Voo

submitted by /u/Haunting-Bell-4379 to r/brasil [link] [comments]

I have currently started investing a bit, I have invested into VOO and QQQM I know there may be overlap so was thinking of just going 100% more into VOO is there anything else I should add? Or is 10k into VOO a good idea? Should I also do a lump some right now or wait or DCA. Thank you submitted by /u/Happy_Ad_3171 to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

This is scary because I recently went from large cash position to investing in stocks But I’m only 29 and I decided to listen to advice here, have a few bourbons to grow balls and buy more VOO Happy Friday! Hope everyone has great weekend submitted by /u/Cheapassboy69 to r/portfolios [link] [comments]

Asking for a young(23yrs) friend who had invested $7500 in VOO in previous 3years. Compare to other ETFs this VOO didn’t do well. What would be the best for her age, keep VOO or sell and invest in VOOG or VGI or VTI. Please advise submitted by /u/PPPP_9999 to r/Bogleheads [link] [comments]

I’m 23 and current liquid NW is around 185k. I earned this I started my savings journey at 16 with my first job. I initially was buying stocks but realized I couldn’t beat the market long term so it’s all in VOO now. But it’s sooo boring. I’m thinking maybe I should add some other ETFs such as international or value or small caps. Roth : 90k in VOO Taxable : 70k in VOO Emergency fund : 25k cash at 4% Bank acct : 2k cash I don’t have a year set for fire as it’s so long from now but hopefully before I’m 45 if things go good in the market and life. I made this post partially because a friend made a 1000% return on vcx and I’m jealous lol. But any thoughts in VOO and diversification? Thanks submitted by /u/Winter-Indication33 to r/Fire [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/gotdrypowder to r/TheRaceTo10Million [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/uncacheable_sardine to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

Considering full porting into this VOO dip today. Will continuously add a few hundred a month into other ETFs as well. Is the consensus that 601 is a good value; or do we feel there’s still room for more discounts in this market? submitted by /u/Odd_Rip9816 to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

Hi everyone! I have seen a huge change these past few days about VOO, and not gonna lie, it makes me scared sometimes.. but do u think its smart to buy more shares now? Cuz its gotten a lot cheaper? submitted by /u/FitAirline1611 to r/investingforbeginners [link] [comments]

I'm aware of some of the discourse here in this subreddit, and I actually don't see convincing academic evidence that ETF investing maximizes the long-term outcome for retail investors. Specifically I want to address a few common arguments ETF evangelists make: Active mutual funds underperforms passive ETFs (Malkiel 1973) Buy-and-Hold Strategies are superior for long-term performance based on a lookback period of 20-30 years 96% of stocks underperform t-bills over their life times (Bessembinder 2017) The first problem with these studies (or any academic literature) addressing this is that their population of active managers aren't truly active. "Benchmark-hugging" is a common phenomena where large managers (Vanguard/Fidelity) only deviate a few percentage points in tracking risk with their own benchmarks. Career risk is commonly associated with this type of strategy. Given both of these factors, it should be common to see underperformance net-of-fees. Secondly, index outperformance is inherently a momentum based strategy. By their own admission, passive enthusiasts conclude that only a handful of companies are responsible for outperformance in an index. But this creates another problem. Any bubble environment, passive index investors are forced to participate. There's no hedging of risk, rebalancing, or de-risking away from companies that could be most vulnerable when institutions are forced to unwind. I'd like to make a quick point on the study regarding that 96% of companies fail to beat t-bills. I think proponents of passive investing who reference that specific study fail to account for both the cyclical factors and company life cycle factors slowly disrupted by innovation. Their position also assumes that they randomly pick companies like a dartboard would without considering that a truly active manager might concentrate their positions in durable companies with pricing power that are quality cash flows or consider multiple scenarios in the immediate future. No long-short manager behaves as robotically as the study implies. They are always constantly thinking about their companies and adjusting positions in a way that achieve desired performance. Enthusiasts also like to attack the underperformance of hedge funds and enhance their argument that raw index returns are superior. The problem with this angle is that it fails to consider risk-adjusted returns and capital preservation. Returns are path dependent. Experiencing a 50% drawdown requires 100% subsequent performance to break-even. A key characteristic to wealth compounding and preservation is survival. ETF proponents fail to convince me that raw return growth without accounting for tail risk in real-time is the superior alternative. The final point that I believe ETF evangelism fails is regime awareness. I have not seen a convincing argument or rebuttal to explain away the negative real returns observed in some periods like 1929-1953, 1970s-1980s, the japan bubble burst, and 2000-2010. I would like to believe that there are obvious factors for active managers to reposition for risk given signs of either higher deflation, inflation, growth, etc. A lot of the passive argument assumes these events happen in a vaccuum with no warning signs, therefore you shouldn't time the market and stay the course with 100% equities. When these regimes scenarios manifest into real life main street challenges, you are competing for liquidity at the worst possible times and none of the studies account for retail job loss, medical, etc. True active management (that's free from benchmark or career risk) is superior in my opinion. By not minimizing agency and fully understanding your positions (whether concentrated, hedged, etc.), I think leads to better outcomes for investors who know what they are doing. Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger frequently reference this (with the caveat that people that don't know finance should consider index investing). But I don't think that means to blindly assume no risk of financial ruin with passive investing. And I do concede that it is either 1.) limited or 2.) difficult to find a truly outperforming active manager. In the backstop of higher oil prices, lower job growth, overstretched valuations, increased geopolitical risk, and a volatility in monetary supply, I think investors this year are in for a rude awakening. And not only that, but they will experience the actual cost of so blindly believing passive investing dogma. Feel free to pushback as I know this is a very minority opinion here submitted by /u/jazzyjjcups to r/investing [link] [comments]

w submitted by /u/Fantastic-Meet-7311 to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Silent_Geologist5279 to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

What's going on? No VOO & chill, especially amongst none US investors? I thought VOO & chill was investing default option? submitted by /u/Master_Pepper_9135 to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

I’ve been heavy into some risky stocks (rklb), but made the move to a 100% ETF portfolio. Note: I haven’t linked all my accounts to that app (blossom) yet but I have about 20k in VOO there as well (this etf track S&P 500 for those who just began) Very bullish on the U.S. for the next couple of years. Let’s see where this goes! submitted by /u/Ancient_Resist3606 to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

I am 100% in VOO at age 36. I have fidelity account. What is the best way to do the split. I might be too heavy in us stocks. This is in a retirement account submitted by /u/Ok_Suggestion_2003 to r/Bogleheads [link] [comments]

As of this year, the dataset from the world’s most prolific equity benchmark (officially launched in 1957) goes back a full century to 1926. I thought now might be a good time to revisit its merit since one of the most tediously repetitive questions across all investing subs is whether the S&P 500 alone (eg VOO) is a sufficient investment, or perhaps if a total US market fund like VTI would be better. The S&P 500 is considered the standard to which the industry is held; it has been recommended for average investors by the great Warren Buffett, and many say small caps are mostly “junk” anyway, so why would you invest in the total market? This question is so common that r/Bogleheads had a pinned post to address it, and it even has its own satirical subreddit: r/VOOorVTI. And what makes the question particularly tiresome is the fact that whether you choose an S&P 500 fund or a total US market fund will likey make no meaningful difference in your long-term returns (or in your life, for that matter). The question is barely worth the brain cells used to dwell on it, yet some people describe themselves as struggling to choose. But do those investors grappling with the question understand the history and merits of each index? Join me on a deep dive to review them (so I can just link to this post and never write out another explanation again). In this post In 1926, Poor’s Publishing and the bond rating company Standard Statistics created a 90-stock composite index in an attempt to track and report the daily returns of the US stock market more broadly than the Dow Jones Industrials Average which only included 12 stocks at the time This index would gradually be expanded to 500 stocks and become the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, launched in 1957, with returns tracked up to the minute The explicit purpose of these indexes was to gauge the returns of the total US stock market, but by using only a representative sample of stocks to make it easier to calculate back when this work was done by hand The S&P 500 index quickly became the preferred benchmark for US equity mutual funds But we have had indexes of the total US market (all the stocks, not just the arbitrary number 500) for more than 50 years now And we have had index funds tracking these total US market indexes for more than 30 years now If you seek passive exposure to the total US stock market, it would be more effective to use a modern total stock market index fund, not a primitive sampling index methodology from a century ago just because it’s more familiar or popular Regardless of which representative US stock market index fund you choose, the returns are going to be so similar that it doesn’t warrant deep deliberation. This is probably the least important decision you could make as an investor. But if you really want to scrutinize it, read on… Early History of Dow Jones and Standard & Poor’s Public stock markets have been around for nearly four centuries, but it wasn’t until the dawn of the 20th century that there was any reliable data source to know the overall performance and direction of the stock market as a whole. Wall Street Journal co-founder Charles Dow was among the first to attempt to index market returns with a daily Transportation Average in 1884, not coincidentally during the heyday of the railroad bubble that would burst a decade later (note that a preoccupation with indexing the returns of the day’s hot themes and innovative growth sectors is a trend as old as stock investing). Later in 1896, Dow and his statistician partner Edward Jones (not THAT Edward Jones) began publishing a daily Industrials Average of 12 representative companies across major sectors. This index was primitively weighted by the share price of each stock such that the rather arbitrary datapoint of stock share price determined the weighting of each company. The “Dow Jones Industrial Average" was expanded to 30 companies in 1928 (hey, another growth bubble period) and is still used as a market indicator to this day, despite it being such an obsolete methodology (for all I know it may have originally been tabulated by the light of flame). Meanwhile, as stock investing reaches feverish excitement in the Roaring Twenties, demand for market data became stronger and, consequently, a more profitable enterprise. In 1923, Poor’s Publishing - known for publishing a railroad investing guide in the 19th century - joined forces with the bond rating company Standard Statistics to publish a weekly market indicator index of 233 stocks in 26 groups, using a base-weighted aggregate technique tabulating growth from the base year. In 1926, they created a separate 90-stock composite price index (50 industrials, 20 railroads, and 20 utilities), while the 233-stock base-weighted index was re-based to 1926 prices. In 1928, the more manageable 90-stock index was then calculated and published daily, and, eventually, hourly. This is why many academic backtests only go back to 1926 or 1928 - it is the oldest point at which we have daily or weekly index data that meets rigorous academic standards (although monthly US stock return data was later compiled back to 1871). In 1941, the two companies merge to form Standard & Poor’s, the index of 233 companies is expanded to 416, and both indexes are based to 1939. The S&P 500 is born By 1957, the 416 company index had grown to 500 “leading” companies (425 industrials, 60 utilities, and 15 railroads) listed on the New York Stock Exchange, comprising about 90% of that exchange by weight. Thanks to the use of early calculating computers (ie calculators), this new larger index could now be tabulated every minute and linked to the 90 Stock Composite to provide a daily record of index returns back to 1928. As was intended, this 80-90% sample of the total market by weight proved to be extremely close to tracking the relative returns of the US market as a whole, without having to calculate the returns of the thousands of smaller stocks which would have been too cumbersome (mind you, it was still being recorded by hand). Based on its success, this 80-90% market sample methodology would continue to be used by S&P to this day in markets or sectors where small stocks may be insignificant or illiquid and thus not desirable for trading operations. The “S&P 500” proved to be a vast improvement on the DJIA, not just because it was a more diversified sample with far more companies, but also because it used market capitalization weighting instead of share price weighting. While both indexes were commonly cited in the media to gauge the direction of the market (as they still are today), the S&P 500 became THE equity market benchmark for measuring asset manager performance, especially in the growing mutual fund industry. Retail investors may pay more attention to the Dow, but the S&P 500 earned itself an undeniable reputation in the finance sector for being the benchmark of choice. As a result of its popularity, familiarity, accessibility, benchmark status, and manageable sample size, the S&P 500 was the natural choice for the first major public index fund, Jack Bogle’s flagship Vanguard 500 Fund VFINX (although at first the fund could only afford to own 280 of the stocks). State Street also used the S&P 500 index for the launch of the first major ETF index fund (SPY) in 1993. The S&P 500 index composition is managed by a committee at Standard & Poor's (the US Index Committee). In 1988, the S&P 500 would remove the limit on the number of companies by industry, allowing sector weights to float and for substitutions between categories. Per S&P: “the selection process for the S&P 500 is governed by quantitative criteria—including financial viability, public float, adequate liquidity, and company type—that determine whether a security is eligible for inclusion. The committee’s role is to choose among those eligible stocks, taking sector representation into account. Among the key requirements are that a company has a sizeable enough market capitalization to qualify as a large-cap stock. It also must have sufficient float, or percentage of shares available for public trading.” Many people consider the S&P 500 to be “passsive” but as you can see that is something of a myth. Growth of indexes for benchmarking The 1950’s and 1960’s were a heady time for academic study of markets and developing investing theories which laid the groundwork for the Boglehead investing philosophy. In a period of less than 20 years, you have the emergence of Modern Portfolio Theory (Harry Markowitz, 1952), the Capital Asset Pricing Model (Bill Sharpe et al, 1961-66) and the Efficient Market Hypothesis (Eugene Fama et al, 1964-70). It’s also an exciting time for the development of indexing. The Center for Research in Securities Pricing (CRSP) is founded at the University of Chicago in 1960 to tabulate monthly returns for common stocks by size decile back to 1926 for academic research. In 1968, Capital International begins publishing international developed market indexes which are later licensed by, and co-branded with, Morgan Stanley in 1986 to become the MSCI indexes. MSCI’s EAFE (Europe, Australia, and Far East) Index gives us solid backtesting for international stock returns to 1968. Like the S&P 500 for US stocks, the MSCI EAFE becomes the preeminent benchmark for international markets. Benchmarks are increasingly important as more investors are piling into mutual funds (including international ones at a time when those markets were significantly outperforming the US market), and since virtually all mutual funds are actively-managed until index funds grow in popularity in the 1990’s, benchmarking is critical for evaluating manager performance. The NASDAQ Exchange was founded in the US in 1971 as the first fully electronic, computerized stock exchange. This attracted a lot of financial firms looking for opportunities to get an edge with computerized trading, and incidentally, the overwhelming majority of firms to list on the NASDAQ wound up being financial companies. The NASDAQ offered a Composite Index from the start but it was so dominated by financial firms that in 1985 they created a separate index of the non-financial companies listed on the exchange called the NASDAQ 100. It is an accident of history but, based on the timing of its creation and the subsequent popularity of the exchange for listing technology companies launching in the dotcom era of the 1990’s, the NASDAQ 100 became the preeminent benchmark for the US technology and telecommunications sector and got its own ETF (QQQ) in 1999. As indexes become fully computerized, the Wilshire 5000 is launched by Wilshire Associates in 1974 and is really the first index to offer comprehensive cap-weighted returns for the entire investable US market (it had roughly 4,700 stocks when formed but 5,000 sounded better). In 1984 in London, FTSE launches it’s 100 UK index and the Russell Company launches US indexes: the Russell 3000 (a comprehensive US market fund), Russell 1000 (large caps) and Russell 2000 (small caps) which becomes the preeminent US small caps benchmark. All these indexes with catchy but arbitrary big numbers ending in zeros (there’s also MSCI 300, 450, 750, 1750, and 2,500, as well as S&P 100, 400, and 600) are useful for benchmarking returns, but the S&P 500 remained the only one with an index fund tracking it which you could invest in for more than 15 years starting in 1976. Eventually, indexing would become such big business that competition would beget consolidation: FTSE ended up acquiring Russell to make FTSE Russell indexes while Dow Jones acquired Wilshire indexes and later combined with Standard & Poor’s to become S&P Dow Jones. As of 2017, there are more stock indexes than there are stocks! Vanguard launches total US market index Back to the 1990’s bull market… this is another major period of advancement in stock market theory and index investing, notably with the publishing of the Fama-French 3-Factor Model in 1992 and the founding of Dimensional Fund Advisors. But this is also the year that Vanguard explodes with the launch of numerous new index funds to complement their flagship 500 Fund from 1976: their “extended market fund” using the Wilshire 4500 index in 1987 which holds all the US stocks NOT in the 500 index, and their Total Bond Market Fund using the US Aggregate Index in 1986 (now owned by Bloomberg and known as “The Agg”). Thanks to newer stock style indexes from S&P and Russell, Vanguard puts out growth funds, value funds, large and small cap funds, and an international index fund (VGTSX, at first using the MSCI EAFE). But perhaps most importantly, they launched VTSMX - the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index fund - tracking the Wilshire 5000 index. As Jack Bogle described, this single fund would now “enable investors to make a commitment to the entire stock market, which I consider as the full fruition of the index fund concept.” These low cost index funds pioneered by Vanguard then made it possible for average investors to create portfolios that fully realize the aforementioned theories developed in the 1960’s and 1970’s (ICAPM, Merton 1973), namely that passive, cap-weighted total market exposure offers roughly the optimal return-on-risk as determined by the market, it serves as a reasonable proxy for the “market portfolio” of all investable assets in the world, and can be calibrated to any investor’s goals, risk tolerance, and timeline by adjusting the percentage of fixed income assets. Fandom for Vanguard grows and a group of “Die-Hards” on the Morningstar internet forums would become “The Bogleheads”, popularizing the Three-Fund Portfolio of the total US stock market, total international stock market, and total bond market. Vanguard would become the largest brokerage in the world by AUM in 2023, incidentally the same year that the net assets invested in index funds would eclipse those of actively-managed funds. Interestingly, Vanguard has fine-tuned their total market funds over the years, switching between similar indexes which may have lower licensing fees, be more effective at tracking, or have a preferable methodology for other reasons. In 2004, Dow Jones took over the Wilshire 5000 index which Vanguard had been using for their Total Stock Market Index fund and, surely not by coincidence (cost?), in 2005 Vanguard switched it to tracking the MSCI Broad Market Index which “only” covers about 99.5% of the total market. But in 2010-12, CRSP began launching and licensing real-time indexes including the US Total Market Index (known academically as the CRSP 1-10, representing all 10 deciles of the US stock market by size). In a flurry of sweeping moves in 2013, Vanguard switched the Total Stock Market Index Fund again, this time over to the CRSP US Total Market Index (which includes more microcaps) where it remains today. The Total International Stock Market Fund was moved from an MSCI index to the FTSE Global All Cap ex US index. How low will you go? For any total market index fund, the manager must determine the smallest practicable market cap of company they are willing to invest in, informing the size of the investable market they are aiming to achieve exposure to. Even most “total market” index funds won’t capture absolutely ALL of the public companies in a market because when they get small enough, there are simply not enough floating shares available to buy and those stocks become functionally illiquid. The S&P 500 chooses to set its floor at roughly the 500th of the “leading” 500 companies (among the very largest in the market). There is nothing eimpirally significant about the number 500 stocks except that it is particularly catchy branding for us primates using a base 10 counting system (see: Fortune 500, Indy 500, Fiat 500, 500 Club, etc). VTI, Vanguard’s total market index fund holds about 3,500 stocks with a goal of holding all the publicly-traded stocks in the US (a number that varies considerably over time) at market cap weight. In practice, VTI probably holds about 99.9x% of them because there may be a new IPO they haven’t added yet, or a microcap company so small and illiquid they can’t reasonably find sellers of the shares they would need to buy to meet the market cap weight. And when you look up the holdings, you will often find VTI owns MORE stocks than the index, perhaps because it may have a few companies that have folded, been acquired, or were otherwise de-listed from the index, and the fund hasn’t officially unloaded those shares yet. This is meant to be a reminder that, although owning the entire market is the empirical objective of Boglehead-style investing, you can’t ever truly achieve that with 100% daily accuracy. You cannot own an index, you can only own shares of a fund which tracks an index, and there are bound to be some very minor discrepancies at the margins (including cash holdings for fund operations). The CRSP total market index which VTI tracks seeks to own all the stocks in the US market. The S&P 500 index includes only the 500 leading US companies since 1957, and considers that roughly 80% US market ownership by weight to be sufficient to simulate the returns of the total market. So what’s the difference in returns? The reason I’ve taken this long-winded walk through the history of indexing is mainly to illustrate that there’s nothing so special about the S&P 500 or any index that makes it clearly a superior choice or guaranteed to perform better than any other alternative, and the number 500 is fairly arbitrary. It is simply one relatively old total US stock market benchmark index among several others, past and present, using a sampling methodology and certain inclusion criteria. In practice, there should be little to no difference in returns between the S&P 500 and the total US market since the S&P 500 was explicitly designed to closely track the total market. And it turns out it has done a remarkably good job at this - over the last 54 years, the S&P 500 average annual returns are within 0.01-0.02% of the total US market, while taking turns outperforming by small margins. That’s not even “noise”, that is a functionally identical result over tens of thousands of trading days. For all the arguments that the S&P 500 is a superior index because of its rigorous inclusion criteria avoiding the “junk” in small cap stocks, that hasn’t mattered. Liekwise, for all the arguments about the importance of including small cap diversification and the higher returns of small caps as a group, excluding them has had no penalty in returns. These are distinctions in methodology with no meaningful difference in outcomes. Not only that, the returns of the S&P 500 are also nearly identical to those of the even more primitive Dow Jones Industrial Average with only 30 hand-picked stocks. As the Boglehead investment philosophy is based on the pillar of wide diversification to approximate the total market, clearly a total market index fund including small caps is, on principle, a better fulfillment of that objective. But if you feel more comfortable using a sampling index of 1,000 or 500 or 250 or even just 30 stocks, that’s fine too. Just pick one, invest early and often, tune out the noise, and stay the course! submitted by /u/Kashmir79 to r/Bogleheads [link] [comments]

M 27 y.o Started a year ago with VOO and chill. After about a month started some research and put a lot of efforts to analyze a lot of stuff. A week ago decided to save my time and mental health with that simple statment - VOO and chill. This is the way submitted by /u/fi_end_13 to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

Above is a picture of the Japanese Nikkei 225, as you can see it took 34 years to recover from its peak in 1980s. Notably, in the 70s and 80s you had to convince people not to invest in Japan because it was doing so incredibly well. Now, the United States does not face the same issues as Japan, and the S&P 500 has performed incredibly over the last decade, though nevertheless it is not free from this fate. For this reason, the evidence overwhelming points towards international diversification. Now this may lead to worse performance or it may not. Regardless it is certainly a good idea. Each time I read this subreddit and see people with 100% of retirement funds in VOO or the like I am filled with anxiety. submitted by /u/Graceful_Parasol to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

I know a lot of people's money is in VOO. So we all have major stakes in how the S&P 500 behaves over the next 5/10/20 years. Do you expect a major correction? Or will the bull run continue? What are your predictions for 2030? submitted by /u/brownmanreading to r/ETFs [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/YourFat888 to r/whenthe [link] [comments]

Uma passageira brasileira foi até a cabine do voo AA950, que partiria de Guarulhos para o JFK, e cobrou o piloto sobre o atraso Ela foi contida por um dos comissários Conforme comentários de quem estava presente 4 passageiros foram expulsos da aeroporto A passageira que tentou entrar na cabine O marido da mesma O passageiro que saiu gritando A esposa do passageiro gritando O caso aconteceu no dia 24/04 submitted by /u/Mallaguetta_SP to r/brasil [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Snoo64812 to r/ETFs [link] [comments]