From: "Elle" 
Newsgroups: misc.invest.financial-plan
Subject: Re: Annual rate of return on 403B
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 22:48:41 -0600
	iQBVAwUARacTKfl/I4+O31e5AQFs6wIAzvGAMz5FYIZU3O0kxCUmu/Ox7mk04hxk
	gEV8sQE8TjTQrhHDQeCfDtIpPSf7n6U/HH71z7aUNkQ4ukxiHo2TUw==
	=Ov1v

Right, and microcap value stocks' returns have far exceeded 
the S&P 500's, historically speaking. Neither of these 
realities justifies an all EM portfolio or an all microcap 
value stocks portfolio. Do you understand why? I'll give you 
a hint: It's a statement made in every mutual fund 
prospectus in the U.S., among other publications.

Keep in mind, too, that the number of mutual funds has grown 
exponentially in the last thirty years. I suspect little was 
available by way of EM funds in the early 1980s, for one. I 
suspect the data of which you speak is dubious in its 
applicability here.

 wrote
> I'm feeling too lazy right now to google up the backup 
> data but I have
> read before that Emerging Markets is the top return sector 
> over
> extended periods of time. Obviously, it's way more 
> volatile so the
> typical 10 year horizon for S&P500 is not long enough. You 
> may be
> looking at 20-30 years as a reasonable timeframe for a 
> 100% Emerging
> Market portfolio.
>
> Elle wrote:
>> I have never seen anyone recommend strictly emerging 
>> market
>> and international stocks for one's portfolio. I think 
>> it's a
>> fair assumption that this is based on historical returns
>> over several decades, which is the OP's timeframe. (He 
>> said
>> he was "relatively young."
>