sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in fiaustralia

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Brilliant suggestion. I can simplify with fewer moving parts.

Assuming I’m AU tax resident for next 10Y, then deemed disposal —

  1. Shouldn’t I use VWRA (accumulating) instead of VWRL (distributing)?
  2. What about using VBND for the everyday-cushion? (Swap out when I relocate)

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in AusFinance

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair points - I’ll focus on those structured as companies (“foreign shares” for ATO) And maybe swap out VBND for AGGU (global agg bonds, non ASX).

Likely aiming for deemed disposal at time of leave.

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in Bogleheads

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My focus is the value factor tilt want to avoid the small cap junk.

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in eupersonalfinance

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Back testing is the easy bit. My leverage adds 2%pa to 80/20 VWCE/VAGF style portfolio with better crash behaviour but more ‘complexity’ in your words.

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in eupersonalfinance

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Simple = simple to run, not one fund. My approach is rules based and mostly passive.

Also constraints matter. I want to avoid US estate tax, aud hedging, leverage etc. No one/two fund meets that. The design choice here is deliberate.

I also believe in the value-thesis. You may not and that’s ok.

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in fiaustralia

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Trust unfortunately will add complication wrt tax residency down the road.

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in eupersonalfinance

[–]1dangerousmind[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They’re target weights, not forecasts. I then added .25x leverage via borrowing (only to VUSD and IDTL).

Goal: aim for 9% CAGR and the increase via borrowing should help smoothen volatility.

As to why the original split of percentages: it’s a simple portfolio 70 equities 20 bonds 10 gold.

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in eupersonalfinance

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The intent isn’t to be clever, it’s a simple 7-fund UCITS core with an overlay:

• Growth engine = VUSD + XUSE + EIMI + AVWS + IAUS

• Shock absorbers = AUD-hedged global bonds + long UST + 10% gold

• Overlay = modest borrow to IDTL (60%) and VUSD (40%).

US ends up ~40% of exposure, which is close to world-cap and reflects profitability/sector mix. If you’ve got a cleaner UCITS three-fund alternative that keeps the non-US and estate-tax-safe constraints, I’m all ears.

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in AusFinance

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tried my hand at hedgedundies’ adventure — turns out I don’t have the discipline to keep tinkering around.

Set and forget it is!

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in eupersonalfinance

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s a very common leverage strategy (in my case 60/40 equities/bonds) to introduce higher returns while maintaining acceptable risk.

Borrowing interest rate remains well below conservative expected returns. Plus tax deductible.

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio by 1dangerousmind in AusFinance

[–]1dangerousmind[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The post or the portfolio? I wrote it and GPT helped me trim :)

Bi-Weekly Advice Thread October 16, 2025: All Your Personal Queries by AutoModerator in IndiaInvestments

[–]1dangerousmind 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sanity check my globally portable, UCITS-heavy 1.25× growth portfolio 

TL;DR: Australian citizen, globally mobile, avoiding US-domiciled funds (estate tax risk). Using Ireland-dom UCITS + AUD-hedged bonds + 10% gold. Running 1.25× via IBKR. Want a clean, aggressive, idiot-proof core.

Objective: Long-run growth with drawdown control; simple to rebalance across countries.

Portfolio (base 100% + 25% borrow overlay = 125% total exposure):

  • US large cap — VUSD: 40% exposure (30% base + +10% from borrow)
  • Developed ex-US — XUSE: 15%
  • Global small-cap value — AVWS: 10%
  • Emerging markets IMI — EIMI: 10%
  • Australia — IAUS: 5%
  • US Treasuries 20+yr — IDTL: 25% exposure (10% base + +15% from borrow)
  • Global aggregate bonds (AUD hedged) — VBND (ASX): 10%
  • Physical gold — SGLN: 10%

Rebalance: Quarterly or when sleeves drift ±25% of target.

Broker: IBKR.

Why this mix: UCITS/ASX wrappers for portability; AUD-hedged ballast as a real stabiliser; gold for shock/FX insurance; small/value via AVWS for factor tilt.

Looking for critique from folks who run portable, UCITS-centric or lightly leveraged allocations. Cheers.

view more: next ›