Back
VGS/VAS/IVV split
Investing Strategy
Hey all! New to pearler, keen to get a stat only investment journey. Small topic and might not mean muc in the long haul, but I’m torn between doing a 50/25/25 split and a 25/25/50 split. I assumed more weight to VGS will help balance the portfolio out more but I like the idea of most of the weight into IVV, granted it has some overlap but im fine with it as it reinforces my position in strong US companies. I think I prefer this mix to something like DHHF with the low MER and tax drag, still providing good global and AU exposure and minimal management being only 3 ETFs. I have heard of the BGBL/A200/IVV combo too and granted it is more cost efficient, I just think my original mix will perform better even with slightly more drag. Also side question: is it worth manually rebalancing by pausing overweight ETFs and contributing more to underweight ETFs or let pearler handle the rebalancing by buying/selling? Thanks all 😊
254 views
Share
0 likes
Lachlan
Asked on 4 July 2025
Comments (3)
Sign in to add a comment
Hello! It’s great to see you’re starting your investment journey with Pearler and thinking critically about how to structure your ETF portfolio. Both the 50/25/25 and 25/25/50 splits you’re considering have their merits, depending on your investment goals and risk tolerance.
A 50/25/25 split, with a heavier weighting towards VGS, would provide broader international exposure, which can be beneficial for diversification. This might be particularly appealing if you’re looking for growth potential across various global markets and not just the U.S.
On the other hand, a 25/25/50 split with more weight in IVV focuses more on U.S. equities. Given the historical strength of the U.S. market, this could potentially offer higher returns, albeit with higher concentration risk in one geographic area. This approach might suit you if you have a strong conviction in the performance of U.S. companies.
Regarding your side question about rebalancing: Pearler’s auto-invest feature, which allows for rebalancing by purchase (buying less of the overweight ETFs and more of the underweight ones), is a very efficient way to maintain your desired asset allocation without needing to manually sell assets, which could incur transaction costs and potential tax implications. This method of rebalancing by purchase is generally less disruptive and can be a more cost-effective strategy in the long run.
However, if you notice significant deviations from your target allocations that aren’t corrected by this method over time, or if market conditions change drastically, you might consider manual rebalancing. It’s also worth noting that manual rebalancing gives you more control, which some investors might prefer.
In summary, your choice between different portfolio structures should align with your investment objectives, risk tolerance, and time horizon. Using Pearler’s features like auto-invest can simplify the process of maintaining your portfolio, allowing you to focus more on your broader financial goals.
Show more.....
Reply
0 likes
ETF weightings are a very personal choice so I won’t comment on that. As long as you end up reasonably well diversified that’s the main thing, which either choice will give you that.
On rebalancing, if you have under 100k invested, it’s not gonna matter that much. If you’re setting up autoinvest, just let it automatically choose the one that is underweight since that’s part of the magic of auto invest. No need to try and tinker with it even more.
Reply
0 likes