Tag: xeqt

What’s in my retirement portfolio (July 2025)

RobH4 Comments

This is a (hopefully monthly) look at what’s in my retirement portfolio. The original post is here. Last month’s is here.

Portfolio Construction

The retirement portfolio is spread across a bunch of accounts:

  • 7 RRIF accounts (3 for me, 3 for my spouse, 1 at an alternative provider as a test)
  • 2 TFSA accounts
  • 4 non-registered accounts, (1 for me, 1 for my spouse, 2 joint)

The target for the overall portfolio is unchanged:

  • 80% equity, spread across Canadian, US and global markets for maximum diversification
  • 15% Bond funds, from a variety of Canadian, US and global markets
  • 5% cash, held in savings-like ETFs.

You can read about my asset-allocation approach to investing over here.

The view as of this morning

As of this morning, this is what the overall portfolio looks like:

Retirement holdings by ETF, July 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.

There weren’t big changes this month. My monthly decumulation from my RRIF accounts involves selling enough XGRO to meet RRIF-minimum payments, and the rest of my retirement paycheque is funded by my non-registered accounts. This month, given the run in the US stock market of late, that involved a sale of some shares of HXS1.

Plan for the next month

The asset-class split looks like this

The bond portion of the portfolio is a little smaller than I would like. The targets for my portfolio 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 60)
  • 36% US equity (dominated by ETFs that mirror the S&P 500, with a small sprinkling of Russell 2000)
  • 24% International equity (mostly, but not exclusively, developed markets)

The change in the bond portion of the portfolio was amplified because I hadn’t updated the asset split of AOA in my multi-asset tracker in a while. AOA has drifted quite a bit since it only rebalances twice a year (next time in October). More on drifting in multi-asset ETFs here.

Overall

The retirement savings look quite healthy; even though I’ve been drawing a monthly salary for 7 months, I’m now ahead of where I was when I started my retirement journey. This is aligned with what my retirement planner told me to expect, but as you can see, the journey has had some interesting ups and downs already.

Monthly retirement savings, as percentage of Jan 2025 value

My VPW-calculated salary has hit a new high this year, a dizzying 0.77% higher than my first draw in January. This stability is thanks to the built-in shock-absorber of the VPW model (a 6-month cash cushion which smooths out the market gyrations considerably). I also think it’s an endorsement of my choice to take retirement payments monthly; my exposure to short-term market hiccups is greatly reduced since I’m not making big sales of ETFs to fund a year of spending all at once.

Monthly salary, as percentage of Jan 2025 salary
  1. Which particular ETF I sell from my non-registered portfolio is based on what asset class is the most overweight at that point in time. If it’s US Equity, then I sell US Equity. If it’s Canadian Equity, then I sell Canadian Equity. ↩︎

What’s in my retirement portfolio (June 2025)

RobH4 Comments

This is a (hopefully1 monthly) look at what’s in my retirement portfolio. The original post is here. Last month’s is here.

Portfolio Construction

The retirement portfolio is spread across a bunch of accounts2:

  • 7 RRIF accounts (3 for me, 3 for my spouse, 1 at an alternative provider as a test)
  • 2 TFSA accounts
  • 4 non-registered accounts, (1 for me, 1 for my spouse, 2 joint)

The target for the overall portfolio is unchanged:

  • 80% equity, spread across Canadian, US and global markets for maximum diversification
  • 15% Bond funds, from a variety of Canadian, US and global markets
  • 5% cash, held in savings-like ETFs.

You can read about my asset-allocation approach to investing over here.

The view as of this morning

As of this morning, this is what the overall portfolio looks like:

Retirement holdings by ETF, June 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.

The biggest changes over the last 30 days was due to a small rebalancing exercise I executed. I sold off some AOA in order to pick up more ICSH. The stock market has been roaring lately, and it caused my target allocations to become a bit cash-poor; ICSH is not, strictly speaking, “cash”, but for my purposes, it’s close enough. (You can read about my cash thoughts here). I could have instead sold XGRO to pick up more ZMMK, but US interest rates are a lot better than Canadian ones at the moment, so I figured I’d enjoy the extra few percentage points of return on my cash holdings.

Plan for the next month

The asset-class split looks like this

This looks to be pretty close to my target percentages which haven’t changed:

  • 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 60)
  • 36% US equity (dominated by ETFs that mirror the S&P 500, with a small sprinkling of Russell 2000)
  • 24% International equity (mostly, but not exclusively, developed markets)

The pie is looking almost perfect at the moment. I don’t see any near-term need for fiddling with what’s there.

Overall

The retirement savings look quite healthy; even though I’ve been drawing a monthly salary for 6 months, I’m now ahead of where I was3 when I started my retirement journey. This is aligned with what my retirement planner told me to expect, but as you can see, the journey has had some interesting ups and downs aready.

Monthly retirement savings, as percentage of Jan 2025 value

My VPW-calculated salary has gone back to more or less where I started at the beginning of the year. And even with the crazy market swings we’ve seen, it’s stayed remarkably stable4. That’s thanks to the built-in shock-absorber of the VPW model (a 6-month cash cushion which smooths out the market gyrations considerably). I also think it’s an endorsement of my choice to take retirement payments monthly; my exposure to short-term market hiccups is greatly reduced since I’m not making big sales of ETFs to fund a year of spending all at once.

Monthly salary, as percentage of Jan 2025 salary

  1. I know it’s July 7, but the numbers are accurate for June, more or less. ↩︎
  2. I treat retirement savings as firewalled from my day to day chequing account. ↩︎
  3. Just barely, but I’ll take it ↩︎
  4. I changed the vertical axis of this chart to align with the other chart; it makes its stability much clearer. ↩︎

TD versus iShares: XEQT/XGRO/XBAL versus TEQT/TGRO/TBAL

RobH3 Comments

My post talking about BMO’s fee reduction for their asset allocation family enticed me to revisit competitive asset allocation funds. TD’s low-low fees (0.17% versus the 0.20% of iShares) are tempting.

So, quick sanity check — what’s the historical performance of XGRO versus TGRO?12

Per https://www.canadastockchannel.com/compound-returns-calculator/ (featured in Tools I Use) I see:

What? The TD fund has returned a full 2 percentage points better? This is a bit hard to believe. They must be rather different somehow?

Ah, yes. Revisiting their respective fund pages reveals that TGRO has a lower allocation for bonds — it’s only 10% versus the 20% for XGRO. More bonds will definitely lower return as a reward for lower volatility (I showed that effect here), so that probably explains the difference.

XGRO versus TGRO: Asset Allocation

So comparing the returns of XGRO versus TGRO wasn’t an apples to apples comparison. I could instead measure the relative returns of XBAL versus TBAL since the equity/bond ratios of these two are equivalent (both at 60% equity, 40% bonds)3. There are, however, some minor differences in the equity side of the equation:

XBAL versus TBAL: Asset Allocation

TBAL has a higher weighting in Canadian equity at the expense of some International equity, let’s see how that translates in the overall return:

That’s a lot closer, but the advantage still tilts TBAL’s way, which is another positive argument for considering it.

I am curious about how different these two are under the hood.

The first obvious difference is that they use different market indexes to build their portfolios, summarized below:

TGRO/TBALXGRO/XBAL
CAD EquitySolactive Canada Broad Market IndexS&P®/TSX® Capped Composite Index
US EquitySolactive US Large Cap CAD IndexS&P Total Market Index
Int’l EquitySolactive GBS Developed Markets ex North America Large & Mid Cap CAD IndexMSCI EAFE® Investable Market Index, MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index
Bonds FTSE Canada Universe Bond IndexFTSE Canada Universe Bond Index and others
Underlying indices tracked by TGRO and XGRO

So sure, the indices are different, but is it really a big deal? Doing a bit of digging I can confidently say that:

  • On the Canadian Equity front, TGRO’s holdings are more broad and include smaller stocks.
  • On the US Equity front, the opposite is true — XGRO holds more smaller US stocks
  • On the International Equity front, XGRO has exposure to Emerging markets that TGRO lacks
  • On the bond front, XGRO includes non-Canadian holdings, so a bit more diversified

Are any of these differences of great significance? No idea. Doubtful. TGRO has a recent small (0.5%) advantage, which is still worth digging in to. I took a look at the underlying assets…It’s easiest to do that by looking at the ETFs that underpin TGRO, one by one (TPU, TTP and TTE). XGRO’s product page shows the underlying assets so you don’t have to do the same (tedious) exercise for it.

Top CAD EquityTop US EquityTop Int’l Equity
TEQT/TGRO/TBALRBC, Shopify, TD, Enbridge, BrookfieldMicrosoft, NVIDIA, Apple, Amazon, MetaSAP, ASML, Nestle, Novo Nordisk, Roche
XEQT/XGRO/XBALRBC, Shopify, TD, Enbridge, BrookfieldMicrosoft, NVIDIA, Apple, Amazon, MetaTaiwan Semi, SAP, ASML, Nestle, Novo Nordisk
Top stock holdings, by asset category, for TGRO and XGRO

Hmph. Almost the same. I guess the difference is really coming down to an advantageous geographic mix for TBAL over XBAL, which may or may not be repeated. As compared to TBAL, XBAL’s greater focus on equities outside North America hurt its performance in the last 5 years.

All this to say that TGRO/TBAL look like fine products, with no real reason not to recommend them. For me, one small complexity with TGRO is its bond allocation, which is lower than XGRO’s, meaning that to keep my usual 20% bond allocation, I would have to either buy a standalone bond fund or buy a TEQT/TBAL combo (a 50/50 ratio works, I did the math).

Perhaps you’ll start to see some of these funds in my monthly update — stay tuned!

  1. I wouldn’t normally do this, especially since the funds don’t have a long history, but in this case I see that the TD funds use obscure (to me) indices so I want to quickly see if there’s a major difference in return. ↩︎
  2. XGRO is the mainstay of the CAD portion of my retirement portfolio and TGRO looks to be the same thing. ↩︎
  3. You may wonder if this is really a valid comparison since what I actually care about is TGRO versus XGRO. I think it is a valid comparison since TBAL and XBAL are still relying on the same underlying indices to build their respective funds, it’s just that the percentages vary. That’s pretty much how most all-in-ones approach the problem of building multiple risk levels: take a set of ingredients (the indicies) and mix them in different ratios to get to the final all-in-one product. It’s really a test to see if TBAL’s indices are somehow “better” than XBAL’s. ↩︎

A “two-fund” method for retirement investing

RobHLeave a comment

I read a lot of different financial blogs from a bunch of different sources. Last week, this article from “boomer&echo” caught my eye.

In it, they propose a “two fund” solution for how to invest in retirement:

They suggest funding your day to day spending needs from the HISA ETFs. Replenishing the HISA ETF comes courtesy dividends from the all-in-one equity ETF, and selling units “during up markets…or on a regular annual schedule”.

There are some things to like about this method, and some things not to like. I’ll break them down for you.

Like: It’s really simple

Two funds, and two percentages to remember. That’s simplicity. In a perfect world, my holdings would look similar, but would instead look something like

  • 75% in XGRO (an 80/20 ETF)
  • 20% in XEQT
  • 5% in ZMMK

This breakdown would give me the 80% equity, 15% bonds, 5% cash that I strive for in my asset allocation targets.

Like: It’s broadly diversified (mostly)

Holding an all-in-one equity fund seems like you’re putting all your eggs in one basket, but as I discussed over here concerning XEQT, it’s actually a great way to make sure you have your investment spread out across many companies in many geographies. My one mild objection to this approach is that there are no bonds5 in the boomer&echo portfolio, but it’s a minor point.

Like: It recommends keeping cash in the retirement holdings

Having cash on hand is a good way to smooth out the gyrations of the market. It’s a fundamental part of my own withdrawal strategy.

Dislike: The approach is likely to get emotional

The approach to refilling the cash portion of the boomer&echo portfolio is left a bit vague in the linked article. “During up markets” is almost guaranteed to encourage daily agonizing over whether it’s really the “right” time to sell. “On a regular annual schedule” is better advice, but that’s a big trade to execute on a single day, and the temptation to delay this trade would be rather large, I expect.

Dislike: It may not be practical

In theory, it’s really nice to have a super-simple portfolio. In practice, it’s much harder to pull off when you have substantial non-registered investments. Making trades in your non-registered accounts to simplify your holdings may attract unwanted capital gains, which of course may attract unwanted taxes. Add to this my dubious practice of holding substantial USD assets, and you quickly go from an ideal to what a real retiree’s portfolio actually looks like. In any case, it’s always good to try to simplify wherever you can, like I did.

My approach: similar, but different

My approach to portfolio maintenance in retirement is similar to the boomer&echo approach, with a few key differences:

  • Withdrawals are done monthly, without fail, and selling parts of my equity portfolio happen every month. No emotion, and I sell in up or down markets, on the same day every month.
  • The 80/15/5 mix between equity, bonds, and cash is maintained at all times, plus or minus a percentage point. My multi-asset tracker spreadsheet helps with that. Extra trades might be needed in a given month to keep the mix correct.
  • The cash portion of my portfolio is divided between a 6 month non-registered cash cushion that is part of the VPW methodology, and everything else. “Everything else” is largely in registered accounts so as to not generate unnecessary (and taxable) interest income.

What do you think about the boomer&echo two-fund approach? Anyone out there using it? Let me know at comments@moneyengineer.ca.

  1. The article in question mentions VEQT, but its MER is 0.24%, and the others are 0.20% or less. I hold XEQT myself. ↩︎
  2. Elsewhere in the article they characterize the HISA bucket as “12 months of withdrawals”, which is not at all the same as “10%”. ↩︎
  3. These kinds of ETFs invest in a variety of HISAs, like the ones I talk about here. ↩︎
  4. I use ZMMK in this role which is a bit riskier but with a bit higher return. Writing this article makes me wonder if I should head back to HISA ETFs instead. ↩︎
  5. Some research indicates that holding no bonds is in fact the best strategy. ↩︎

News: BMO reduces fees on all-in-one ETFs

RobH1 Comment

Summary: BMO has reduced fees on its family of asset-allocation ETFs (ZCON, ZBAL, ZGRO, ZEQT) to put its Management Expense Ratio (MER) in the same realm as competing families from GlobalX, iShares and TD.

If you’re a fan of all-in-one ETFs (as I am)1, then there is a new low-cost competitor2 to consider in BMO. BMO announced a reduction in their fees last week, and per Rob Carrick, it’s a win for everyone concerned. If you’re new to the idea of all-in-one ETFs (aka asset allocation ETFs), here’s a good place to start: https://moneyengineer.ca/2025/01/21/why-you-can-fire-your-advisor-asset-allocation-etfs/.

It’s probably worth taking a quick scan of the four lowest-cost families out there. Here’s the overview.

ProviderFund Symbols
TD3TEQT, TGRO,TBAL,TCON
BMO4ZEQT, ZGRO, ZBAL, ZCON
GlobalX5HEQT, HGRW, HBAL, HCON
iShares6XEQT, XGRO, XBAL, XCNS, XINC
Low-cost all-in-one ETF providers, and the symbols you can use to buy them

In my view, any of these families are worthy of your investment dollars. Which particular fund you pick within a family depends on your tolerance for volatility and/or your timeline for needing the money you’re investing. Each list of fund symbols in the table above is listed in order of amount of equity — so for TD, you can see that TEQT has the most equity (100%) whereas TCON has the least (40%). You might want to give https://moneyengineer.ca/2025/05/06/investment-basics-asset-allocation/ a read to get more familiar with the concepts.

  1. XGRO and XEQT are both members of the coveted “ETF All Stars” slot. ↩︎
  2. There are other all-in-one families (Vanguard, Fidelity, Mackenzie), the ones shown here are the least expensive of the lot at 0.20% MER or less. TD is the current winner of the lot with a rock-bottom 0.17% MER. ↩︎
  3. TEQT launched in April 2025. ↩︎
  4. There’s also an ESG asset allocation fund, ZESG. ↩︎
  5. There’s also a bunch of covered call variations that are of no interest to me. ↩︎
  6. iShares is the family I work within. I started with them over the others because they could be traded for free on my former provider (QTrade). My current provider (Questrade) allows free trading for any ETF. ↩︎