A.I.M. Users Bulletin Board

[ls7550]

I assume the blue line is the XIV+ portfolio and the red line is a general index?

Spot on Tom.

Downside is that as of 2nd Jan 2018 access to US funds are being stamped on by EU regulations. Seems that increasingly US funds are also now adding prohibitions on marketing domestic (US) funds to EEA member state residents. That might become a non-issue after Brexit (yep we voted for it in 2016 and still haven't broken free of the shackles nor apparently will we for a number of years yet).

Almost as though banks played their heads they win, tails taxpayers bail them out gameplay leaving states printing in attempts to bail themselves out (export their problems onto others), but with the 'others' all doing similar (resulting in savers/investors ultimately to foot the bill). As part of that 'great repatriations' are now the focal point (lock in those savers/investors). I just hope we don't ultimately return to a era of where currency controls are reinstated, where you can barely take enough cash out of the country for a decent foreign vacation.

That said, the US looks well placed. Trump's in effect injecting $3.5T via tax reforms. Somewhat tempted by a low footprint 75/25 BRK-B/physical gold blend going forward (no dividend footprints, individual stock rather than funds etc.) excepting the WB late life and single stock concentration risk factors. If you consider stock and gold to be polar opposites (one does well during periods of positive net real yields, the other tends to do well during periods of negative net real yields, such that a 50/50 barbell is akin to how a STT/LTT barbell equates to a 10 year bullet), then a 75/25 stock/gold equates to a 50/50 stock/bond type asset allocation (but endures more volatility along the way). Gold historically has been much more respected over here in the UK, such as no 1930's style prohibition.

Hi jaiml

re-balanced once or twice a year?

Once/year. Zvi Bodie 10% in 10x stocks (via LEAPS) when the remainder 90% earns some, yields less than a 10% loss in any one year provided only rebalanced once/year. The primary risk is that of multiple sequential losses. Sometimes rebalancing might have yielded better returns, in other cases made things worse. Washes. So best IMO to just slow-AIM as TF calls it (infrequent rebalancing/larger moves). As I age and my mind gets slower, so also has my tendency to rebalance less frequently :) Hunting around for value once/year and all leisure time between sits well with being a few years away from being 60 ('retired' for over a decade now ... how time flies when a year is just 1.75% of a lifetime compared to when you were 10 and a year was 10% of a lifetime).