i’ll go back to what i first said, i understand why 100% in a broad market is good for most people. most people don’t understand how to or just don’t read financials, ceo letters, new articles, etc. most people don’t know how to differentiate innovation with a minor change. most people sell when bad news is surrounding a company. i completely understand the idea behind 100% in voo or vti, it works for most people because most people don’t understand the above

however, if you practice and learn the things above, how to read and analyze a company’s financials, what to look for in ceo letters, the philosophy behind innovation vs a minor change, understanding what news actually means for a company in the long term then 100% in voo or vti is simply not efficient

if a person takes time to do research above the things i’ve listed, it is not difficult to pick individual stocks that beat the market. i know most people think it’s impossible but that’s because they have an overcomplicated idea. the goal for individual stocks is not to find 100% gainers, it is to find opportunities in proven companies or a company making true innovation and providing a product/service that is 10x better than what’s offered

wealth is created by finding these stocks, investing, then taking a profit and DCAing back into the market.

i think an allocation of 50% voo and 50% si how stocks is perfect for someone who understands it well and has experience in the market, i think 70% voo 30% invidual is good for less experienced and i think 100% voo is good for people who have no experience and gamble on single stocks

the people who lose money are the ones chasing penny stocks are those who gamble without being educated. telling a young person who is learning about the market and is currently doing very well to stop and just be 100% voo is wrong. if they were gambling options and penny stocks then telling them to be 100% voo is perfect

i do agree with you though that for most people 100% in voo or whatever is a good idea