EMEQ

ProjectStrange3331

I manage my sons IRA and have him in the following. I prefer vgt over nasdaq based on personal preference. VTI 49.9% VGT 26.2% VXUS 17.6% DRAM 4.0% EMEQ 2.4%

user4443337

I’ve read that value tends to beat out growth. I have a 40 year timeline so I’m going value. 35.7% NTSD, 20.3% GDE, 10% each AVUV/AVDV, then small amounts of AVEM, EMEQ, SPMO, FMTM, FLCA (NTSD excludes Canada exposure), WTLS, SGRT - and now the 6 MAG stocks. I totally overcomplicated it and made it a mess but my cores are still the majority, I’m just trying to find a small amount of alpha. Spent a ton of time researching ETFs. And lifecycle investing suggests to use some leverage when young, which I’m using a modest amount.

user4443337

I have 10% AVUV, AVDV, and 10% split in AVEM/EMEQ. Then just NTSD for SPY + EFA. GDE for SPY + gold futures, gold as a diversifier but return stacking it. Then some momentum/active funds, 5% split SPMO/FMTM 3.2% split SGRT/WTLS then I just did 3.3% market cap weighted split between Mag 6 excluding tesla. Still sticking to my cores but trying to add a small slice of alpha and experiment a bit.

itriedtoplaynice

EMEQ

GMVexst

I'm single with no kids, so I am aggressive because I have nothing to lose besides early retirement. My retirement account is 50% VOO 25% SMH 15% DRAM (new addition) 5% WGMI 5% EMEQ. My Roth is all individual equities that a I trade with being tax exempt. And my regular brokerage is all individual equities I hold long term.

DaddyTheFatherCR

Outside of the usual VXUS, I like IDVO, EMEQ, AVIV, AVNM.

EarAppropriate7361

I’m in the minority that I don’t trust market cap weighted index funds. I do 50% active management 50% passive factor-weighted funds. A lot of the studies about active vs passive seem flawed to me. As you say, a lot of active funds are trying to be more defensive than the market, have rules for sector weighting, don’t allow mag 7 over concentration. Personally I think active funds work better with lower AUM for higher flexibility and higher concentration into a small number of holdings to put more weight in their highest conviction picks. But I choose multiple funds with managers that have different investment styles like GRNY, PVAL, CGDV, EMEQ, STRN, and AIS so there’s still diversification despite the concentration. I feel that the expense ratio is the cost I pay to have somebody else choose my stocks rather than picking them myself, rather than an extra expense I’m losing by not investing in an index.  But does the table tilt toward active managers the more people invest in index funds? Yes, but it would require a lot more people to do that. When markets are efficient indexes do well and active struggles. But there could be a breaking point where too much index investing could potentially create opportunities for active investors, but we’re very far away from that being the case.