MSCI

zork2001

Here is a list of popular ETFs, you can compare the risks vs reward and expense ratio compared to VOO. Personally in my retirement accounts I like VOO for it low expense Ratio over a long period of time. It has a good balance of growth and dividends. For my brokerage account I am a fan of FTEC, I believe in tech and the growth can be a lot faster with the intention of selling one day and moving my money into something else. Shame, FTEC went down to $140 a share and now it is back up to $171, that's a 22% increase in a month. |**ETF**|**Full Name**|**Focus**|**Risk**|**Dividend Yield**|**10-Year Return vs. VOO**|**Net Expense Ratio**| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| || || |**VOO**|Vanguard S&P 500 ETF|S&P 500 (large-cap)|Moderate|\~1.3%|Baseline|0.03%| || || |**SCHD**|Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF|Dividend value stocks|Lower|\~3.5–4%|Slightly lower|0.06%| || || |**QQQ**|Invesco QQQ Trust|Tech-heavy growth|Higher|\~0.5%|Higher|0.20%| || || |**FTEC**|Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF|Pure tech sector|High|\~0.5%|Higher|0.08%| || || |**VTI**|Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF|Total U.S. market|Moderate|\~1.4%|Very similar|0.03%| || || |**VT**|Vanguard Total World Stock ETF|Global (U.S. + Intl.)|Moderate|\~2.0%|Lower historically|0.07%|

zork2001

Here is a list of popular ETFs, you can compare the risks vs reward and expense ratio compared to VOO. Personally in my retirement accounts I like VOO for it low expense Ratio over a long period of time. It has a good balance of growth and dividends. For my brokerage account I am a fan of FTEC, I believe in tech and the growth can be a lot faster with the intention of selling one day and moving my money into something else. Shame FTEC went down to $140 a share and now it is back up to $171, that's a 22% increase in a month. |**ETF**|**Full Name**|**Focus**|**Risk**|**Dividend Yield**|**10-Year Return vs. VOO**|**Net Expense Ratio**| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| || || |**VOO**|Vanguard S&P 500 ETF|S&P 500 (large-cap)|Moderate|\~1.3%|Baseline|0.03%| || || |**SCHD**|Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF|Dividend value stocks|Lower|\~3.5–4%|Slightly lower|0.06%| || || |**QQQ**|Invesco QQQ Trust|Tech-heavy growth|Higher|\~0.5%|Higher|0.20%| || || |**FTEC**|Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF|Pure tech sector|High|\~0.5%|Higher|0.08%| || || |**VTI**|Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF|Total U.S. market|Moderate|\~1.4%|Very similar|0.03%| || || |**VT**|Vanguard Total World Stock ETF|Global (U.S. + Intl.)|Moderate|\~2.0%|Lower historically|0.07%|

zork2001

Here is a list of popular ETFs, you can compare the risks vs reward and expense ratio compared to VOO. Personally in my retirement accounts I like VOO for it low expense Ratio over a long period of time. It has a good balance of growth and dividends. For my brokerage account I am a fan of FTEC, I believe in tech and the growth can be a lot faster with the intention of selling one day and moving my money into something else. Shame FTEC went down to $140 a share and now it is back up to $171, that's a 22% increase in a month. |**ETF**|**Full Name**|**Focus**|**Risk**|**Dividend Yield**|**10-Year Return vs. VOO**|**Net Expense Ratio**| |:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-|:-| || || |**VOO**|Vanguard S&P 500 ETF|S&P 500 (large-cap)|Moderate|\~1.3%|Baseline|0.03%| || || |**SCHD**|Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF|Dividend value stocks|Lower|\~3.5–4%|Slightly lower|0.06%| || || |**QQQ**|Invesco QQQ Trust|Tech-heavy growth|Higher|\~0.5%|Higher|0.20%| || || |**FTEC**|Fidelity MSCI Information Technology Index ETF|Pure tech sector|High|\~0.5%|Higher|0.08%| || || |**VTI**|Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF|Total U.S. market|Moderate|\~1.4%|Very similar|0.03%| || || |**VT**|Vanguard Total World Stock ETF|Global (U.S. + Intl.)|Moderate|\~2.0%|Lower historically|0.07%|

greytoc

>the S&P 500 is like the 'premium index'? I prefer to characterize it more as a brand with good marketing. Not to take a way from the folks at S&P - but the S&P 500 was not always the baseline index for US large cap equities. >Are there other indexes that do the same thing at a cheaper price? Yes - MSCI (formerly a Morgan Stanley business) has a US Large Cap index product. The index that u/xiongchiamiov mentioned is a Fidelity US Large Cap index but I don't think that Fidelity will license it outside of their own products. FTSE/Russell also has a similar product called the Russell 1000 which is US large cap index. CRSP (center for research in security prices) also has a US large cap index called CRSP US Large Cap Index. I think some Vanguard funds use CRSP indices. >Does S&P own the methodology they use to select the companies, or just the name? An index provider owns the methodology and they decide on the index construction, rebalancing frequency, etc. See here - [https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/methodologies/methodology-sp-us-indices.pdf](https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/methodologies/methodology-sp-us-indices.pdf) FTSE/Russell methology - [https://www.lseg.com/content/dam/ftse-russell/en\_us/documents/ground-rules/russell-us-indexes-construction-and-methodology.pdf](https://www.lseg.com/content/dam/ftse-russell/en_us/documents/ground-rules/russell-us-indexes-construction-and-methodology.pdf) CRSP Methodology - [https://www.crsp.org/indexes/crsp-market-indexes-methodology/](https://www.crsp.org/indexes/crsp-market-indexes-methodology/)

ThibSo

This has been my last two weeks. Buy Valneva stocks -> cases of Chikungunya vaccine related death destroys the confidence in their vaccine. Buy Total Energie stocks -> OPEP+ decides to increase oil production by quite a lot. Buy MSCI India ETF -> Pakistan-India conflict I'm starting to think I'm the one causing this x)

someonestolemycord

Switch to an alternate index. e.g. S&P to CRSP, MSCI, Bloomberg, etc. To use an example, an index is like Waze. If I am driving, and Waze goes out on my phone, the car does not crash, and I just switch to Google Maps to tell me the route to continue on.

_AscendedLemon_

Real talk: Next time divide your money into different portfolios: money you CAN'T loose into bonds, then majority just in some wide index (S&P 500/MSCI World or even ACWI), just a portion you can loose into options gambling... Sorry, but you probably aren't in this 2% that are above 0 trading options, especially 0DTE

Illustrious-Smoke509

The MSCI EMU index. I believe the EU can step up now the US doesn't want to deal with the rest of the world anymore. I see a lot of potential for the EU. This tracker doesn't include the UK and Switzerland, in other European trackers these countries make up the biggest part, but I believe the Brexit was a bad decision. I think countries like Germany and France especially will do good in the long-term, so I would rather have an ETF more concentrated in these countries and less in countries like the UK. What is the Economic and Monetary Union? [https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/economic-and-monetary-union/what-economic-and-monetary-union-emu_en](https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/economic-and-monetary-union/what-economic-and-monetary-union-emu_en) (Disclaimer: I am retarded and this isn't investment advice)

Significant_Willow_7

My positions aren’t static and held in several different brokerages. The largest is the federal TSP I fund, which mirrors the MSCI ACWI IMI ex USA ex China ex Hong Kong Index. My main brokerage account is in Vanguard Developed Markets Index (VTMGX) and Vanguard Total International Bond (BNDX). Individual holdings are limited to BRK.B, GLD, SLV, and some AAPL that I’d owe huge cap gains on if I sold.

SecretPhilosopher96

You can buy that and hedge with the JPM Premium Active Income ETF. You will end up with the MSCI World.

SecretPhilosopher96

We should put up a fund to pay for his retirement. 50% 5x Lev. MSCI USA and 50% Wendy’s.

Trashcan_Johnson

You have chatgpt yet? If not, get it. It's as easy as asking it "Japanese stock etfs". 1. iShares MSCI Japan ETF (EWJ) Issuer: BlackRock Benchmark: MSCI Japan Index Exposure: Large- and mid-cap Japanese companies Expense Ratio: 0.50% Liquidity: Very liquid and popular among U.S. investors 2. WisdomTree Japan Hedged Equity Fund (DXJ) Focus: Japanese equities while hedging against currency risk (JPY/USD) Good for: Investors concerned about the yen weakening against the dollar Expense Ratio: 0.48% 3. Franklin FTSE Japan ETF (FLJP) Low-Cost Option Expense Ratio: 0.09% Tracks: FTSE Japan Capped Index Appeals to: Cost-conscious investors 4. iShares JPX-Nikkei 400 ETF (JPXN) Benchmark: JPX-Nikkei 400 Index Focus: Quality Japanese companies based on return on equity, operating profit, etc. Expense Ratio: 0.48% 5. MAXIS Nikkei 225 ETF (Tokyo-listed, Ticker: 1346.T) For Japan-based investors Tracks: Nikkei 225 Index Currency: Yen-denominated, available on the Tokyo Stock Exchange

BizBerg

It's rated silver by Morningstar, which is really good. Has also outperformed its benchmark. Vanguard Target Retirement’s simplicity may be easy to overlook, but its straightforward, low-cost approach is a strength rather than a weakness. By focusing on broad diversification and minimal expenses, it helps investors stay on track for retirement. This target-date series reflects Vanguard’s deep-rooted investment philosophy. It invests primarily in four low-cost, broadly diversified index funds that provide efficient exposure to global stocks and bonds. Any adjustments to the glide path or asset allocation undergo rigorous evaluation by a committee of senior Vanguard investors with a long-term perspective. The committee’s high standards mean strategic changes are infrequent. For instance, the last significant adjustment came in 2015 when Vanguard increased the allocation to international stocks and bonds by 10 percentage points. The equity portion shifted to a 60% US and 40% international split, while bonds moved to a 70%/30% split. At the time, this equity allocation maintained a home bias of about 7 percentage points relative to the MSCI All Country World Index, a global stock benchmark. However, as US stocks have significantly outperformed international markets since then, the series’ strategic target to non-US stocks is about 5 percentage points higher than the global weighting as of February 2025. A reversal in relative performance for international stocks would be a tailwind for this series. Investors furthest from retirement start with a 90% stock and 10% bond allocation. This remains unchanged until 25 years before retirement, at which point stock exposure begins to decline, reaching 30% seven years after age 65. Five years before retirement, investors still hold 59% in stocks—5 percentage points above the norm—and at retirement, the stock allocation is 50%, 6 percentage points higher than the average peer. This relatively higher stock exposure near retirement makes the portfolio more susceptible to market downturns, which could be challenging for conservative investors. However, for most investors, this remains a compelling option for retirement savings.

Random_Alt_2947284

I'm taking a middle ground approach. I think volatily is too high to take a side, but I think the bottom isn't in. So I'm holding out til iShares MSCI world hits 80

IronyElSupremo

Stocks are risky but a typical investor takes out a lot of risk by buying a broad-based fund/ETF of multiple stocks (usually the S&P 500, Russell indices, FTSE, MSCI, etc..). Maybe an industry group gets hit with bad economic news, but usually other industries pick up the slack. Sometimes they all get hit (see last few months), but usually most go up at various paces.

DoubleSkew

Facts bears hate: >European stocks (EFA - MSCI EAFE) hit an all time high today 

Potemkin_Pillage

Given current market conditions, is their any likelihood that rebalancing could cause SPY to drop, if MSCI decided to withdraw from more US equities in favor of other assets?

Ok_Employment_192

So this is my portfolio plan (note that I'm european). I started investing one month ago and I am slowly DCAing. So I didn't deployed all my money yet and I can still do some changes. If you any advise/ feedback that would be greatly appreciated! 60%: Vanguard FTSE All-World ETF (VWCE) 15%: Amundi MSCI Semiconductors ETF (CHIP) 15%:  iShares Bitcoin ETP (IB1T) 10%: gambling on penny stocks for my own entertainment 

wiznico19

MSCI ACWI. Very low TER, good fund sizing. And please accumulation (unless you want to pay taxes over taxes). Second choice according to me is MSCI WORLD ETF, exactly like the First one but not including the emerging market (e.g. china)

wiznico19

MSCI ACWI. Very low TER, good fund sizing. And please accumulation (unless you want to pay taxes over taxes). Second choice according to me is MSCI WORLD ETF, exactly like the First one but not including the emerging market (e.g. china)

Bosskingforlife

iShares MSCI India ETF 53.24 USD +0.39 (0.74%)

Maga1498

Look up MSCI ACWI index ETFs.

abrittain2401

Well, since Trump's Independence Day when I "bought the dip", my FTSE100 ETF is up 3.5% while my MSCI World ETF is up 1% and S&P 500 Index 0.5% up.. So my European (UK not EU) ETF has performed better since then and seems more resilient to Trump nonsense than World or US ETF's.

Random_Alt_2947284

MSCI world. Even though it's mostly US stocks, the economy will recover from whatever shitshow is about to happen. It's also adjusted to the biggest worldwide earners, so if the US does really badly it will add more worldwide stocks and less US stocks

jrppi

MSCI World Index is not a very efficient way to reduce US exposure. Country weight for United States in the index is 72%.

Dem0nid

What about investing in some World Indexes? Like the MSCI World Index or the FTSE All-World Index? These indexes are a great way to get global exposure, spreading your investments across a diverse set of countries.  

aviendha36

I use IBKR too. You need to look for UCITS ETFs - these are EU-regulated funds that US investors can access. Try VEUR (Vanguard FTSE Developed Europe) or MEUD (iShares Core MSCI Europe).

Morten14

You could try an ETF based on the MSCI USA Quality Factor index. QUAL for example.

LowRelative4793

Long-Term Investment Advice I’m looking to build a long-term (15–20-year) investment portfolio. Although I already hold small positions in stocks and cryptocurrency, I’d like to focus primarily on ETFs—incorporating stocks, bonds, and commodities. I am looking for highly diversified portfolio with aggresive investment approach. Since I’m not well educated on this matter, I’ve used AI tools to shortlist a few candidates, but I’d welcome additional insight or suggestions. I’m based in Europe and trade through IBKR. Here’s the allocation I’m considering: * **iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (CSPX.L)** – 40% * **Vanguard FTSE Developed Europe UCITS ETF Distributing (VEUR)** – 16% * **Xtrackers MSCI AC Asia ex Japan ESG Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XAXJ.L)** – 16% * **Amundi Pan Africa UCITS ETF Acc (LGQM.L)** – 8% * **Amundi Euro Government Inflation-Linked Bond UCITS ETF (EMI.L)** – 10% * **Amundi Physical Gold ETC (GLDA.L)** – 10%

luvs_spaniels

The "time in the market" hypothesis has been around in some form since the 1960s and arguably the late 1800s. It's an old argument (they used it marketing materials back then and still do today) and predates ETFs and mutual funds. The modern version uses various back tests to prove their point. The hypothesis itself is flawed. The issue lies in the back test data. Index funds were not available to individual investors until 1975. ETFs in the US became available in 1993. Let's set aside the fact that ETFs and open ended mutual funds can become insolvent. (There are no guarantees that SPY, for example, will exist in 5 years. I don't think it will become insolvent, but it could happen.) The time in the market argument often uses a buy-and-hold back test with a start point before 1975. The problem is that before 1975, an individual investor wasn't buying an instrument tied to an index. They were picking a basket of stocks similar performance to the index. The datasets chosen for analysis are typically the Dow Jones Index, the S&P 500, or the MSCI World Index (youngest of these). These are all stock indexes. So yes, the hypothesis is talking about the stock market. A similar analysis of the entire market would likely require a stocks, commodities, bonds, and real estate portfolio of some sort, and it would likely only apply to one country's market. (In economics, a market can be significantly smaller than a stock index, but the hypothesis typically uses stock indexes as evidence.) Now, [this lovely chart iShares created](https://www.ishares.com/us/investor-education/investing-101/long-term-investing) to support the "time in the market" has additional flaws. (I'm using it because it's not pay walled, and it's similar to others, flaws included.) 1. It starts in July 1926 and runs through November 2024. A newborn would be 98-years-old. That's a longer time period than our average lifespan. 2. It assumes a massive basket of stocks that individual investors could not practically manage before 1975. That's half the data shown. 3. It does not adjust for inflation. For example, using the real inflation adjusted value during the Great Inflation (1965-1982) flips the trend line during that time period. Even though we all think about large ETFs like MSCI world as diversified market baskets, no ETF is risk free. As traded instruments go, they're babies. The oldest are 31. In comparison, Ford's 121. Index ETF's aren't old enough to use them to support the time in the market hypothesis. (Insolvent ETFs liquidate assets and send investors a check for their share of the sale. It's not quite the same as a company going bust, but that money is still out of the market.) In practice, people like me aren't timing the market. Most of us are following it. The market starts an upward trend. You join after it starts and ride it up, if it continues. The trend dies. You sell and go find another trend or wait until the trend turns in your favor. The goal isn't to beat the market. It's to manage the drawdown.

Random_Alt_2947284

I prefer the MSCI world. It is also quite concentrated on the top stocks, it relies much less on the top 10. It's a nice middle ground between having the top preformers but also being diverse.

TopherBrennan

Calls on iShares MSCI Mexico ETF.

der_Sager

No, youre just applying the phrase wrong, time in the market should only ever be strictly used to talk about wiedly diversivied ETFs like MSCI worlds or FTSE All world, not singular stocks. a stock can go bust and never recover. but the world market wont go completely bust and to zero. Thats why its called time in the market, not time in the stock market

DaHuba

Only way: not buy Teslas, not enter Tesla Taxi... And best: MSCI World: how many Billionairs are taking it gladly? No way to get around really, ETF will continue to buy this dead meet on saving plans...

BigHardThrobbingCock

Don't worry, I still managed to get bear trapped with CFDs on the S&P500. MSCI ACWI IMI is an all-world high and mid cap index similar to the FTSE All-World, german finance bros in /r/Finanzen call it the holy grail since you come up on top even if chiner were to get ahead of mangoland economically

kal14144

>I'm not sure what you are trying to say about the MSCI world index, since the top 10 companies in it are all America. Global indices (even those including the US) significantly outperform US indices. This means that people are moving away from dollar denominated assets toward non dollar denominated assets. Which means that the stock market crash needs the added context of the fact that it crashed further when you account for the dollar also crashing. >You might also note that although the exchange rate has softened on the dollar calling it "crashing" is hard to take seriously. With the Euro and GBP it is trading within a quite normal range--not as high as when the dollar spiked in 2022 but essentially at 2022 levels. The Yen has had a massive decline since 2022 and recent changes have just brought the exchange rate to what it was way, way back in August 2024. ICE Dollar index is down from ~110 when Trump was sworn in to 99.3 right now. That’s almost a 10% drop in less than 4 months. Call it a “correction” if that makes you feel better but that’s a significant rapid decline in value. Also known colloquially as a crash.

draw2discard2

I'm not sure what you are trying to say about the MSCI world index, since the top 10 companies in it are all America. You might also note that although the exchange rate has softened on the dollar calling it "crashing" is hard to take seriously. With the Euro and GBP it is trading within a quite normal range--not as high as when the dollar spiked in 2022 but essentially at 2022 levels. The Yen has had a massive decline since 2022 and recent changes have just brought the exchange rate to what it was way, way back in August 2024.

BigHardThrobbingCock

I own broad market ETFs where tesler makes up 0.9% even in the MSCI ACWI IMI; forgive me father, for I have sinned

kal14144

Assets denominated in other currencies absolutely have been impacted by the crash of the dollar. They don’t move completely independently of the US market because it’s still one global economy but the major non US markets have gained significantly relative to the US market. Compare the MSCI world index to the S&P since Election Day. US stocks are down approx 25% in real terms while people who parked their money in non USD denominated assets saw significantly less damage. (Which is a bit of a self fulfilling prophesy as people dump USD denominated assets and buy other currencies to buy non USD assets with them)

Bosskingforlife

iShares MSCI India ETF 53.41 USD +0.41 (0.77%)today

Magus-of-the-Moon

The way non-US people invest into US stocks is rather simple. Most big US companies are also listed on other stock exchanges, meaning they can just be bought, and there are also many listed ETFs that track US indices like the S&P 500 or stuff like the MSCI World (which is mostly US stocks). As far as ETFs are concerned, you can obviously just buy ETFs that track non-US indices. As for directly buying stocks, I'm not sure how regulations are like in the US, so you may have to buy ADRs.

InIce1234

Full porting into Franklin MSCI World Catholic Principles UCITS ETF 

Ruck_Zuck

I think DCA is still fine, however, US only is not maximum diversification. Maybe you want to consider buying MSCI World ETF going forward

kiwimancy

They choose a benchmark based on the kind of stocks or other assets they invest in. For example, a fund which buys a selection of US stocks might benchmark against the S&P 500, while one that buys stocks in Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada might benchmark against the MSCI EAFE. One which buys investment gade bonds would benchmark against the BbgBarc Agg. For more complicated funds which vary their exposure to different assets, it's harder to find an appropriate asset. Yes if they can't beat their benchmark in the past, that is a sign they are unlikely to beat it in the future, and a low fee index fund tracking that index would be better. If they do beat their benchmark that is better, but alpha (risk adjusted outperformance) is unreliable while fees are guaranteed, so most active funds underperform long term even after they've outperformed for a few years. Diversification is a so-called free lunch because if you find multiple assets with similar performance which aren't very correlated, that reduces your risk but not return. So diversifying is good. With that said most stocks globally are fairly correlated, so it doesn't necessarily benefit you to go out of your way and pay higher fees to collect stocks from niche market corners.

Greenappleflavor

>> bootstrap retirement for the last 3-4 years after being ignorant most of my life. >> if you are debating VOO versus SCHD… it is a mater of minutes to download Actually you don’t need to download to compare. OER while important, is deducted from the performance shown already. One is simply following an index. The other is geared towards blue chip, us stocks that has cash flow and pays good dividends. Both are taken a hit as the US is down, even prior to trump tariff, sp500 was lagging greatly against MSCI ex US. Which was doing well until tariffs. Now it’s just not as negative as sp 500. Either way, if you’re talking about retirement, and you have a ways to go, unless you’re actively monitoring/rebalancing your portfolio, you should just buy growth oriented funds covering US large, US small, international emerging and developed. If you’re a novice, without much or any experience, you should just buy indexes that track US large, US small, and international. And a better example is where people buy VTI and VOO. **that** cracks me up every time.

Kontrafantastisk

It could. It also couldn’t. That’s why I primarily hold MSCI ACWI index funds. Yes, the US makes up some 60% at the minute, but it will adjust automatically over time. Now, my time horizon is about 20-25 years so it’s the best strategy in that window (I think). But fir my kids with a 50-60 year horizon, I but 50% MSCI ACWI, 25% Emerging and 25% India. I am absolutely positive that the US stock market will not make up 60% of the global market cap in 60 years.

DizzyExpedience

Good news and hopefully MSCI will either re-balance the all world index with less US weight or launch a new one

More_Childhood6506

If we’re heading into a long period of slower growth, the key for me is resilience and selectivity. Personally, I’ve shifted more toward value investing . not just because it tends to do better in low-growth environments, but because it forces you to focus on real fundamentals: cash flow, balance sheet strength, durable business models. I also watch closely what top value fund managers are buying (I get free email alerts for that), and it’s helped me spot opportunities that still have upside even in a sluggish macro. I also think diversification by quality becomes more important than just index exposure. Broad ETFs like MSCI World or S&P 500 are great, but if the tide’s no longer lifting all boats, I’d rather be in the few boats still moving. Finally, a bit more allocation to hard assets (commodities, real estate) and short-term fixed income for stability and optionality — especially if we’re facing volatility and weak growth at the same time.

GanacheCharacter2104

Yeah I feel the same I own MSCI China. I am less afraid of this than my S&P500. China is going forward USA is in full reverse. They don’t seem to even let people get education anymore.

Melodic_Fee5400

NVIDIA and Apple are like 90% of MSCI WORLD. they will save us 

Only-Power-3746

I would buy and MSCI world ETF and never look at the price.

paeschli

Haven’t China ETFs been a thing for years at this point? I hold multiple ones (just type MSCI China in any trading app). What does this news change ?

just_for_shitposts

As a backdrop to every discussion, keep in mind that the dollar is dumping hard: https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/USDEUR/?timeframe=6M Since all your US stocks and most indices (FTSE, MSCI, etc. even if you buy them in your currency) will be dollar-denominated, any loss in stocks will compounded by the loss in purchasing power, and any gains will be diminished. NASDAQ and S&P500 have erased about a year of growth: - https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/AMEX-SPY/?timeframe=60M - https://www.tradingview.com/symbols/NASDAQ-NDX/?timeframe=60M The yield curve inversion (a leading indicator for an upcoming recession) has been going on for a while now, so technically a recession is overdue. So that's that. Folks (China presumably) are dumping US treasury bonds for gold, i.e. the bonds that the US needs folks to buy to rotate US debt need higher will have a premium in order to not be unattractive. This was a play of Trump to dump the market, forcing FED rate cuts to incentivize the economy with cheap money.

davecrist

Said another way, you made a claim that was easily refuted with a minute of looking on the source website *you specified*. Were it obviously true you could just as well have responded with an MSCI link that supplemented your claim. Blather ain’t fact. You wanna be ticked off, fine, but bring me something, man, or shut up.

lwhitephone81

I've stated to you that the MSCI data going back to the 1970s shows no SV premium, and after furious googling the best you've been able to come up with is a 10 year old blog post/ad for one of MSCIs infintine goofy indexes by a low level employee, which has not a single hard number or piece of data backing up its claims. I stand by my statements, and you'll never refute them. Google away.

davecrist

>which shows no premium. The Managing Director, MSCI Research says the opposite of that. It was 10 years ago but it’s published on MSCI’s website. “While many factors have been shown to have statistical significance in explaining variations in risk and returns, not all of these factors offer premia relative to CAPM pricing. Factor premia represent exposure to systematic sources of risk that have historically earned a long-term premium. We have so far identified six factors that meet this criterion: Value, Low Size, Low Volatility, High Dividend Yield, Quality and Momentum. These factors have been empirically tested over years of academic research.” https://www.msci.com/www/blog-posts/what-is-factor-investing-/0165572817

lwhitephone81

\>That’s ignoring the availability, study, and analysis of the CRSP data  CRSP is a data set published in 1977 by DFA co-founder David Booth. It's maintained with a $300M "donation" by Booth to the Booth School of Business. \>that academics have used to arrived at similar conclusions. If you're suggesting other academics have validated the CRSP data, that's never happened. In fact, that dataset has never been independently validated, except with recent (1970s-) data by MSCI and others, which shows no SV premium. \>VBR is cheap and has been doing well enough.  The CRSP data says SV should outperform SG by 4% per year. Look at actual fund results and tell me if that in any way reflects reality. \>AVUV ( admittedly ex-DFA folks)  AVUV has provided increased fund cost, taxes, risk, with reduced performance vs total market. It's been great for the sellers, bad for the buyers.

Peace_and_Rhythm

Even with significantly higher passive ownership, the market wouldn't necessarily become a completely irrational Ponzi scheme, although certain dynamics would amplify. I can think of a few things: (and sorry for the long answer) First off, the criteria for index inclusion, while often market-cap weighted, aren't static. Index providers like S&P and MSCI periodically review and adjust their methodologies. If passive ownership grew to dominate, there would be immense pressure and economic incentive for these providers to adapt their rules to ensure new, promising companies could still enter and be represented. Ignoring a significant portion of the market by sticking to rigid, outdated criteria would be detrimental to the very purpose of the index - reflecting the market. Second: even in a heavily passive environment, active management wouldn't vanish entirely. There would still be active funds, venture capital, and private equity seeking out and investing in smaller, growing companies *before* they meet index inclusion criteria. Their role in price discovery and capital allocation at the earlier stages remains crucial. If these active players identify significant potential, it will drive up the market cap of these companies, eventually making them eligible for index inclusion. Third: while market-cap weighting does mean larger companies receive more investment, it doesn't completely disregard fundamentals. Over the long term, a company's market cap is still driven by its earnings, growth prospects, and overall business health. If a company consistently underperforms, its market cap will eventually decline, leading to a lower weight in the index or even exclusion. Finally, labeling it a Ponzi scheme is still a leap, in my opinion. A Ponzi scheme relies solely on new money to pay off old investors and has no underlying value creation. The stock market, even with dominant passive investing, represents ownership in real businesses that generate profits, innovate, and contribute to the economy. While increased passive flows can create momentum and potentially amplify valuations, it's still ultimately tied to the performance of those underlying assets and the dynamism of the economy, which allows for new entrants and the evolution of market leadership. It would create a different *kind* of market, potentially with less price discovery at the very large-cap level, but not necessarily an inherently irrational and collapsing one.

AbleImprovement9717

Short Answer: Yes, S&P 500 is a solid place to start—especially if you’re young, but… SPHQ might be even better. ⸻ Longer Answer: Here’s How to Think About It You’re right that the S&P 500 (like SPY, VOO, etc.) is: • 100% U.S. large-cap • Heavily tech-weighted • Proven over the long haul (historically 9–10% annualized return) • More volatile than a world index, but with higher upside historically At 27, you’ve got 30+ years of compounding ahead, so volatility isn’t your enemy—time is your friend. And you’re not wrong that MSCI All World (like VT or VWRL) has more global diversification—but 60% of it is still U.S., and the rest is often less efficient and slower-growing. ⸻ Enter: SPHQ — S&P 500 Quality Factor ETF If you want to hammer one fund long-term, SPHQ is a brilliant twist on the traditional S&P 500 approach. Why? • Focus on high-quality U.S. companies—those with strong balance sheets, high return on equity, consistent earnings, and low leverage. • It filters out the junk and gives you exposure to companies that tend to hold up better in downturns. • Performance has historically beaten the S&P 500 with less volatility. Seriously—check the charts. TL;DR: SPHQ = smart S&P 500, perfect for a long-term “set it and forget it” strategy. ⸻ Suggested Strategy • Invest the bulk now (maybe 80%) into SPHQ. • Keep 20% in cash or short-term bonds if you’re risk-averse, or add a small slice of international (like VXUS or VEU) later if you want to gradually globalize. • DCA (dollar-cost average) only if you’re worried about market timing—but lump-sum investing historically wins the long-term race. • Don’t try to time macro stuff too much. Time in the market > timing the market. ⸻ Final Advice You don’t need a flashy portfolio—you need a durable one. SPHQ is a fund you can hammer into for the next 10–20 years and not feel dumb about it later. It gives you U.S. growth, quality filtering, and simplicity.

theorem21

The president declared economic war on the rest of the world, with few exceptions, and then went off on a jaunt to one of his golf courses. (If the president’s airplane is Air Force One and the president’s helicopter is Marine One, what is the name for the presidential golf cart? Caddyshack One?) None of this means that U.S. stocks will necessarily go down or even produce bad returns over the next three, five or 10 years. Nobody knows these things, although lots of people pretend they do.  On the contrary, high-risk emerging and frontier markets can produce spectacular returns. You think the U.S. stock market has been on a tear for a decade? Romania has been better. So has Slovenia. So have Lebanon and Kazakhstan. You’ve tripled your money on the Kazakh stock market in the past decade, according to data provider MSCI. But emerging and frontier markets are also risky and volatile. You can never be sure what you’re really going to get. One day the caudillo and his junta say they have decided to return the country’s trade policies to the 1880s, and announce they are declaring economic war against the rest of the world. Then a week later they announce they have called it off — after first tipping off investors on the caudillo’s personal information and news service. In an emerging or frontier market, nobody expects the official spokesperson for the junta to tell the truth.

NoUsernameFound179

Bigger so far... Seriously though. S&P was already expensive. All that stability and trust comes out of it now. Perhaps even some future growth too. I can imagine it will go to a PE of 20 for the foreseeable future. And that is with bond yields staying where they are. Either the FED will have to step in, and it will all end up in massive inflation or risk a collapse with them yielding 10% and every kind of heavy recession that comes along. You know that many other countries or entire regions are currently trading below a PE of 10? E.g. iShares MSCI EMU Small Cap ETF, If you want decent performance and diversification from US.

MainManu

Remember when people said it was risky that American companies were over represented in the MSCI world? Welp I guess I just found out what they meant. That idiot cost me a good part of my pension backup.

outsider4200

You can buy the euro. But if you don't know how valuta trading works. My advice, don't do that. You can invest in euronext or eu etfs. If you are rich(I think not), then you can buy euro bonds. Bonds is only interesting when you want a steady return of 4,5 a year. Here are some popular etfs. If you have these you have placed your bets on almost the whole eu market. iShares Core MSCI Europe UCITS ETF (EUR) Vanguard FTSE Developed Europe UCITS ETF (EUR) SPDR S&P Euro Dividend Aristocrats UCITS ETF iShares MSCI Europe SRI UCITS ETF iShares Euro Government Bond 10-25yr UCITS ETF (IBGL)

catluck

What is MSCI EM, and why is the USA being added to it?

Random_Alt_2947284

iShares MSCI World

Random_Alt_2947284

I would short the MSCI World right now then

JohnOakman6969

Since i'm in France, we have a special account called a PEA that isn't taxed after 5 years. But you only get access to european based indexes. So I put my money in "DSP5" which is reverse -1x of MSCI USA.

Traditional_Buy_8420

As a European since the US market seems to undergo un(der)regulated market manipulation I will pull out of MSCI World and recommend my friends and family to do the same.

cursed_010

>Using MSCI World Index returns for 1976–2022, Finlay and Zorn calculated that Lump Sum outperformed DCA 68% of the time across global markets measured after one year Source:-https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/dam/corp/research/pdf/cost_averaging_invest_now_or_temporarily_hold_your_cash.pdf DCA is a losing strategy since it minimizes your time in the market

Longjumping_Beyond82

Serious advice from someone who was in the same position. I watched countless YouTube videos, trying to find a channel providing me with actual good knowledge to understand the stock market. Ended up identifying "put as much as you want into MSCI World and wait" as the correct solid advice and - bam - that's what I do now :-D

Jolly_Quote_9151

Exactly. I have sold everything with profit. I was holding the MSCI World for 2 years. But I can not continue anymore. I’ve completely lost belief that there’s even the slightest trace of intelligence left in the US government. It’s pure madness.  How arrogantly Trump talks to other countries literally disgusts me. Im sad for the people with respect and honor in the USA to have such a representation :( I'm curious to see how strong the headwind will be for the United States. The way the U.S. government treats other people will not be forgotten!

ToinouAngel

MSCI World ETFs are down ~5% on the European markets, fun day again.

leeuwvanvlaanderen

MSCI world down like 4% in EUR rn and y’all bulls celebrating lmao

Tight-Purpose5445

I've tried to find data on the constituents of the MSCI World since inception to the present to no avail. I need the data in monthly increments, an help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

torchma

Dollar cost averaging (a more or less braindead but effective way of investing) isn't really a strategy meant for targeted, single company picks. Either make strategic wagers on single companies (requires lots of research very time consuming) or stick to ETFs. My recommendation if you're looking to diversify away from your 401k is to pick European ETFs. And if you want to get more targeted, maybe even German ETFs (e.g. MSCI)

chrswnd

u/Onnimation but ETF/MSCI World buying is a no brainier right now, don’t u think?

Nic_Pera

I'm invested in ASX:VGS which tracks the MSCI index which is similar to FTSE Global All Cap Index. These ETFs were a solid bet, however, with talk of a more fragmented global economy ahead (e.g. deglobalisation, regional blocs), they might not deliver the same results going forward.. So, my investment strategy is to contribute to my superannuation (like a workplace pension), set it to the readymade growth portfolio, try to be as tax efficient as possible, and hope for the best

Academic-Image-6097

No, I don't. I am in an All-world ETF that doesn't do ESG inclusion. But I am re-considering this lately, as you can see. Perhaps VanEck Sustainable World ETF, but it's not market cap-weighted and does not exclude fossil fuel. Maybe iShares MSCI World SRI UCITS. The choice depends on your country, your desired exclusions and your broker, I suppose. Honestly, I might just sell it all, pay off my mortgage and hopefully sleep better at night. But that's me.

Academic-Image-6097

It's not a dumb question at all. But I know too little about you to tell you. It really depends on what's available to you to buy for a low cost. The ETF should have a low yearly expense ratio, in any case, and hold a large amount of companies for the diversification. It should follow a respected broad index, like MSCI World or FTSE All-world. I am in NL and buy iShares MSCI World Accumulating (IWDA) monthly through DeGiro. Accumulating means it automatically reinvests dividends back into the fund, which is probably something you want. I do at least, because dividends paid out are taxed more here. I believe Vanguard Total World Stock Accumulating ETF (VT) is a common choice for people in the USA. For other places it might be different. So please do your own research, and consider the idea that I am just a random guy on the internet who may be talking out of his ass.

Old_Shoe5167

There's a decent overlap in VOO and QQQ already and then you have some of the mag 7 as solo stocks. I see no reason for that. The portfolio basically says "I'm gonna bet on the mag 7. Then I'm gonna bet on mag 7 some more and also let me bet on mag S.E.V.E.N." At your age, I'd just focus exclusively on 1-3 broad fund(s) until I have at least one year's worth of gross salary/income in it. It can be something like VOO tracking S&P500 or you could diversify a bit by looking into MSCI World or combine VOO with some ex-US ETFs. Say you choose to stick with VOO and make $50K a year - try getting $50K worth of VOO before you look at single stocks. Unless you live with your parents and have zero living expenses, this is gonna take you a couple of years already. As for single stocks, those are more of a gamble on what you think might do well and outperform the major indexes. You can throw some spare change at them if you feel like something is extremely undervalued but I'd keep a majority of the portfolio in 1-3 big ETFs and by majority I mean like 80%. As for dividends, they do sound nice but the average industry payout is 3-4% so to live off of that, you'd need millions invested, so unless you're looking at some nice inheritance, I wouldn't focus on them either.

TheGeneralPeron

I am actually invested in ETF so probably this was the wrong subreddit. I invest in both MSCI ACWI and SnP500 (yes I know they overlap but wanted a full position in us markets) 80/20 aprox. I also evaluated going like 25% in rn and then dcaing the rest throughout the year. Would it be wiser to just DCA it all throughout the year rather than going 1/4 in now? This week seems to be full of potential economic news, shall I just wait? Apologies if my questions are not good, I am far from knowing in the matter, I also know market cannot be timed for what I could speculate something and then the opposite happens. I just want to know what the "wiser" move is, even if the ends up not being the best

backnarkle48

Talk about putting all of one's eggs in one basket. I can imagine data centers and crypto mining centers moving into Iceland to exploit its cheap energy sources, but that country is not a closed economy. We live in a global economy, though that seems to be at risk because of one orange idiot. Nevertheless, if there is decoupling from the US (unlikely), then it is impossible to predict which country's public equities will do best. If you are unsure about where to put you savings, diversify as much as possible. One way to do that — while still gaining exposure to the deepest and most valuable markets (especially the US) — is to own an ETF linked to MSCI ACWI.

Teklaroma

Simple: Institutional trading / algo trading / Index Funds (ETF) Money. The market doesn't really care about whether or not we think something should or shouldn't happen. Anytime you find yourself thinking "it can't possibly..." or "there's just no way it can..." with any stock, you're wrong, anything can happen (and in some cases will happen). But to give you an answer: Index Funds. What is the most bought asset in the trading world? I would say Index Trading Funds (ETFs). MSCI World, FTSE All World, NASDAQ, S&P 500 and many more have exactly these companies in the top 5. Most people (especially casuals who're not that deep intro trading) buy ETFs and sell them because if panic or buy them for diversification) and that is me included, have most of their money in ETFs. That's why. ETF selling and buying in close to all ETFs make them move close to identical.

Low-Environment4209

If American outperformance is over we won’t know for a decade. Not worth considering therefor. Doesn’t hurt to have foreign exposure though. FXI off the lows and MSCI Europe or Dax are good bets. Diversity is key

JohnOakman6969

Buy inverse MSCI USA etf, to the moon

TheFiscalHawk

Looks like a typical ETF chart from either MSCI or S&P from the past month... you are fine just holding. 

jonneh

Bloomberg > The MSCI Pacific Index has fallen as much as 7.9%, the most since the 2008 financial crisis

GhostsinGlass

* SGX FTSE Taiwan -7.28% * Hang Seng -8.02% * China A50 -5% * Singapore MSCI -7.52% * Nifty 50 -25 Google Play Cards

Das_KommenTier

This is correct. However, I could imagine that a lot of investors from outside the US will shift their portfolio from MSCI World to some ex US ETF.

atpplk

The whole world invest in the US market. 60-70% of MSCI world, yet 25% of world GDP.

Sheyvan

No. It's why my Investments heavily underweigh US. In january i split half my MSCI into MSCI-Ex-USA. Guess which Part is doing better now. Emerging Markets are my largest Position.

MiniTab

That is objectively false. The US economy is absolutely not “*currently* one of the best performing economies (sic) globally”. It is actually the *worst* performing major economy currently. https://www.nbcnews.com/business/markets/stocks-close-worst-quarter-2022-tariff-uncertainty-rcna198956 “The Euro Stoxx 600 index, which tracks companies across 17 countries, has risen 5% to start the year as the S&P 500 dropped by roughly the same amount. In fact, the Stoxx 600 has just had its best quarter against the S&P since 2015, according to FactSet data. The U.K.’s FTSE 100 also rose more than 5% in the same period. The MSCI China index, a benchmark of 580 Chinese stocks, ended the first quarter up 16%.”

Petit_Nicolas1964

I‘m not sure if the combination of these ETFs makes a lot of sense as you have many overlaps. Might be better to focus on an all world ETF or a combination of MSCI World and MSCI Emerging Markets.

trogers52

SP500 P/E is 22 today, MSCI Europe is 15 today, Nikkei was over 50. So the Japanese analyst reference is a silly comment. Remove the magnificent seven and the P/E as SP493 was 18 on March 31, 2025. Source: https://am.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpm-am-aem/global/en/insights/market-insights/guide-to-the-markets/mi-guide-to-the-markets-us.pdf. I wonder if there is a American premium on SP493 vs. MSCI-Europe today? Let's get back to the magnificent seven and their premium. My question to you, is if the business in environment advantage is "Small", why are the top ten MSCI-world stocks all American based? If it were a coin flip, anything more than six says something unique is going on. All ten? Come on. The advantage isn't small.

kelsos666

Lots of Europeans (some Americans maybe too) wished for a World-ETF without the United States. Deutsche Bank reacted promptly and launched the "MSCI World ex-USA" under its brand xTrackers. (ISIN: IE0006WW1TQ4). From zero to 1.4 Billions AUM within a few months speaks volumes.

Cobra25k

Big buy in Amazon, I think around 500 shares. Big buy in ASML, around 100 shares. Pretty big buy in Shopify, around 200 shares. Bought some Meta and Google. Bought some SoFi and MSCI. And lastly a smaller buy in SalesForce.

Candlelight_Fant4sia

I out my superannuation (Aussie private - and essentially only - pension) all in cash last year, \~4.5% with zero risk, and told everyone I know. Before that, it was 40% ASX200 / 60% MSCI world excl. Aus and made massive gains, now it would be decimated though.

BosSF82

"MSCI’s All Country World Index, which covers companies across the global economy, is down over 1% today, after Beijing announced 34% tariffs on US goods. That means it is over 10% below its record high, Reuters reports, a fall generally classed as a ‘correction’."

Fantastic_Judge1663

Even the freaking MSCI World is down over 11% over one month. No signs of it being over. Bad.

Th3_Corn

I would invest 3k in a broadly diversified ETF like the MSCI World or the Vanguard FTSE All World and the other 3k in a short term government bond via an online broker (cant tell you which is good for the UK unfortunately). These brokers usually allow you to create a savings plan that you can stop/start on-demand. As for getting into the topic: information on good investing is readily on the internet for free. I'd be suspicious of anybody trying to sell you investment tips. I can recommend Ben Felix (very dry, but very scientific) and The Plain Bagel on YouTube. Otherwise books are a good source but i would avoid books from finance gurus. Usually they have a very unique take on investing that is either not particularly good or doesnt apply well to you.