I see a lot of people suggest portfolios of something like 80-90% VTI or VT with 10-20% bonds for longterm retirement accounts. To me this just seems absurd. In my mind what I question is over the course of 30 to 40 years of investing what will make you more money, bonds or VT/VTI? I believe you would be far and away better doing 100% VT/VTI until you are like 5 to 10 years away from retiring and then shifting a small portion into bonds. Can someone who likes the 80/20 stocks/bonds shed some light as to why carrying bonds for 30 to 40 years is a good strategy over just carrying more stocks? Ups and downs with stocks are no problem as this money will not be touched for over 30 years.
Submitted November 16, 2021 at 10:24PM by Ktmhocks37 https://ift.tt/3cid7s7
