Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 3:06 pm
goonie wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 3:04 pm
Marseille07 wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 2:51 pm
Da5id wrote: ↑Wed May 26, 2021 2:45 pm
That is a truly tortured reading of my point. "Nobody knows nothing buy the haystack" is surely the most neutral with regard to future expectations one can be. And I acknowledge no "underdog" in the future returns. I don't know. So please don't put words in my mouth.
I'm not talking about the haystack. I'm talking about buying US, buying ex-US, or both.
If you criticize US-buying as performance chasing, you need to explain what buying ex-US is or isn't. Please don't conveniently bust out the haystack talk. I know you like to talk world market weighting, but it doesn't explain anything about what it means to hold ex-US in your allocation.
You took the debate of US-only vs global cap weight, pushed it to the side, and introduced an alternative debate of US-only vs Intl-only (which nobody is interested in). This is a straw man.
I'm just saying that if US-buying is performance chasing, then ex-US buying is reversal chasing. Responding to this with world market weight is a non-answer.
Your argument really makes no sense at all. The quote, "I don't have any idea what is the favorite or the underdog going forward, only what is in the past. Which is why I have a mix of the two" suggests no performance chasing whatsoever.
Nobody is saying that buying U.S. in and of itself is performance chasing. Nor is buying ex-U.S. reversal chasing.
Dumping international to buy U.S. is performance chasing. Dumping U.S. to buy international is "reversal chasing" although I've not heard that term before.
This isn't complicated. You are trying to make it something that it is not.
I buy U.S. equities. I buy international equities. I don't, nor have I ever, chased performance or reversal. I simply buy, hold, and maintain my AA.
Most here would agree that holding 100% U.S. equities isn't chasing performance unless one is actually chasing it. Someone who's done so for 10 or 20 or 50 years isn't chasing anything. I'd argue they just have a less diversified allocation than they otherwise could have. But that doesn't mean it's performance chasing.
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to prove. To my knowledge, nobody has said that holding 100% U.S. equities is performance chasing if that person has always only held U.S. equities. In the context of this thread, the OP himself said (maybe not in this thread, but certainly many times on the forum) that he grew tired of international's poor performance and chose to go 100% U.S. and that it turns out Jack Bogle and Warren Buffett were right. That is performance chasing.