You can read about my asset-allocation approach to investing over here.
The view post-payday
I pay myself monthly in retirement, so that’s a good trigger to update this post. On November 25th, this is what it looks like:
ETF Breakdown of retirement investments, November 2025
The portfolio is dominated by my ETF all-stars; anything not on that page is held in a non-registered account and won’t be fiddled with unless it’s part of my monthly decumulation. Otherwise I’ll rack up capital gains for no real benefit.
No notable changes this month; HXT is down slightly because that’s the fund I sold in my non-registered account this month to help pay the bills. I’ve sold quite a few shares of this fund this year and I’m seeing the capital gains mounting, but it’s around where I expected to be. I try to keep taxes owing reasonable; nonetheless I’m guessing I will certainly be moving to quarterly instalments in FY 2026; that’s the downside of having no withholding tax of any kind this year.
Plan for the next month
The asset-class split looks like this
It’s looking pretty close to the targets I have, which are unchanged:
5% cash or cash-like holdings like ICSH and ZMMK
15% bonds (almost all are buried in XGRO and AOA)
20% Canadian equity (mostly based on ETFs that mirror the S&P/TSX)
36% US equity (dominated by ETFs that mirror the S&P 500)
24% International equity (mostly, but not exclusively, developed markets)
All looks to be in order from an asset allocation perspective, no need to do anything here. Cash is slightly elevated as a result of the pending closure of the three remaining QTrade accounts and will drift back to the normal 5% over the coming few weeks, I expect.
Overall
Net worth overall stopped its 6 month winning streak and I’m down slightly month over month. But I will reiterate: my net worth is still growing even though I’m taking a living wage every month. You might think that “decumulation” means “a steady reduction in net worth” but it needn’t be the case. And, in my particular case, my retirement income will include no pensions, so it’s probably a good thing that it keeps increasing overall.
My VPW-calculated salary continues to grow for the 7th straight month in spite of the step back this month in my net worth. That’s a feature of the “cash cushion” that is integral to the VPW withdrawal. It serves as a shock absorber to the monthly ups and downs of the stock market.
Next month will end my relationship with QTrade as I move the final 3 RRIF accounts to Questrade2.
My QTrade one is no more, transferred to Wealthsimple to take advantage of their Summer promotion. ↩︎
I had hoped to move these to Wealthsimple and generate more free money, but alas, they still don’t support self-directed spousal RRIFs, which is very odd indeed. ↩︎
Summary: Vanguard asset allocation funds aka all-in-one funds VEQT, VGRO, VBAL, VCNS. VSIP have reduced their management fees to 0.17%, down from 0.22%, effective November 18, 2025.
It’s a good time to be an all-in-one investor, as I am. New to all-in-ones? Read all about them here.
The summary pretty much says it all. It just got cheaper to own Vanguard’s all-in-one funds. The amount of the reduction amounts to 50 cents for every $10001 invested per year, but compounded over many years, and multiplied by however much you have saved for retirement, it can be a surprisingly large number.
All-in-ones are much cheaper than either roboadvisors or your typical financial advisor, but as we studied before, they’re not without some cost, so fee reductions are always welcomed. Vanguard joins TD and BMO in reducing the cost of their all-in-ones. We looked at the makeup of each of these funds lately; there’s not a huge amount of difference, no matter which one you pick.
Anyway, you may note that Blackrock’s XEQT/XGRO/XINC family is now the most expensive of the lot; there’s no reason for that to be true given the competitive landscape. I would expect Blackrock to follow suit, or if not, I’ll probably be making some moves to get to lower fees, since a lot of my retirement portfolio is currently tied up in XEQT/XGRO. ZEQT/ZGRO I think is the closest in makeup to the XEQT/XGRO family.
Of course, if you only have $1000 saved for retirement, you have other worries. ↩︎
Do you ever wonder about the differences between, say, XEQT and VEQT? Or XGRO and TGRO? Of course, you could ask Reddit1, read an article from a trusted source (ahem), or you could investigate it yourself.
How?
Well, my usual starting point is to google “<trading symbol> ETF”, for example “XEQT ETF”. For popular ETFs, this often generates hits for competitive products, so do be careful of that minefield.
But really, there’s a better way. You can instead google “<trading symbol> fact sheet”, for example “XGRO fact sheet”. In my unscientific tests, this search yield the actual fact sheet for the ETF in question as either the 1st or 2nd result — it’s a pdf file in all the cases i tried.
So what’s the fact sheet, and what’s it all about? Let’s hand it over to the pros:
The ETF Facts is a four-page document that summarizes key information about an ETF in a simple, accessible and easily comparable format. It is designed to help you make an informed decision about your investment by including information such as a fund’s investments, risk rating, past performance and the costs associated with owning it.
The highlights for me about the ETF fact sheet are:
It’s short. 4 pages, and generally the most interesting bits are on pages 1 and 2
It’s “easily comparable”. The format is always the same, allowing for an easier side-by-side looksee.
It’s got information about what the fund invests in. If you hold multiple ETFs, knowing what’s behind each one will help you avoid inadvertently piling on to one segment of the market2.
So let’s take a quick look at my number one Canadian holding, XGRO, to see what it’s about.
Recording the above video taught me that XGRO changed significantly back in 2018, so looking at its performance prior to that is no longer an apples-to-apples comparison. After a bit of searching, I found that XGRO used to be called CBN, which had a MER of about 0.75%. You can read a bit more about that at Canadian Couch Potato, an excellent resource, by the way.
And, inexplicably, people reliably ask this question week after week after week… ↩︎
I don’t make segment bets; maintaining my asset allocation percentages (36% US Equity, 24% International Equity, 20% Canadian Equity, 15% Bonds, 5% cash) is the only metric that matters to me. ↩︎
This is the Ontario regulation; because we like bureaucracy in this country, every province has a securities regulator 😦 ↩︎
And I assume this is also the case in the USA since all the US-based ETFs I own have fact sheets. But I couldn’t find a specific regulation about that. ↩︎
As mentioned elsewhere, I try to keep about 5% of my retirement savings in what I loosely refer to as “cash”. Of course, it’s not cash, cash doesn’t earn any interest, and that would drive me bonkers. Instead, I’ve been using ZMMK and ICSH (two of my ETF all-stars) to serve this purpose. I made a more detailed assessment of available products at the time over here.
But Global X (a company who I do a lot of business with, thanks to XEQT, XGRO and HXT) has launched 4 products that invest solely in US Treasury Bills.
TSTX/TSTX.U/TSTX.F: all based on 1-3 year treasury bills, which, in common bond lingo, is “short” duration. TSTX is the one that’s probably of greatest interest to most of you since it trades in CAD. TSTX.U is the same thing but it trades in USD, and TSTX.F trades in CAD but uses currency hedging to smooth out the CAD/USD exchange rate1.
TLTX/TLSX.U/TLTX.F: same idea as above, but these products are based on 20 year T-Bills, which would be considered “long” duration and are much more sensitive to changes in the prime interest rate.
They are brand spanking new (launched Oct 7, 2025), but have already paid out their first distributions at the end of October:
CAD ETF Distribution
USD (.U) ETF Distribution
Hedged (.F) ETF Distribution
TSTX family (1-3y)
0.14090
0.13991
0.13990
TLTX family (20y)
0.16056
0.15943
0.15941
The TSTX family is paying 3.4% yield, which is way better than any CAD product I’ve evaluated previously2. It’s not as good as USD HISAs, but being able to get US-like interest rates in a Canadian denominated product is a cool thing. T-Bills of this duration are not super sensitive to changes in interest rates, but the 20y ones would be. TSTX is a product I’ll be keeping an eye on as an alternative to ZMMK, potentially, as long as the prime rate in the US remains significantly higher than Canada’s.
Reduced Fees for CNDX (S&P/TSX 60 index)
Global X was running a promo this year that I talked about previously, but they’ve set a new low price for their flagship Canadian index fund at 0.09% MER starting in 2026. (The MER is 0% at the moment). I don’t hold CNDX myself (I use XIC and VCN, which both include all of the TSX and costs 0.06%), but if you like to focus on the larger part of the Canadian market, you may want to take a look here.
I don’t like hedging as a rule, as it just adds cost and I figure that over time, the USD/CAD exchange rate is reasonably stable. ↩︎
And if these ETFs existed at the time, I probably wouldn’t have looked at them because they have a duration that’s a little too long for me to consider them “cash-like”. But I like my “cash” to be cashflow positive, with no downsides. ZMMK and ICSH aren’t guaranteed to do that, but their super-short average duration (90 days or so) makes it far more likely. ↩︎
In a previous post, I took a look at the major fund companies’ all-in-one-funds with a focus on what passive indices each of them folllowed with regards to Canadian equity, US equity, International equity, and bonds. That assessment found that iShares and BMO were very similar, but TD and Vanguard looked very different.
But do different indices really make a difference in terms of what each of these companies hold when it comes to equities? That’s what we’re trying to find out. Let’s take a look at each of the categories in turn.
Canadian Equity
Let’s take a look at the top Canadian equity holdings of TEQT, XEQT, ZEQT and VEQT1:
Stock
TEQT %
XEQT %
ZEQT%
VEQT%
RBC
1.65
1.73
1.62
1.80
Shopify
1.55
1.69
1.62
1.49
TD
1.12
1.16
1.10
1.16
Enbridge
0.84
0.88
0.85
0.92
Brookfield
0.82
0.82
0.78
0.81
BMO
0.74
0.77
0.72
0.77
Agnico
0.66
0.69
0.68
0.63
Scotiabank
0.64
0.67
0.63
0.68
CIBC
0.60
0.63
0.60
0.63
CP KC
0.57
0.58
0.57
0.62
# held
292
215
215
156
Top 10 %
9.19
9.62
9.17
9.51
Top Canadian Equity Holdings for TEQT, XEQT, ZEQT, VEQT per ETF factsheets, October 2025
VEQT has fewer holdings than the others, and this indicates slightly more concentration/slightly less diversification than the other funds. TEQT is at the top of the heap when it comes to the number of companies held, with XEQT and ZEQT looking pretty similar. My take here is that the differences between TEQT/XEQT/ZEQT/VEQT are pretty slight when it comes to Canadian equity. The Canadian equity indices these funds track may be different, but the differences are pretty minor, and might simply be attributable to tracking errors; how often and when these funds rebalance their holdings may explain the differences shown here.
But just for fun, I looked at comparing VCN (which is underneath VEQT, and tracks the FTSE Canada all cap) to XIC (which is underneath XEQT, and tracks the S&P/TSX Capped Composite) and found this using https://www.dividendchannel.com/drip-returns-calculator/ (which is also listed in Tools I Use).
This indicates a tiny advantage to XIC aka the capped composite index, but there’s not a lot of daylight between these two returns!
On the Canadian Equity front, I declare the 4 funds EQUIVALENT!
US Equity
The US weighting is NOT the same for each of these funds, so making a one-to-one comparison is a bit tricky.
TEQT: 55% US
ZEQT: 50% US
XEQT, VEQT: 45% US
What I show in the table below is the percentage of the US portion held by the fund. So in other words if stock XYZ makes up 5% of the US holdings of TEQT and XEQT, it means that TEQT actually holds more of XYZ because 55 cents of every dollar of TEQT is invested in XYZ as compared to 45 cents for XEQT et al.
Stock
TEQT: TPU %
XEQT: XTOT %
ZEQT: ZSP/ZMID/ZSML%
VEQT: VUS%
NVIDIA
7.81
6.91
7.35
6.45
Microsoft
6.62
5.71
6.26
6.02
Apple
6.38
5.53
5.99
5.54
Amazon
3.73
3.24
3.45
3.49
Broadcom
2.75
2.38
2.51
2.23
Meta
2.74
2.33
2.51
2.56
Alphabet Cl A
2.43
2.07
2.26
1.97
Alphabet Cl C
2.13
1.67
1.82
1.59
Tesla
2.12
1.80
1.91
1.46
JP Morgan
1.46
1.24
1.36
1.29
Eli Lilly
1.25
1.00
1.09
1.00
Berkshire
1.15
1.33
1.47
1.43
# held
504
2494
1511
3524
Top 10 %
38.17
32.97
35.54
32.74
Top US Equity Holdings for TEQT, XEQT, ZEQT, VEQT per ETF factsheets, October 2025
What’s clear here is that TEQT is an outlier insofar as it only focuses on the largest US companies, with the other three funds including smaller companies. This also impacts how much money is found in the top 10 US holdings of TEQT, with 38% of holdings invested in names like NVIDIA, Microsoft, Apple et al.
This has proven beneficial of late since smaller US companies have not kept pace with the larger ones. Per spglobal.com, the 10 year performance as of Oct 13, 2025 of the three US market segments has been:
S&P SmallCap 600 = 7.65%
S&P MidCap 400 = 8.49%
S&P 500 = 12.75%
Meaning that any fund that holds smallcap and midcap US stocks has had their returns dragged down in the past 10 years.
So my conclusion for US Equities is that TEQT is the performance champion, but this comes with a less diversification than the alternatives: not only does TEQT focus on the highest-performing portion of the US equity market, it also puts more money overall into the US equity market. This has worked well for the last ten years, but it’s anybody’s guess as to whether this is a good idea for the future.
International Equity
The International2 weighting is NOT the same for each of these funds, so making a one-to-one comparison is a bit tricky.
TEQT: 20% International
VEQT: 25% International
ZEQT: 25% International
XEQT: 30% International
BMO gets the “lack of transparency” award from me for their complex structure. ZEQT holds ZEA which holds European stocks as well as IEFA, which is their USD fund holding the same things. It also holds ZEM which holds emerging markets stocks as well as EEM, which holds similar things in USD. Nowhere can you find a BMO/ZEQT consolidated view like what I’m showing below.
Like in the previous examples, what I show in the table below is the percentage of the International portion held by the fund.
Stock
TEQT: TPE %
XEQT: XEF/XEC %
ZEQT: ZEA/IEFA/ZEM/EEM%
VEQT: VIU/VEE%
Taiwan Semi
0
1.73
5.88
4.19
ASML
1.98
1.43
2.11
1.59
SAP
1.43
1.03
1.37
1.14
Nestle
1.30
0.93
1.24
0.96
Roche
1.24
0.87
1.12
0.95
Novartis
1.24
0.90
1.17
0.98
AstraZeneca
1.24
0.93
1.26
0.94
HSBC
1.15
0.83
1.22
1.02
Shell
1.11
0.80
1.09
0.87
Toyota
1.06
0.70
0.97
0.85
Siemens
1.02
0.77
1.08
0.82
Tencent
0
0.80
2.75
2.10
Samsung
0
0.37
2.03
1.16
Alibaba
0
0.40
1.87
1.59
# held
893
5626
3864
3524
Top 10 %
12.77
10.25
20.89
15.68
Top International Equity Holdings for TEQT, XEQT, ZEQT3, VEQT per ETF factsheets, October 2025
Here you see some pretty significant differences. BMO and Vanguard (especially BMO’s ZEQT) have a much heavier emphasis on “emerging” markets than XEQT does; TD’s TEQT has NO exposure to emerging markets at all.
That’s an interesting strategic choice being made here. Let’s compare emerging market performance to mature international markets. We cand do that by looking at IEFA (mature markets) versus EEM (emerging markets)4:
Emerging markets have been a serious lag to global performance, so perhaps TD is on to something here. I played with this chart quite a bit and it’s only very lately (last 2 years or so) that emerging markets have outperformed the established ones. Long term trend? ZEQT certainly hopes so.
So on the international front, you have choices
TEQT only focuses on mature markets
XEQT allows some (not much) exposure to emerging markets
ZEQT and VEQT make much bigger bets on emerging markets
Which is the correct call? TEQT historically has made the right choice, but as the old adage goes “past performance does not guarantee future results” (or something like that).
I’m using the all-equity versions of these to make the comparison more apples-to-apples. VEQT has a larger Canadian percentage (30%) than the other 3 (25%), so I muliplied VEQT’s holdings by 25/30 to make the comparison meaningful. ↩︎
In this analysis, I’m not making a distinction between “mature” and “emerging” markets. Some of the funds do. In all cases, “International” means “no US, no Canada”. ↩︎
The Money Engineer 