Post New

Buffet: “And my widow will not be an expert on stocks. And- I wanna be sure she gets a decent result. She isn't gonna get a sensational result, you know? And since all my Berkshire shares are going-- to philanthropy-- the question becomes what does she do with the cash that's left to her? And I've been-- part of it goes outright, part of it goes to a trustee. But I've told the trustee to put 90% of it in an S&P 500 index fund and 10% in short-term governments.”

Same interview: "Vanguard would be fine, and Berkshire would be fine...I wouldn't want to be touting Berkshire to people generally. I have no problem touting the S&P500, and low cost".

Likely Buffett is still advising 90% S&P500.

I’ve been thinking on this some lately. My trustee (likely my daughter) will also not be an expert on stocks. She could be but likely will not have the time or inclination. It's tricky: situations change, the investing landscape changes, as we have recently witnessed.

I’m thinking to recommend leaving the Berkshire, currently 50%, and putting the rest in Vanguard Total World Stock ETF VT, or equivalent. I know, cap weighted and far from optimal. Advantages are it’s cheap, likely to be around long term, and… it is cap-weighted, it makes no bets on anything in particular, “the entire global stock market in one low-cost package”.

Any thoughts?

I'm in the same boat.

My investment instructions say to sell Berkshire and all other equities and put the proceeds into RSP.

It's not perfect, but that's the best I got.

A few of random thoughts.

Yes, I'm predictable, cap weight is a bad idea. Based on the best research available, almost any other weighting scheme you might find is going to be better. Equal weight, fundamental weight, whatever.

If you like the total world as a fund, there are equal weight versions of that too, I think. Maybe only the ones listed in Europe though.

I am a big fan of QQQE. Lower concentration than the S&P 500, so much lower single company risk. Equally weighted. But mainly, the value based on old fashioned earnings has gone up WAY faster than for the S&P 500 set of firms. This gap may not remain in future, but it is really immense. And QQQE isn't nearly as high above its average valuation level as the S&P 500 is above its own average level. In round numbers, I would guess that QQQE was close to its long run average valuation level at the lows two weeks ago, not something you could say about the S&P. The disadvantage is that it includes a few companies I would not feel comfortable investing in, but that's a problem with every fund. The fees are high, but that is more than made up for by the earnings growth, which has been on trend around inflation + 8%/year for ages. Even if that dropped a lot, the S&P's equivalent rate of trend real earnings growth is less than half that.

I would rate attractiveness of QQQE better than RSP, and RSP better than SPY.

I have in the past made positive noises about an "estate" portfolio of big chunks of BRK and QQQE. My thinking has changed recently as a result of deciding to reduce to a minimum my economic exposure to the US, but that probably doesn't affect other folks.

For a "know nothing" portfolio that is more work, not what you were asking for, there is much to be said for the dartboard. Buy equal dollar amounts of all the stocks in any major index. S&PP 500, Russell 1000, MSCI World large cap, Nasdaq 100, whatever. Every year or two (but not near end June), reconstitute. Sell anything no longer in the index, buy things that are newly added, and rebalance all the positions to roughly equal weight. (many brokerage interfaces have a one-button rebalance feature). Too much typing? Buy any random subset of 40-100 companies in the index, reconstitute every year or two with new random picks. The key secret: do NOT try to pick a subset based on what you know about any companies, use dice. Based on academic studies and some of my own tests, your chances of beating the S&P 500 over time are in the vicinity of 90-99%.

Jim

My investment instructions say to sell Berkshire and all other equities and put the proceeds into RSP.

I'm not comfortable with everything in the US market. RSP really hasn't done well, so far at least.

https://testfol.io/analysis?s=0SCmjmtLNns

I'm not comfortable with everything in the US market. RSP really hasn't done well, so far at least.

VT is a great idea, the least complicated.
If dividend taxes (by furriners) is a concern, then maybe 60/40 or 50/50 VTI/VXUS. You can't claim foreign tax credit for non-US dividend taxes for VT (< 50% non-US as of now), but you can't claim foreign for VXUS.

Argh...
" but you CAN claim it for VXUS. "

VT is a great idea, the least complicated.
If dividend taxes (by furriners) is a concern, then maybe 60/40 or 50/50 VTI/VXUS. You can't claim foreign tax credit for non-US dividend taxes for VT (< 50% non-US as of now), but you can claim foreign for VXUS.

Good point. I was going for the least complicated. The trustee will already have enough to do with managing taxes and distributions from three trusts. My heirs will likely be US based, though they have the option of UK citizenship also. I have both.

VT (Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF) is everything Buffett says about an S&P500 index, and more. It is hugely diversified, takes care of itself, even if the US does become less of an economic power, and for most of its holdings has lower single-stock risk than QQQE including the current Mag 7 stock most likely to blow up (i.e. VT owns less Tesla than QQQE).

What about Berkshire? Is Berkshire a good holding for my heirs? Under current tax law they will get a stepped-up basis.

50% Berkshire/50% the other thing?

FYI,Ishares launched an Equal weight S&P500 index. EWSP. No dividends paid out and domiciled in Ireland

might be useful to post this in "non US Stocks".

RSP really hasn't done well, so far at least.

How to you figure?
It's true that the Gigacaps have just had a huge run up in the last quarter.

But, if I'm not mistaken, RSP's performance since inception 22 years ago has beaten the S&P for every single end date up till the end of 2025, and in most rolling five year stretches too, and in data going back a century. And that's all accomplished with a tiny fraction of the risk. (largest position 1/35 as big as in the S&P 500, so permanent capital risk from rare blowups is minuscule by comparison).

No, sorry, the cap-weight S&P 500 is for suckers these days. It's hugely dominated by a tiny number of firms, with the top 5 being over 1/4 of the fund and top 10 begin over 1/3. If you know what to bet on those few firms, what the heck are you doing in an index fund? If you don't know what to bet on those few firms, what the heck are you doing having a concentrated portfolio in them?

As Mr Buffett has noted, the uninformed investor should not have a concentrated portfolio. Don't let someone else use up your few ticket punches.

Jim

<<RSP really hasn't done well, so far at least.>>

How to you figure?
It's true that the Gigacaps have just had a huge run up in the last quarter.

But, if I'm not mistaken, RSP's performance since inception 22 years ago has beaten the S&P for every single end date up till the end of 2025, and in most rolling five year stretches too, and in data going back a century.

Here's a link to the site I posted previously, with Berkshire added:

22 years SPY RSP BRK-B:
https://testfol.io/analysis?s=fY0z9HYkNcl

If I'm reading it correctly (probably not), 5-year rolling CAGR metrics show RSP matching then lagging SPY over the last 10 years. Which is to be expected since SPY has had a great run for 15 years, and has been hard to beat, though Berkshire has beaten it with the recent run up!

15 years SPY RSP BRK-B:
https://testfol.io/analysis?s=b1J5LdZdFfT

My money is NOT buying SPY, RSP, VT or any cap-weighted index anytime soon, I hope.

In 5-10-20-30 years? Well, that's problem I'm thinking about.

Here is a suggested allocation for the portion of your portfolio where you desire "know nothing full exposure" to the US market. By definition, "know nothing" includes making no judgement regarding cap weighted versus equal weighted. We take the easy way out and divide equally between the two.

==========

SP500 Cap Weighted			40%

Nasdaq Equal Weighted (QQQE)		20%
SP500 Equal Weighted (RSP)		10%
Fortune 500 Equal Weighted (DFVE)	10%

Extended Market Cap Weighted		20%
(This is the full market ex SP500)

==========

80% is large cap, equally divided between cap weighted and equal weighted. Currently cap weighted may not be favorable, but a person DCA-ing over multiple decades, the difference between the two may not be much.

The equal weighted portion is half assigned to QQQE so we can overweight the companies with fastest growing earnings. The other half is equally divided between RSP and DFVE Fortune 500 equal weighted. This adds variety because Fortune 500 list is ranked based on revenue whereas RSP is ranked based on market cap. Apparently Fortune 500 list has approximately 460 companies, 130 of which are not in RSP. DFVE has performed better than RSP per the fact sheet.

Last but not least, for good measure and since we desire full market exposure, the last 20% is allocated to the extended market (full market ex SP500). If you bought a full market cap weighted index fund, extended market is usually about 20% allocation. Even though it's cap weighted, it's not too concentrated because it comprises of almost 3000 companies (company 501 - 3500+)

==========

https://www.invesco.com/us/financial-products/etfs...

https://doubleline.com/funds/fortune-500-equal-wei...

Here is a suggested allocation for the portion of your portfolio where you desire "know nothing full exposure" to the US market. By definition, "know nothing" includes making no judgement regarding cap weighted versus equal weighted.

I really think (maybe it's the latent Boglehead in me), more than three funds/ETFs is too much for a know-nothing human to manage.
VT+BNDW - doable
SPLG+QQQE+RSP+DFVE+VXF - too complicated.

A few years ago, I put my mother-in-law in 8 ETFS, perfectly suited for her circumstances, then and now. Her eyes basically glazed over when I tried to explain why that allocation was good for her, and I have not tried explaining since then. For what it's worth, she has done better than most Boglehead portfolios, because I tailored hers to her circumstances.

No Jim, I will not do it for any other of my friends or family. Even though several have asked me. I have heard you loud and clear. However, in my defense, she's an exceptionally kind woman, and 180° opposite of the stereotypical mother-in-law. If someone talks to her, and if they don't like her, the problem is with them, not with her. That is how I judge people.

However, in my defense, she's an exceptionally kind woman, and 180° opposite of the stereotypical mother-in-law.

Postscript, and I think I've shared this story on Fool.com. I used to DCA money for her into a taxable account some years ago. She never asked me about it, and she was extremely surprised when I told her, after some time, that her money had actually grown quite a bit. She had just assumed that I put it in every month, and gambled it away, and never told her about it out of embarrassment. So she was expecting a balance of zero.
It takes all sorts to make the world go around. Maybe all the judgy people can take a note of that.

Postscript, and I think I've shared this story on Fool.com. I used to DCA money for her into a taxable account some years ago. She never asked me about it, and she was extremely surprised when I told her, after some time, that her money had actually grown quite a bit. She had just assumed that I put it in every month, and gambled it away, and never told her about it out of embarrassment. So she was expecting a balance of zero.

Funny!

While sorting out my dad's estate, a family member and heir was shocked to see how much dad had in investments (through a "helper", unfortunately), and implied dad must have taken money out of the family business. I tried to point out that his money would double if it made 7% a year for 10 years and he was retired for 20. Some folks, otherwise highly intelligent, don't quite get compounding.

Here is a suggested allocation for the portion of your portfolio where you desire "know nothing full exposure" to the US market.

Sure, could do that. There are all-in-one products that would make it simpler to manage. My concern is recommending something that gets closed or languishes in some way. I want them to get a reasonable result, it doesn't have to be sensational. One hopes the kids all have successful and satisfying careers.

Currently cap weighted may not be favorable, but a person DCA-ing over multiple decades, the difference between the two may not be much.

I agree, though in the context of this thread the investments will be lump sum. Probable timeline: I die, wife leaves everything as is, she dies, everything goes into separate trusts for the kids, trustee decides what investments to use in each trust.

It's interesting how death tends to bring out the worst in some people. During the decade between when my father-in-law died and the death of my mother-in-law, I pretty much guided his (now her) investment potfolio. She passed away at the tail end of the Great Recession. My wife's sister was all bent out of shape because I wasn't "family" and she should have been making the decisions and she threatened to sue. I gave her paperwork which showed that, despite having just transversed the most financially debilitating period since 1929, the estate had doubled in value since her father's demise and suggested that she give the records to whichever attorney she selected.

My mother-in-law had a number of pieces of gold jewelry and a couple of gold Krugerrands. I fooled around with a kitchen scale and determined that the pile of gold jewelry had the same gold contnet as the two coins. I recommended that my wife offer her a choice of the two options and predicted she would take the handful of pieces which constituted the "pile" because it appeared larger. She spent five hours running around the neighborhood from jeweler to jeweler to determine the value of each of the pieces and then took the pile. About a week later she accused my wife of cheating her by using that process, but never explained why or how.

Some people just make you want to scratch your head.

As a seperate note, I have reecently spent a feww hours documenting where all the skeletons are hidden to assist whoeever has the job of dealing with our estate. My parents never shared or documented their hiding places and when the later of the two passed on, I had the job of searching their house for various caches of valuables in weird places (and likely didn't find them all).

Jeff

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.