Page 2 of 2

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Wed Jun 03, 2015 7:25 pm
by Desert
MachineGhost wrote: Yeah, especially since he's using 2011 data rather than 2014.  But the PP is definitely an active stance to specifically protect against all economic climates as possible.  What's wrong with that?

I think one of the main benefits that gets overlooked in having a truly global financial portfolio is you never need to rebalance.  Ever.
Yeah, I agree that the PP is somewhat active.  It contains some passive elements in its means of investing in the 4 asset classes.  And the rebalancing bands might be described as somewhat passive, or at least rules-based.  But yeah, the portfolio construction itself is definitely active. 

We should start an all world fund that just buys everything.  As you said, other than the original purchases, we wouldn't have to do anything.  Just sit back and count those ER dollars flowing in. 

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2015 6:29 am
by bedraggled
Anybody tested an all-world portfolio= and how does it work?

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2015 9:00 am
by MachineGhost
Desert wrote: We should start an all world fund that just buys everything.  As you said, other than the original purchases, we wouldn't have to do anything.  Just sit back and count those ER dollars flowing in.
Cullen has since updated (Jan this year) and simplified the global financial asset portfolio:

[align=center]Image[/align]

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2015 10:08 am
by sophie
That's the problem with the Boglehead portfolios.  How often do they get "adjusted" in response to the latest thinking about what an optimal portfolio should be?  Which probably involves a healthy dose of market timing, which could also be described as selling low and buying high.

I'm purposely trying to blind myself to the flood of recommended portfolios, to keep myself from tinkering with simple 3 fund lazy portfolio I set up in my 403b.  I wish Vanguard had an autorebalance feature the way TIAA CREF does, so I wouldn't have to do any monitoring other than to log in occasionally to get messages and record the balance for my asset spreadsheet.

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2015 11:18 am
by MachineGhost
sophie wrote: That's the problem with the Boglehead portfolios.  How often do they get "adjusted" in response to the latest thinking about what an optimal portfolio should be?  Which probably involves a healthy dose of market timing, which could also be described as selling low and buying high.

I'm purposely trying to blind myself to the flood of recommended portfolios, to keep myself from tinkering with simple 3 fund lazy portfolio I set up in my 403b.  I wish Vanguard had an autorebalance feature the way TIAA CREF does, so I wouldn't have to do any monitoring other than to log in occasionally to get messages and record the balance for my asset spreadsheet.
FWIW, Vanguard came out with a global financial asset portfolio that was virtually the same as what Cullen did, so I think we can safely say either one is a true passive global financial portfolio that never needs changing or rebalancing.  So we add cash and real assets in the PP and this is our active approach vs the passive reference.  I'm tempted to invest in the global financial portfolio just to be a masochist (I don't believe in market-cap weighting).

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2015 12:51 pm
by Desert
MachineGhost wrote:
Desert wrote: We should start an all world fund that just buys everything.  As you said, other than the original purchases, we wouldn't have to do anything.  Just sit back and count those ER dollars flowing in.
Cullen has since updated (Jan this year) and simplified the global financial asset portfolio:

[align=center]Image[/align]
That's a pretty simple allocation.  I agree with you regarding cap-weighted investing though; I don't like it.  One could do a LOT worse, of course, and most investors probably do fall short of the returns this allocation would deliver.  But I hate buying the same large growth stocks, MBS, high yield, etc. that everyone else is chasing.  Historically, value has outperformed growth quite consistently. 

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 3:45 pm
by HB Reader
Does anyone recall any postings showing the annual results of a pairing of PRPFX with EDV or TLT (say 90/10 or 85/15)?

I thought I had seen one or two, but can't seem to find them.

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 4:29 pm
by mathjak107
bndx does not have enough ooomph when called upon to fly fighter cover for a portfolio. it can't really do the heavy lifting  long term treasury's can.

about the best thing you can say for it is it isn't stock. it may not take away a whole lot in a downturn but it can't add much either.

while bnd was up a bit in 2008 many other total bond funds were down as they acted more like stocks then bonds.

Re: Is It Time For PRPFX To Shine?

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 9:22 pm
by MediumTex
HB Reader wrote: Does anyone recall any postings showing the annual results of a pairing of PRPFX with EDV or TLT (say 90/10 or 85/15)?

I thought I had seen one or two, but can't seem to find them.
I believe it was close to the end of the massive PP thread over on the BH forum.