglio
#portfolio
#portafoglio

6 Commenti

Uwe@SchlaubiSchlumpf

3Settimana

Congrats. Brave decision to go Value. I think value has underperformed in the last years in the msci world. This isn’t necessarily bad as factors like small or value can always underperform for many years before they come back. That’s the risk in risk factors.
How do you think about adding other factors?

••

50onFire@50onFire

3Settimana

@SchlaubiSchlumpf

Hi, it's really difficult for me to explain all my thoughts in a few concise words. I'll try to do so while avoiding being misunderstood. My package includes 50% SWDA; XDEV represents 37.5% in a dollar-cost averaging plan with a monthly allocation of 2% of the portfolio. Overall, the value tilt will reach about 10% within a year—I wouldn't say it's accurate to claim I'm betting on it.
As a passive investor, I follow the market. The small bias comes from reasoning opposite to yours: the growth sector has outperformed and reached significant multiples.
To answer your question, in general I don't like to deviate from the market. I always think that every time I buy outside the market average, there's someone who has made the same reasoning as me but in reverse, and therefore sells. One wins and the other loses—it's a zero-sum game. If I buy the whole market, I neither win nor lose; I grow with the market.
I hope I've conveyed my thoughts clearly... I'll discuss this further in future posts.
I'd like to continue having your perspective, and I'd appreciate it if you'd follow me on Facebook as well, where I find it easier to exchange opinions: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61579956810263
Good luck, friend.

••

Uwe@SchlaubiSchlumpf

3Settimana

@50onFire don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t use the word „bet“ either. Value is simply a factor that is used on the Fama & French Five Factor Model (and others) it’s used to model market return that could not be explained by market risk alone. So tilting towards value is simply taking a rewarded risk. The value premium is backed by decades of data. But it performed not so good in the developed large markets for the last 10-15 years. It was a growth market. Tat is a totally usual thing. Premiums like small or value tend to underperform for a while before they overperform again. Seems to be the risk you have to take in order to outperform in the very long run.

••

50onFire@50onFire

3Settimana

@SchlaubiSchlumpf As you will have understood, English is not my strong suit and I actually hadn't fully grasped your comment. Now I have perfectly understood what you were telling me. I know this point but I'm not well-informed enough to define a clear idea. I'll take this opportunity to study the topic a bit. Give me a few days and I'll come back to share my ideas

•

50onFire@50onFire

3Settimana

@SchlaubiSchlumpf I’ve been reflecting on the topic and I still have some doubts. I get the impression that these studies identified factors that outperformed the market in the past because, having initially been undervalued, they eventually went through a mean reversion process. It seems to me that different factors tend to outperform and underperform the market cyclically, sometimes with cycles longer than a human lifetime. For now, I still believe that, for a retail investor, the most sensible choice is to follow the market cap. However, your perspective has given me new insights that I’d like to explore further.

••

Uwe@SchlaubiSchlumpf

3Settimana

@50onFire I think you are mostly right. Maybe not human lifespan but often more time then a human can wait. Waiting two decades for value to perform again can be to much when you are 57. I think the theory behind it is, that you can’t arbitrage risk factors because there is a risk involved. (The risk of value being that the low valuation of the company was right and it‘s going under). The theory is that If you have more then one factor, your propability of a long drought phase sinks.

••