5

My portfolio only has 3 ETF funds (emerging markets, S&P and STOXX 600). I do not pay any commissions on purchases over 500€ and I usually buy 2000€/month.

Since I don't have any costs to buy more stocks, should I rebalance my portfolio anyway, or just change how much I buy depending on the current performance? (e.g. if the S&P is growing slower, buy more of that and less STOXX 600).

  • 1
    I am in a Similar situation, and just use the next purchase to my portfolio closer to balance. It is not an exact science. – Pete B. Sep 15 '17 at 11:23
3

If I normalize to look at your portfolio as "Years of salary saved" it would be obvious that early on, you are going from zero at the start to "1" perhaps 5-8 years in if you are saving a decent percent, 10-15.

At "1" if your desired mix is 40/30/30, but you are at 50/30/20, without depositing to the "50" asset, you'd need to get the other 2 up to 37.5%. Since the total assets are a year's salary, you can see how quickly the misalignment might take years to resolve. Here, deposits totaling 25% of a year's income.

Let's me offer a differ way to look at it. Say I wanted an 80/20 balance, S&P/cash. The S&P has been on a tear since the bottom, tripling in the last 9-10 years. Using deposit to balance might mean never depositing to the S&P again. This would also mean losing any potential gains for the 'dollar cost averaging affect'.

0

Rebalancing just means resetting the shares to the allocation you chose initially. It's totally up to you how you do it. I would take the least costly option that is possible so in your case that would be changing the allocation of your next purchase.

0

If this is in a taxable account, selling assets to rebalance might trigger a capital gains tax. The assets in that portfolio are pretty similar so the benefits of balancing it seem smaller than if it were more diversified.

If just change the purchase allocation.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .