If you’re an indexer, you can let the market decide for you. Vanguard Total World Market: 38% growth, 26% value, 36% core. Vanguard Total US Market: 46% growth, 23% value, 31% core. Vanguard 500 Index: 47% growth, 22% value, 22% core. So the market’s advice appears to be “tilt growth.”
Seems like some try to time value or growth. Best to diversify and have both. Value guys say value is better over time, but there are long lulls in value performance. For example, ‘The numbers are clear: over the past decade, growth stocks have produced a 14.6% annualized return, vastly higher than the 10.5% returns from value stocks.Mar 8, 2023’. Value ‘gurus’ push a heavy value tilt, but those in value the last 10 years have a lot of catching up to do.
I keep it simple, with a few low cost index funds, including domestic and international funds. I’ve learned I’m not smart enough to pick winning stocks.
The numbers are clear: over the past decade, growth stocks have produced a 14.6% annualized return, vastly higher than the 10.5% returns from value stocks.Mar 8, 2023
Value and growth often swing independently and enhance your diversification. A blended approach, possibly combined with a balance of large vs. small stocks, should serve the long-term investor well.
With today’s efficient markets, just having some of both through a broad index fund is probably best. You could get cute by owning the two styles separately to take advantage of rebalancing, tax-loss harvesting, and asset location for tax purposes, but I expect long-term returns to be quite similar between growth and value. Just keep it simple with fewer portfolio positions rather than more.
There can be a lot of overlap between growth and value so you should have both.
If you’re an indexer, you can let the market decide for you. Vanguard Total World Market: 38% growth, 26% value, 36% core. Vanguard Total US Market: 46% growth, 23% value, 31% core. Vanguard 500 Index: 47% growth, 22% value, 22% core. So the market’s advice appears to be “tilt growth.”
Seems like some try to time value or growth. Best to diversify and have both. Value guys say value is better over time, but there are long lulls in value performance. For example, ‘The numbers are clear: over the past decade, growth stocks have produced a 14.6% annualized return, vastly higher than the 10.5% returns from value stocks.Mar 8, 2023’. Value ‘gurus’ push a heavy value tilt, but those in value the last 10 years have a lot of catching up to do.
I’d say choose whatever approach you’re most comfortable with, if it will help you stay invested through all market cycles.
Domestic or international, small- or large-cap I bias towards value and quality on top of owning the market.
Value has always seemed a safer strategy to me.
I keep it simple, with a few low cost index funds, including domestic and international funds. I’ve learned I’m not smart enough to pick winning stocks.
I can’t speak for others but I favor value stocks. Sometimes growth can only be measured after the fact.
The numbers are clear: over the past decade, growth stocks have produced a 14.6% annualized return, vastly higher than the 10.5% returns from value stocks.Mar 8, 2023
I don’t know about you, but my investment time horizon is significantly longer than one decade.
For most people an index fund is probably best, a good mix and don’t try to get fancy.
Value and growth often swing independently and enhance your diversification. A blended approach, possibly combined with a balance of large vs. small stocks, should serve the long-term investor well.
With today’s efficient markets, just having some of both through a broad index fund is probably best. You could get cute by owning the two styles separately to take advantage of rebalancing, tax-loss harvesting, and asset location for tax purposes, but I expect long-term returns to be quite similar between growth and value. Just keep it simple with fewer portfolio positions rather than more.
Free Newsletter
Arrives weekly.