Skip to content


Permanent Portfolio 25% Stock Allocation FAQ

The Permanent Portfolio allocation is 25% stocks, 25% bonds, 25% gold and 25% cash. In this series of posts we’re going to talk about how to implement each one of these components to take advantage of the economic cycles of Prosperity, Inflation, Recession and Deflation. 

This FAQ is divided into two sections: Short Answers and Long Expanded Answers. If you don’t want to know the details then just read the Short section and skip the Long Expanded section. This page will be updated from time to time as more common questions and answers are needed.

We begin this series with discussing the 25% stock allocation and Prosperity. 

Short Answers

Why own stocks for Prosperity?

Stocks are the #1 asset to have during times of prosperity. During these times the economy is sound and growing. Inflation is under control (less than 5% per annum) and not causing any rapidly rising prices. Market interest rates will be stable and perhaps slightly falling. People are happy. 

In prosperity it is not uncommon to see stock prices rise sharply as companies grow, expand and produce profits for investors. Annual stock returns (price increase + dividends) could be in the +-10% historic range. Times are good, employment is stable, people are spending money on products and services. Stocks are going to perform well.

What kind of stocks should I own in the Permanent Portfolio?

You should own a broad-based stock index fund that captures the maximum returns offered by the stock market without trying to beat the market with speculative stock bets. 

That means you want to use a stock index fund and only a stock index fund. 

Why is an index fund the best choice for the Permanent Portfolio?

Because index funds are the average of the entire stock market. It represents the average returns an investor could expect that year without trying to beat the market. Over time it has been shown that index funds will beat almost all actively managed funds. 

What stock index fund should I use?

There are many index funds available today. Some are good, some are mediocre and some are downright bad. You want to own the cheapest and most broadly-based stock fund available. That leaves two main choices:

  1. Standard & Poors (S&P) 500 Index
  2. Total Stock Market Index

What index fund should I buy?

Here are the basic considerations:

  1. It should track the S&P 500 or Total Stock Market Index
  2. It should have an expense ratio below 0.50% a year
  3. It should be a passive index with no active management of the fund
  4. It should be from a well-established company with a track record for index investing
  5. It must be 100% invested in stocks at all times no matter what.

Here are some options that fit the above criteria:

S&P 500 Index

Vanguard S&P 500 Index Mutual Fund (Ticker: VFINX)

State Street S&P 500 SPDR ETF (Ticker: SPY) *

iShares S&P 500 ETF (Ticker: IVV) *

Fidelity Spartan 500 Mutual Fund (Ticker: FSMKX)

Total Stock Market Index

Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF of Mutual Fund (ETF Ticker: VTI / Mutual Fund Ticker: VTSMX)

iShares Russell 3000 Index ETF (Ticker: IWV) *

Fidelity Spartan Total Stock Market Mutual Fund (Ticker: FSTMX)

This list is far from complete. If you are at a brokerage or mutual fund company that offers their own index fund then you can use that as long as it meets the listed criteria. 

* See question below about difference between an Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) and a Mutual Fund.

Should I use the S&P 500 or Total Stock Market index if I have the choice?

I prefer the Total Stock Market for the wider diversification and tax efficiency. Harry Browne suggested using the S&P 500. It doesn’t matter too much for performance except for some small minutiae. 

Can I use an actively traded fund for the Permanent Portfolio instead of a broad based index fund?

No you can’t. You don’t want a fund manager making decisions to move between stocks, bonds, cash, commodities, etc. and disturbing the strategy. You must use a fund that is 100% invested in stocks at all times for the stock portion of the portfolio. The Permanent Portfolio holds assets that will protect you from big stock losses already. You don’t need a manager trying to out-guess the markets. 

This rule is not flexible. Do not break it. 

My retirement plan doesn’t offer any index funds. What can I do?

This is an unfortunate problem for many workers. Index funds are not as profitable for mutual fund companies who like making big fees on actively managed funds. As a result, many 401(k) and IRA plans don’t offer index funds. 

In this case you have few choices:

1) Move your IRA to someplace like Vanguard that has index funds.

2) Ask your retirement plan administrator to make index funds available either by requesting them from the 401(k) custodian or if necessary moving the company 401(k) plan to a new custodian that does offer them.

3) Use the funds that you have to the best of your ability.

If you are forced into option (3) (and many are), then try to look for the following in your funds that you do have:

  • Lowest expense ratio possible.
  • Should track the broadest and largest stocks in the US market.
  • Should be 100% in stocks at all times and not be moving in and out of assets like bonds.
  • Should have low portfolio turnover

What about owning International stocks and what index should I use? 

International exposure is not so important to US investors. The US Economy and companies are already all over the world. There is also currency risk with international stock investing which can hurt performance in some cases. However, if you wanted to own some international exposure then perhaps 5% or so of the portfolio is fine (so 20% US index and 5% Intl. Index).

Again the international index should be cheap and broad-based. The EAFE international index, FTSE international ex-US index or what is sometimes called a Total International Index are good choices:

iShares EAFE Index (Ticker: EFA)

Vanguard FTSE ex-US Index (Ticker: VEU / Mutual Fund: VFWIX)

Vanguard Total International Index (Ticker: VGTSX)

Fidelity Spartan International Index Fund (Ticker: FSIIX)

Harry Browne did not openly advocate international diversification in the Permanent Portfolio, but his associates have said a little is OK.  Also, some international index funds charge slightly more because of the added expense of trading on foreign stock exchanges. Therefore, international stock index funds are more expensive but should not exceed 0.75% in expense ratio. 

What’s the recap?

  1. Only buy index funds for the stock portion of the portfolio.
  2. The index fund should be either Total Stock Market or the S&P 500.
  3. The index fund expense ratio should be less than 0.50% a year (unless it is an international index and can be up to 0.75% a year).
  4. Never purchase an actively traded stock fund unless you have absolutely no other choice available to you.
  5. Do not try to beat the market with the funds. Your market protection is already built into the other asset classes you own. The stock asset class serves a specific purpose and you don’t want to tamper with it by trying to outguess the market.
  6. If you want to own some international exposure you should limit it to about 5% allocation (5% Intl + 20% Domestic = 25% total in stock)

Long Expanded Answers

What is a stock index fund?

An index fund is a way of passively tracking a pre-defined basket of stocks. Index funds typically own several hundred to several thousand company stocks. These stocks are usually owned in proportion to the size of the company in the market. For instance an index fund owning the US Stock market will own a much larger number of shares of General Electric (a huge multi-national company) compared to small regional publicly traded company like a power utility.  

The advantage of this approach is the index doesn’t need to engage in expensive activities associated with actively traded investment funds (such as research, analysts, advisors, etc.). Because the stock index fund owns the entire market it is expected to earn the average performance of the market in any one year minus their small management fees to maintain the fund. 

What is the S&P 500 Index?

The S&P 500 is an index of stocks compiled by Standard and Poor’s that comprise the 500 largest and most liquid publicly traded companies in the United States by market capitalization. These are the companies you rely on every day of your life for just about everything you do. General Electric. Wal-Mart, 3M, Microsoft, Johnson and Johnson, Google, Coca-Cola, IBM, Home Depot, McDonald’s, etc. 

You can see the entire current list here:

Current S&P 500 Companies

The S&P 500 represents around 70% of the total value of the US Stock market. 

What is the Total Stock Market Index?

The Total Stock Market (TSM) index includes all the companies of the S&P 500, but also includes all the other publicly traded companies that aren’t quite big enough to make it into the largest 500 list. These are called “mid-cap” and “small-cap” companies which means they have a market capitalization (size) that is smaller than the biggest (which are called “large-cap”).

The TSM index is commonly called other names such as the Wilshire 5000 or Russell 3000. A TSM index commonly holds thousands of companies (3000-7000+) in the composition as opposed to the 500 of the S&P 500. The TSM index easily covers 98%+ of the entire US publicly traded stock market. This is why it’s called the “Total Stock Market” Index. It owns just about everything except tiny low-volume stocks or penny stocks

Why should I only use index funds for the Permanent Portfolio?

Indexing is the best and most efficient way to invest in stocks. Not only does it guarantee you maximum possible returns because you own all the companies all the time, but it’s also cheap. A typical index fund may have an expense ratio of less than 0.20% per year. This means for every $10,000 you have invested in the index the fund management company is going to take just $20 for handling all the operations. 

Compare this to a non-index fund which can charge 1%, 2% or more each year. It doesn’t sound like much, but for each $10,000 invested you’re paying $100, $200 or more every year to the managers. Over the years it starts to really add up and hurt performance. It’s like driving a car dragging an anchor behind it where the index is like driving that car dragging just an empty soda can. 

Not only this, but most actively managed funds don’t beat the index fund over time. So you are paying more in management fees and you’re paying this extra cost for them to underperform the market. Yes, it’s true.  

Didn’t Harry Browne recommend owning the S&P 500 Index in his book Fail-Safe Investing and radio show? Why use the Total Stock Market Index instead?

It doesn’t matter that much except maybe for taxable investors. The Vanguard S&P 500 index has been available for 30 years and was the world’s first commercially successful index fund. It has a stellar track record.

In the early 1990’s though the Total Stock Market came on the scene. It held a much larger number of stocks and should have slightly better tax efficiency. The overall performance between the two is largely identical depending from year to year. Over the past several years, companies like Vanguard (the pioneer in index funds and world’s largest fund company) are recommending to their customers to use the Total Stock Market fund over the S&P 500 fund. 

The reason why I personally prefer the TSM over the S&P 500 is the wider diversification and tax friendliness.The S&P 500 index holds 500 stocks and sometimes when a company shrinks it is removed from the index and replaced with a new one. This can generate unnecessary selling for the fund and those costs are passed onto the fund holders. If  you are holding the fund in a taxable account this means you could incur capital gains taxes that you didn’t expect. 

Because the TSM owns almost all publicly traded stocks at all times it tends to generate less capital gains vs. the S&P 500 because it isn’t required to sell a company when it gets too small and buy more of another when it gets too big. If a company gets too small in the TSM it is probably bankrupt and will be delisted. This is not a taxable event. Likewise if a company gets too big there is no need for the index to sell another company to make room for the new leader. The fund simply buys more of the new leader’s stock. 

With the above said, we’re dancing on the head of a pin. Both types of index funds are quite tax-efficient and offer excellent performance. I simply prefer the TSM fund because I like the wider diversification and want to get any edge on tax efficiency I can. If you want to use the S&P 500 index, or have no other choice, then that is still an excellent decision and you will be in great shape for the Permanent Portfolio strategy. Don’t sweat it. 

Shouldn’t I have a fund manager making stock decisions using their wisdom and insight?

NO! First of all the Permanent Portfolio has fixed allocation to stocks, bonds, cash and gold. You don’t want to own a fund for your stock portion and have that manager suddenly decide they don’t want to own stocks and go 100% cash or bonds. They can throw a real monkey wrench into the strategy if you have not only the markets moving around but now you have some fund manager trying to outguess what is going to happen next. 

The Permanent Portfolio strategy has assets that will cover you if the markets are doing poorly or doing well. You don’t need a fund manager making decisions that could hurt performance. 

But aren’t fund managers smarter than me at beating the market? 

You aren’t trying to beat the market. Also, here’s a secret: Fund managers are the market. 

Somewhere around 90% of all stock trades on the market are between institutional investors. That means mutual fund companies, pension plans, endowments, stock brokers, investment banks, etc. They are basically all trading against each other. Each has access to the same information, the same real-time news, the same hot tips, etc. Yet, one has decided to buy a stock and one has decided to sell that same stock.

What does this mean? It means they are both trading on virtually identical information and making decisions that are 180 degrees away from each other. How can that be? Simple: They are trading on random noise. 

When you own the entire stock market you benefit from all the wisdom, research and money these other firms have spent analyzing the stocks of the companies in the index. The index holds all stocks. The stocks go up and down as earning outlooks adjust. You just sit back and collect the money without having to pay a bunch of MBAs to research everything and come to opposite conclusions about what to do. It’s the best deal going.

But can’t a good manager beat the market? 

It’s no better than luck. Virtually every study performed on this area has shown it to be luck. It’s called the Random Walk because the market movements are equivalent to a drunk stumbling down the street. You can watch him and know he’s moving a particular direction, but at any moment he may change course, stumble, reverse or simply puke on your shoes. It’s not predictable and one of the core tenants of the Permanent Portfolio is not trying to predict the markets. 

The important thing to remember is that each year the people who beat the market changes. One year you’ll have a hot fund manager and the next year they may rank near the bottom. Then a new winner will come up to beat the index only to find in a couple years they’ve faded away. And on and on. 

Well as it turns out, over time as winners come and go the average annual return of the index funds just keeps climbing and climbing higher. After a decade or two the index fund owners find that their returns end up in the top quartile of performance without having to pay high fees to get it. 

Think of it this way. Let’s say you’re a marathon runner in a group of 10 people. You’re not the fastest, but you have consistent performance and finish in the top half of all participants each time you race. Sometimes you’re 5th, sometimes 3rd, sometimes 4th, etc. 

Now you enter a series of races against your nine competitors and you run each year for 20 years. Over that time the fastest runner the first year ends up dead last the next. The previous loser is now the winner. Then a new winner shows up and hurts his knee and drops out of racing entirely due to the injury. Etc. The years go by and you never win a race, but you’re consistent. You’re so consistent that you’ve racked up many 5th place, 4th place, 3rd place and maybe even a couple 2nd place finishes. You’ve never done really well each year, but you’ve also never done really badly. In fact you’ve managed to show up for each and every race and never missed one yet. 

Well after 20 years of this consistent performance you will probably find that you’ve won the marathon series. Your rivals have either dropped out, burned out, or were never consistent enough to be in the top five. Your supposedly “average” performance pushed you into the well above average category because you are so consistent and reliable year in and year out.

That’s indexing. You’re not going to be the best each year, but over time you’re going to win. Promise. 

What is a fair expense ratio for an index fund? 

Anything 0.50% a year or below for a US index fund or 0.75% or below for an International fund.

Some companies offer S&P or Total Stock Market funds with outrageously high expense ratios of 1% or more. Do not use these funds unless you have no other choice available. If the index fund is charging more than 0.50% a year then you are being charged too much and need to find another option if you can. 

Some international index funds charge slightly more because of the added expense of trading on foreign stock exchanges. Therefore, international stock index funds are more expensive but should not exceed 0.75% in expense ratio.

If your only choice is an expensive index fund or an expensive actively managed fund then choose the expensive index fund. The best choice though is a cheap index fund.

What is the difference between a Mutual Fund and an ETF?

An ETF is short for Exchange Traded Fund. This is a fund that can be traded intraday like any stock on the market. You can buy an ETF in the morning and sell it at lunch then buy it back again before you go home from work. This would be an incredibly bad idea, but you could do it if you wanted.

A typical mutual fund however allows redemptions and deposits on a fixed basis (usually at the end of the trading day). This means when you buy a fund you get the price of the fund after the market closes.  You can’t trade in and out of it multiple times a day. Some companies (like Vanguard) won’t even let you buy back into a fund you just sold until you wait 60 days. This is done to keep the market timers and performance chasers from hurting the long-term holders of the fund and keep down costs. 

The difference here doesn’t matter much for a buy-and-hold investment strategy like the Permanent Portfolio. The hourly or even daily fluctuations in price are irrelevant. However there is one major difference between ETFs and Mutual funds: Trading Costs.

When you buy a mutual fund you send your money to the your broker or fund custodian and make the purchase. Many times if the mutual fund is with the same company there is no transaction fee for this. You would, for example, send your money into Vanguard and tell them “Buy as many shares of the Total Stock Market Index as my deposit allows.” They say “Ok.” The sale is made, and the shares deposited into your account with no other fees involved.

Well with an ETF you need to deal with a brokerage. You have to place a market order, perhaps worry about a bid/ask spread, then pay a commission on the whole transaction. The commissions at a discount broker can be less than $10 or be hundreds of dollars at a “full-service” brokerage for each trade. 

The problem is if you are making many small trades then the ETF can get expensive. If you are, for instance, depositing $100 a month into your portfolio you may spend $10 just to purchase the ETF. In other words, 10% of your savings that month went into transaction costs! Not good. 

However if you sent that same $100 into a mutual fund company they simply would buy into the fund and not charge you commission. So you save money on the upfront purchase. Much better. 

Now there are times where ETFs make sense and I will recommend some ETFs later on. But the important thing to remember is you should do the transactions in bulk and not a bunch of small trades with ETFs. If you follow that rule you can avoid the small commission charges that can really add up over time. 

What about using an index fund that tracks a specialty index like small-cap stocks? 

This is not advised. You want the broadest based index fund that captures the widest returns available from the US Stock market. That means the S&P 500 or TSM funds. 

But haven’t small-cap stocks beaten large-cap stocks over the years?

Academics say “yes”. Reality says “it depends”. There are periods of time when large-cap companies dominate the market returns and times when small-cap companies dominate the market returns. It is unpredictable. 

Let’s look at a big stock bull market to make our point. From 1980-1999 Small Cap stocks returned 14.29% CAGR but Large Cap stocks returned 17.11% CAGR. So for nearly 20 years the supposed higher returns of small-cap stocks over large-cap stocks didn’t exist. That’s a long time to wait for a theory of small-cap outperformance to show up isn’t it? How many people would have been sticking with that idea by year 17 or 18 of the strategy? Not many.

A broad based index will ensure you can grab extra returns from any stock asset class because you’ll own all of them all the time. 

And before you start thinking that you’d rather have 100% stock portfolio to get those great returns all I can say is “Good Luck!” That was a wild ride and one of the greatest bull markets in stocks in US history. Not only that, but there are periods on both sides of that date range (1970’s and 2000’s) when stock performance was horrible!

If you still need more information about why the small cap advantage may not be that big of an advantage after all, please see this speech by Vanguard Founder Jack Bogle:

The Telltale Chart

What about owning some international stocks? 

Harry Browne didn’t advise this specifically. John Chandler, a close associate of Harry Browne and his former publisher says a little International exposure is OK but don’t go overboard. 

My opinion is that 20% of your stock allocation percentage in International stocks is fine. That means 5% of your 25% allocation could be international stocks (5% – Intl and 20% Domestic). 

The US is still about half the world’s economic output. It’s simply massive and not going away any time soon despite what some say. The fact is that American companies already have huge international presence and therefore international exposure already. Think about it and you’ll agree. General Electric has appliances, lightbulbs, generators, jet engines, etc. all over the world. You can’t hardly go anywhere on the planet without running into a McDonald’s or Starbucks. Microsoft and Apple Computer sell their products everywhere. Don’t forget food either. Archer Daniels Midland, Kraft, Campbells Soup, Coca-Cola, etc. export their products extensively. Caterpillar sells their construction equipment to everyone to build roads, bridges, buildings and everything else. Finally, you probably are flying on a Boeing plane to get to all of these places and rent a Ford or GM car to go to your Marriott hotel when you get there. Did you forget your running shoes for your morning jog? Not a problem. The store down the street probably sells Nikes. 

Get my point? 

So even if you think you have 0% international exposure by only owning American companies you actually don’t. It’s almost certain that the profits you receive from these stocks are generated from all over the world and not just from America.

What’s the recap?

  1. Only buy index funds for the stock portion of the portfolio.
  2. The index fund should be either Total Stock Market or the S&P 500.
  3. The index fund expense ratio should be less than 0.50% a year (unless it is an international index and can be up to 0.75% a year).
  4. Never purchase an actively traded stock fund unless you have absolutely no other choice available to you.
  5. Do not try to beat the market with the funds. Your market protection is already built into the other asset classes you own. The stock asset class serves a specific purpose and you don’t want to tamper with it by trying to outguess the market.
  6. If you want to own some international exposure you should limit it to about 5% allocation (5% Intl + 20% Domestic = 25% total in stock)
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Posted in FAQ, Permanent Portfolio.

Tagged with , , , , , , .


21 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Zack Hiwiller says

    Great post, craig. My 401(k)’s lonely index choice is an S&P 500 index fund with an ER of 0.36% I don’t find that to be too outrageous given the limits of a 401(k). Maybe a better rule of thumb would be for the index to be below 0.5% If you limit domestic/international to .25/.5, I think you are going to leave people with too small a universe of choices. I think a .5/.75 is more reasonable, but that is just my opinion. We’d all like to have access to Vanguard’s mutual funds or ETFs in our retirement accounts, but for many it isn’t possible.

  2. craigr says

    Hi Zack,

    Thanks for visiting. You are right that the expense ratios can be higher. Sometimes as an index fund snob not locked into a 401(k) I forget that options others have may not be as good as the 0.10% fees that Vanguard, Fidelity or iShares can charge people. I made your suggested changes to the FAQ as they are reasonable. In the end, people are better off with an expensive index fund than an expensive actively traded fund. The focus should be to find the cheapest index fund you can that covers the broadest range of stocks available to you. I’d rather see someone in an S&P 500 index charging 1% a year (even though it is highway robbery) than an actively traded fund charging the same amount. Thanks for your input and please come back to visit often.

  3. Lombezien says

    Craig,

    With U.S stocks accounting for a mere 45% (and falling) or so of the world’s stock market capitalization, why wouldn’t Vanguard’s new global stock index be a better choice for the stock allocation?

    Seems to me the ultimate global diversification the new fund offers outweighs the tradiitonally cited additional risks of int’l investing, some of which you cite. But as far as I’m concerned, the biggest risk going forward may end up being holding too many dollars in a world where wealth is increasingly transferred abroad, and America buries itself in debt.

    Thanks.

  4. craigr says

    Lombezien,

    The new Vanguard Global Index (ticker: VTWSX ETF ticker: VT) is interesting and I have considered using it myself. It’s a little on the expensive side but I anticipate this will eventually come down as Vanguard is known to do.

    The US’s percentage of world GDP is shrinking, but their companies are very far reaching around the globe. Whenever I travel outside the country I’m constantly reminded of the deep presence of American influence around the world. My allocation in the past moved anywhere from 20% US stocks 5% intl. to 15% US Stocks and 10% intl. as markets moved. In the end the global markets are so interdependent (as 2008 has shown) that having a lot of intl. diversification may not matter as much as we think. Overall I think your biggest bang for the buck diversification is maintaining the 25% split with stocks, bonds, cash and gold than splitting up the stock portion too much.

    But your point is well taken. Investing is not an exact science and I see a lot of potential in Vanguard’s new total world fund as a one stop shop for stock allocation for the Permanent Portfolio. Thanks for your comment.

  5. Sean Person says

    How does one create the GOLD portion when all they really have to invest is 401K pretax money. You can use GLD etf but its not the same and in the end it is just worthless paper. If the majority of your portfolio ends up tax advantaged you wont have enough money for the 25% physical gold…

  6. craigr says

    Hi Sean,

    There are two things you can do:

    1) You can use an IRA to hold gold coins. Some IRA custodians can purchase and hold Gold Eagles in your IRA for you and this is allowed by the IRS.

    2) You can hold the gold outside of your retirement accounts. The first assets you want in tax sheltered are your cash and bonds which throw off lots of interest income you don’t want taxed (bonds can also have capital appreciation you want to shelter). The third asset is your stocks which throw off dividend income and capital gains when you rebalance. The last asset you want in your retirement account is gold. Gold gains are taxed at a flat 28% “collectible” tax rate but it throws off no interest or dividends to shelter through the years. You’ll only pay this tax as you rebalance from time to time (perhaps many years between transactions).

    If you choose option (2) you may want to reduce your retirement fund contributions a to make the gold purchase outside the IRA.

    I agree that the gold ETF is the least liked choice for owning gold. Having an IRA custodian hold physical gold for you is better, but you still have some counter-party risks. The best choice is physical bullion stored securely yourself or held at a bank in segregated storage for you.

    I’m working on the FAQ that will discuss buying and holding gold that will hopefully answer a lot of questions you may have so please check back in the next couple weeks.

  7. Sean Person says

    im not sure i like the IRA gold coin thing either, banks will seize your gold just like they did in 1933. US governement will totally collapse within 8 years or less if we do not return to gold standard and end federal reserve usury. i like your investing strategy alot better than peter schiff but still very wary of the zionists and socialists that destroy our governement and our lives. sometimes i think there is no logical investment if country is doomed.

  8. craigr says

    Sean,

    You just do the best you can and hope things work out but have plans in place in case they don’t. As for the US seizing gold, well they did it in 1933 because it was tied to the dollar. Today it’s not tied to anything so I’m not sure what it would buy them by seizing it. But governments do strange things. Even if this were to happen, they’ll certainly go for the gold at the COMEX warehouses first where it’s easy to grab. The idea of them going door to door is not likely and if it were to happen we have much bigger problems to worry about.

  9. Joel says

    Love your blog. Thank you for introducing me to the Permanent Portfolio and Harry Browne. I read Fail-Safe over the weekend and I must say that is the BEST book ever on portfolio investing. Did Browne study Austrian economics (real economics) because his economic views are similar to Ron Paul. I have a couple of questions that I hope you could address.

    I’m in the processing of setting up my portfolio: 25% in Gold at GoldMoney.com; 25% in VMPXX for Cash (Roth IRA); 25% in VFINX (Roth IRA) & FUSEX (401K) for Stocks. However, I’m not sure what to do with the bond allocation. I wanted to purchase VUSTX since I have a Vanguard Roth IRA but the maturities for the bonds are only 15 years, where as Browne recommends 30 years. I could use TreasuryDirect.com but they charge $45 for each sell. I would like to use VUSTX since it would be in my Roth IRA and therefore be tax deferred.

    So should I buy the bonds from TreasuryDirect or buy VUSTX in my roth to take advantage of the tax deferred account. VUSTX returns prior to last year were on par with other long term treasury bonds which is why I believe last year’s under performance was temporary.

    One more thing, for those that are interested in Austrian Economics check out mises.org. I’m currently taking a home study course in Austrian Economics. I have to say it’s the best $350 I’ve spent (beside my PS3!!!!). Here’s the link for anyone interested….http://www.mises.org/store/Mises-Institute-Home-Study-Course-in-Austrian-Economics-P211C0.aspx

    Thanks

  10. craigr says

    Hi Joel,

    Can your Vanguard IRA access the Vanguard Brokerage Service? If so, you could buy the LT Treasury bonds on the secondary market for possibly less money (You’ll have to check your fee structure). Or you could buy the iShares Treasury Long Term ETF (Ticker: TLT) which is a better substitute for LT Treasuries over the Vanguard LT Treasury bond fund. The iShares LT Treasury fund moves almost identically to near 30 year treasury bonds. If you can’t do these options and can only use the Vanguard fund then that’s just what you’ll have to do. It’s better than not owning bonds at all in the portfolio.

    Also keep in mind you are only selling your bonds when they get back down to 20 years maturity or you need to rebalance. I’m not sure of the purchase quantity you are making, but this means you could go years before needing to pay the Treasury Direct fees. So the costs may not be so bad when you consider a bond fund is charging you an expense ratio each year to do this for you.

    Harry Browne was a student of Austrian economics which is why what he says is so logical compared to Keynesians. :) He also knew Ron Paul. His Austrian views are why his portfolio is structured on economic cycles and understanding of the impacts of monetary supply. Lastly, the strong emphasis he places on uncertainty in predicting human behavior in the markets is another hallmark of the Austrian school. I have the same home study course and it is indeed a fantastic read for someone who wants to understand the Austrian economist view of the world.

  11. Joel says

    Unfortunately, I don’t have access to the brokerage services. I like TLT too but I’ve decided that it makes more sense for me to use VUPSX for my Roth. This year’s $5,000 (75%) dollar Roth IRA contribution means I would have to allocate only an extra $1,250.00 (25%) into GoldMoney.com making my total portfolio contribution to $6,250. If I use TreasuryDirect or TLT, I’ll have to allocate even more money to establish a balance portfolio. I would have to contribute $5,000 for Roth that is split between VFINX and VMPXX; $2,500 for GoldMoney.com and $2,500 for TreasuryDirect or TLT in a taxable account. That would make my total portfolio contribution $10,000 instead of $6,250 I would have if I used VUSTX in my Roth.

    There’s noting wrong with saving more money (10,000 vs 6,250) but with this economy I’m primarily considered about establishing an adequate emergency fund. Does this plan make sense? Your input would be greatly appreciated.

    Also, I’ve been listening to his investment archive and I have to say that it is incredible. Why did I never hear of him earlier? That would have saved me 30-40% percent of my portfolio :( Thank God I’m only 24, so I can take that hit. From now on, I’m never listening to mainstream media’s investment advice. I can’t believe I let them convince me to put 100% of my portfolio in stocks!!!!!! Along with their propaganda that stocks and real estate will always go up!!!!

    As a new student to the Austrian School (thank you Ron Paul), I think Browne’s portfolio is amazing. What I love most about this portfolio is that its structure is based on economic cycles which makes the portfolio bulletproof. It’s simple, makes sense, and has a great track record. I upset it took me so long to realize what a TRUE diversified portfolio looks like.

    We live in a uncertain world (human actions), so its pointless for me to send hours researching about investments (those days are over thanks to the PP). Now I can focus on passing my CPA exam…lol. Once again, thanks for all your help and keep up the good work.

    Thanks,

  12. craigr says

    Joel,

    It may be worth calling up some other companies like Fidelity, etc. and asking them if they allow access to the bond secondary market for IRAs or ETFs. If so, you may want to open an IRA with them.

    Also you are better off holding gold in your taxable account over bonds, cash or stocks if you can. Gold doesn’t give off interest or dividends each year so you can save on some tax impacts and leave more room in your tax-deferred accounts for the other assets.

    What is the VUPSX fund? I don’t know that fund.

    As for saving money in this economy. I agree it’s important to save as much as you can. The 25% “cash” allocation is to help you ride out recessions (or worse). However I’d just suggest also that you try to keep the balanced portfolio once you get a comfortable cash position. The markets are unpredictable (especially now!) and anything can happen so you want to make sure you have all four asset corners built up to provide protection to you.

    I came across Harry Browne’s investment advice in the last couple years. I came to the same conclusions you did about risk in the markets. Harry Browne’s approach didn’t really resonate with me at first until I started to do some serious research and found out that his advice is excellent.

    Now, I think if your portfolio doesn’t hold stocks, bonds, cash and gold you are simply not diversified. These people recommending 100% stock portfolios based on past history are really taking a huge gamble. IMO. There is a significant chance of failure following that advice. As for real estate, etc. “always going up”. Yeah that is real howler told by many in the real estate business. Homes are consumption items. That’s it. You buy one because you want the benefits of ownership. If you make a profit when you move, great, but don’t count on it. If you’re going to invest in real estate you should do it only as a speculative investment with money you can afford to lose.

    But you’re young so you’ll be fine. The benefit you have is you have learned the lesson of too much risk so early in your life. There are people much older than you that unfortunately are in serious trouble because they took too much risk or didn’t educate themselves about investing. One of the goals of this site is to educate others about portfolio ideas that can grow your money safely with lower risk.

    Each year brings new challenges and the permanent portfolio is not guaranteed against loss. But for my money I feel it’s a pretty good approach and sleep well at night knowing I follow the ideas of Harry Browne. If you follow Harry Browne’s 16 golden rules of financial safety you will do well in your investing career so don’t let today’s bad market get you down.

  13. hassan Dannawi says

    Iam 75 years old retiree lost 40% last year>I put money in Midas fund which is bold fund,I lost half of my money.Permanent portfolio seemed good what about long term treasury.Is it safe

  14. craigr says

    Hassan,

    I am sorry to hear about your loss. Many people are in a similar situation. I don’t like to give specific advice because each person is different with different situations. My general advice though is you should always maintain a very widely diversified portfolio and never make too large of a bet in any single investment category. I don’t know about the Midas fund, but it looks very heavy on gold miners which were hurt badly in 2008. It also is a very expensive fund that lost 60% in value last year. My advice would be you should diversify to protect your remaining money.

    If you are unsure what to do to manage your portfolio you can look into buying the simple Permanent Portfolio Fund (http://www.permanentportfolio.com/perm.htm). This fund incorporates a very similar strategy to Harry Browne’s approach. It provides simple diversification inside of one fund.

    If you wanted to run your own fund then I suggest you may want to read his book Fail-Safe investing which talks about how to setup your own portfolio.

    As to whether long term treasures are “safe”. Well everything has risks and every investment will be safer in some environments than others. Then other times an investment maybe quite dangerous. Since the markets are not predictable we cannot know what is best to own at any one time which is why you should always be diversified with the Permanent Portfolio.

    At a minimum I always advise people to ignore market predictions and hold a diversified portfolio in all cases. Nobody can predict the future.

  15. JackPine says

    Hi craigr– If I choose to ignore the risk of the ETF GLD just being a piece of paper and used it instead of physical gold in the Permanent Portfolio would GLD not hedge inflation similar to physical gold?

  16. craigr says

    JackPine,

    If you can only do ETF Gold for the Permanent Portfolio then that’s better than no gold at all in the portfolio. If we have bad inflation, and assuming the ETF is properly run, then it likely would hedge inflation like physical gold. However you still have the counter-party and other risks if things were to get especially bad with the dollar and we go into a severe inflation scenario.

  17. JackPine says

    So if I buy physical gold and keep it in a safe at my house how do i go about rebalancing if gold prices drop and I have my other 75% of the permanent portfolio in a Roth IRA? Do I moving funds from the tax shelter to purchase more gold? This would not be efficient would it?

  18. craigr says

    Jack,

    In that case it may make sense to perhaps use your IRA funds to temporarily build back up your gold allocation using ETFs by rebalancing out of your other IRA assets as needed. Then slowly build your non-IRA gold allocation back up with other funds and sell down the gold ETF held in the IRA.

  19. JackPine says

    Hi Craig,

    I am looking forward to your FAQ pertaining to gold. Thanks for entertaining my questions.

  20. JackPine says

    Craig,

    In your opinion is holding the PP in the form of:
    TLT 25%
    GLD 25%
    VFISX 25% or Cash
    VTWSX 25% or VTSMX
    preferable to simply holding:
    100% PRPFX?

  21. craigr says

    Jack,

    If you’re a DIY kind of guy the ETFs are fine (except I’d prefer not to see the gold in ETF form, but rather more physical control). If you don’t like messing with things then PRPFX is also fine if you are OK with the slight differences in the allocation. Over the long haul they both have done about the same. If you don’t know which you’d prefer, you could always do a little of both. The PRPFX fund is going to cost more in expense ratio over DIY (and there is also manager risk), but that’s the price you pay for the convenience. I personally use the 4 x 25% split myself.



Some HTML is OK

or, reply to this post via trackback.