VWOB
Vanguard Emerging Markets Government Bond Index Fund ETF Shares
Mentions (24Hr)
0.00% Today
Reddit Posts
5 Great Fixed-Income Funds to Buy for 2023.What do you think?
Mentions
Do these ETF bond funds’ returns **include the interest payments reinvested, or does it only include the NAV?** The bond fund that I’m looking at are $VWOB and $BNDX.
how many EM debt ETFs (e.g. VWOB) are loaded with Saudi, Kuwaiti, Qatari, Turkish or Israeli bonds? how are those funds doing?
TLDR Math first: $300/week for 4 years = **$62,400 contributed** With reasonable historical returns (~7–9% blended), you’d likely end up around $70k–$75k, not $100k $100k by Nov 2029? Very unlikely without: • Much higher contributions (≈ $400/week), or • Extremely high sustained returns (~24%/yr, unrealistic). Portfolio issues: • Overlap (VUG + VONG do the same thing; VNQ + REET overlap). • Too aggressive for a 4-year, must-have-cash goal (heavy equities, thematic risk). • Fine for long-term investing, not ideal for a car purchase timeline. • More realistic expectation: • $70k–$80k is a reasonable target at $300/week. • $100k requires either more savings or more time. Better approach for this goal: • Simplify (1 broad stock ETF + bonds). • Increase bonds/cash as 2029 approaches. • Prioritize capital preservation over growth. ⸻ Weekly ETF Investment Plan: Can It Reach $100K by November 2029? This plan assumes investing $300 per week starting in November 2025 and continuing for four years, or roughly 48 months, with no withdrawals and full dividend reinvestment. Over that period, total contributions would equal approximately $62,400. The portfolio is spread across eight ETFs covering U.S. growth stocks, high-dividend equities, emerging-market bonds, real estate, natural resources, and a thematic AI/technology fund. The weekly allocation breaks down to $50 each into VUG, VONG, VYM, and VWOB, and $25 each into ARTY, GNR, REET, and VNQ. This results in roughly two-thirds of the portfolio being equity-based, with the remainder split between bonds and real-asset exposures. Dividends are assumed to be reinvested, so all return estimates reflect total return rather than price appreciation alone. To project future outcomes, historical total returns for each ETF were reviewed and normalized to conservative forward assumptions rather than peak historical performance. ARTY has delivered roughly 11–12% annualized returns since inception but with high volatility, so a 10% forward assumption is used. VUG and VONG have produced long-term returns in the low-to-mid teens, but given concentration risk and market cycles, a 10% assumption for both is reasonable. VYM has historically returned about 9% annually when dividends are included. VWOB has produced lower but steadier returns in the 3–4% range historically, though current yields justify assuming closer to 5%. GNR has been cyclical, averaging under 5% long-term but higher in the last decade, so an 8% assumption is used. REET has returned roughly 4% long-term and VNQ around 6–7%, so forward assumptions of 5% and 6% respectively are used. When these assumptions are weighted by allocation size, the blended expected return for the entire portfolio comes out to approximately 8% per year. This is an optimistic but reasonable estimate based on long-run averages, not a forecast of guaranteed performance. Using that return assumption and weekly contributions, the projected portfolio value after one year would be roughly $16,200 on $15,600 contributed. After two years, contributions would total about $31,200 with a projected value near $33,800. After three years, contributions would reach approximately $46,800 with a projected value around $52,800. By November 2029, total contributions of $62,400 would be expected to grow to roughly $73,000 to $74,000, assuming steady markets and full dividend reinvestment. That result is materially short of the $100,000 target. To reach $100,000 in four years on $300 per week would require an average annual return of roughly 24% sustained for the entire period. That level of performance is far beyond historical norms for diversified ETF portfolios and would require unusually favorable market conditions every year. Alternatively, keeping the assumed 8% return and solving for contributions shows that weekly investments would need to increase to roughly $400 per week to reach $100,000 by November 2029. It is also important to recognize that even the $73,000 projection is not guaranteed. Markets over a four-year window can underperform historical averages, particularly for equity-heavy portfolios. While a strong bull market could improve outcomes, relying on exceptional returns introduces significant risk, especially when the funds are needed on a specific timeline. Because this is a four-year goal, such as saving for a car or other near-term purchase, the portfolio’s risk profile deserves scrutiny. The current allocation is diversified but aggressive for the timeframe. There is meaningful overlap between VUG and VONG, both of which target large-cap U.S. growth stocks. VNQ and REET both provide real estate exposure, which has been volatile and interest-rate-sensitive in recent years. Sector-specific funds like ARTY and GNR add volatility that may be appropriate for long-term investing but can work against a fixed-date goal. For a four-year horizon, a more balanced or simplified approach would typically improve reliability, even if it slightly reduces expected returns. Increasing exposure to high-quality bonds, short-term Treasuries, or a conservative allocation ETF would reduce downside risk as the target date approaches. Broad market equity funds can replace overlapping growth ETFs without sacrificing diversification, while limiting niche and thematic exposure reduces the chance of large drawdowns at the wrong time. In summary, investing $300 per week for four years is a strong savings habit, but under realistic assumptions it is unlikely to reach $100,000 by November 2029. A more defensible expectation is a final value in the $70,000 to $80,000 range. Reaching $100,000 would require higher contributions, a longer timeframe, or accepting substantially more risk with no guarantee of success. For short-term goals, preserving capital and reducing volatility often matters more than maximizing growth, and adjusting expectations or strategy early improves the odds of a successful outcome.
>What are the differences between the NAV and Market Price of bond funds? NAV is calculated from the aggregated closing prices of the underlying assets. Market price is from the closing price of the ETF. Some bonds are not very liquid and don't have recent trades all the time, or trade mostly at times besides the US market close, while VWOB is pretty liquid and does. So the market price tends to be a more accurate picture of value than NAV. But they are rarely going to differ by a noticeable amount. The return based on market price is what someone would have realized if they purchased at the market closing of 09/29/2015 and held until 09/30/2025. >If I wanted to calculate the total returns for the last 10 years, which column do I use? For cumulative total return ending 09/30/2025, 47.83%.
This isn't really a bond fund question, it's an ETF question, and you happen to see it more prominently in bond funds. ETFs are baskets of assets - that VWOB fund, for instance, contains a bunch of emerging market government bonds. Each of those bonds has a market value (ie, the amount of money someone would pay for that particular bond). However, many bonds are relatively illiquid - they aren't traded very often. Hence, the market value of the bond may be set by the last trade, which may actually be a few days (or months!) in the past. This is especially true in 2022, with VWOB, which like held a number of Russian bonds that were made nearly worthless/untradeable by Russian sanctions. However, when an investor buys/sells VWOB, she isn't paying for each individual bond, she's paying for *the entire basket*. It's fairly common that bond funds are *significantly* more liquid than their underlying bonds. Hence, the market price of a ETF (the basket in it's entirety) may diverge from the total market value of all the underlying assets (the NAV). The ETF authorized seller creation/redemption process **normally** ensures that the market price of an ETF is very close to the NAV of all underlying assets. However, when underlying assets become illiquid (ie, bonds, and especially Russian bonds in 2022), the NAV of an ETF will start to diverge from market value of the ETF. *If I wanted to calculate the total returns for the last 10 years, which column do I use?* What's your goal? Picking the "total return by NAV" answers the question "if I bought the underlying assets, this is the return I'd get - although I might not actually be able to buy/sell those underlying assets when I want to" Picking the "total return by market value" answers the question "if I bought the ETF, this is the return I'd get - but that's not necessarily the same as the underlying assets, and may diverge in cases of underlying asset illiquidity" I'd also comment that the real answer is "don't bother". The past performance of bond funds is irrelevant. Bonds are a contract for **future** cash flow. If future bonds did well, that doesn't matter - you can't buy those bonds anyway, and they may already have matured and no longer exist. If future bonds didn't do well, that also doesn't matter, for the same reason. Do you think **current** bonds are worth buying? If so, get the ETF. If not, don't.
I like VWOB. Currently yields 6% and vanguard figures out the taxes for me.
I have a dumb question. Why are some bond ETFs dropping? VCSH, VWOB, FCBYX and many others. You would expect them to rise as interest rates fall, no?
As you indicate VT is very heavily US focused. Sticking with Vanguard ETFs I'd look at VXUS, VSS, and VWO. If you wanted bond exposure they offer BNDX and VWOB. There are also a ton of single county ETFs from various sponsors so you could spread out even further if you want to.
VWOB for high yield BNDX for investment grade longer duration
JEPQ stocks.. 9 1/2 - 10% annual dividend. (Chase) VWOB emerging market bonds. 6 1/2 % annual paid monthly.(Vanguard) I don’t take a lot of risks. I like these accounts in my Fidelity portfolio. I managed them. I have considerably much more money in my Vanguard account and that’s professionally managed. FYI, as a percent, I do better myself…
Long bonds just got destroyed and have a long time going up. As far as international, I use Avantis funds to squeeze it, but there isn't much else you can do. I have VWOB but it's very controlled. If you have no futures exposure, you could do some research until you understand what you're getting, then try that.
As the yield curve changes, I'll buy US bond funds that have the best yields. I'm currently considering emerging market bond funds like EMB and VWOB where yields are almost 7%.
NXP for municipals LQD for corporates BLV for long term treasuries VWOB for emerging market bonds SHY for 1-3 year treasuries BIL if you want short term liquidity I lean more towards municipals to avoid income taxes but NXP is one of the better funds that has been consistent for decades.
I was considering VWOB until recently, it’s vanguards emerging markets sovereign bond ETF, yielding over 6% last I saw. Reason I stopped considering it was the World Bank and IMF have been saying that the international debt situation is getting pretty bad and a lot of countries are at risk of going the way Sri Lanka did, but it’s definitely a fund I’m keeping on my radar because, hey, sovereign debt is typically safer then corporate debt and I figure that in a normal year even emerging market sovereign debt is likely safer then junk bonds for similar yields, although I very we may be mistaken there.
45% equities (15% each in SYLD, FYLD, EYLD), 30% bonds (10% each in BOND, BNDX, VWOB), 15% commodities (BCI), and 10% trend following (DBMF).
>It would be incredibly dumb to buy 100 shares of VWOB and then sell covered calls like a G. The worst that could happen is you'd miss out on 5% dividend payments, which would add up over time if the stock price stayed flat or fell.
Do you mean an ETF or mutual fund since BNDW is an ETF. If you are looking for an ETF which contains only sovereign debt - there are a few specific ones for emerging market and investment grade countries but I've not seen one that includes all countries since the investment grade will vary hugely. These are all ex-US - so you have to buy US treasury ETFs if you want total world. ETFS with emerging markets government debt include $VWOB, $JPMB SSgA has some SPDR ETFs which you can probably combine to get total world exposure. List here - [https://www.ssga.com/us/en/intermediary/etfs/fund-finder?g=assetclass%3Afixed-income!fixed-income-sector\*Treasury-and-Government](https://www.ssga.com/us/en/intermediary/etfs/fund-finder?g=assetclass%3Afixed-income!fixed-income-sector*Treasury-and-Government)
EYLD for stocks and VWOB for bonds.
Get some bonds and commodities. BCI, VWOB, BNDX, BOND
I’d add in BNDX and VWOB. Foreign debt is the largest asset class in the world.
Globally diversified portfolio. Have a good mix of stocks, bonds, and commodities. For the stocks and bonds, have a good mix of US, foreign developed market, and foreign emerging market. For example, my portfolio is 60% stocks (split evenly between SYLD, FYLD, and EYLD), 20% bonds (split evenly between BOND, BNDX, and VWOB), and 20% commodities (BCI).
VWOB has some exposure, but not a lot.
You are not getting a lot of core-bond duration, mainly just the 5% VGIT, which is sometimes the better diversifier in a market crisis. SCHO is kind of a cash replacement which won't move much or yield much, though it should be around 1.5% now. I wouldn't hold that much of it unless you have near term plans for that money. SAMBX, MSD, EDD, and VWOB are on the risky side and equity-correlated in a crisis. That doesn't mean they aren't good picks for the overall portfolio, just that your portfolio's risk level is higher than just the risk of 45% stocks. Of these, floating rate bonds will perform best in a positive-or-neutral-growth, rising-rate environment. I would not recommend adjusting your portfolio for that, both because timing the market is hard and because the ten year just hit 2% which is where it was in 2019 before the shutdowns. It's possible yields won't go much higher. It looks like you left out ~10% of the portfolio.
BND, VWOB and other bond based ETFs took a deep dive. Bloody red
Sorry if my previous comment across snarky. Wasn’t my intention. I’ve been messing around with stocks and ETFS for a while seeing what moves where and why. Keeping an eye on correlation between movement and social sentiment, news releases, market key dates, etc. I finally settle on: VOO 20% VIOV 20% VEA 15% VWO 15% AVDV 10% VGIT 10% SCHP 5% VWOB 5%
Vanguard VWOB vs Jpmorgan EMB?