automatic rebalancing?

[CaliforniaMan]

I am sorry that I was not clear. I was hoping that I could entice you to look at your runs at another facet, to examine the results from a different view, as I am too lazy to do my own work. But I was also raising some ramifications from Bogle's assertion as quoted by another poster, that we should not bother to rebalance at all.

Again, if rebalance does not help, and stocks beat anything else, we should all go 100% equity. Yet, Bogle also says to have some bonds. Why?

Well, you are not the only lazy one here and spring is upon us, so time to be outside in the garden instead of doing spreadsheets . For me the answer as to why not hold 100% stocks during retirement (I did hold 100% stocks during much of my accumulation period) is that we don't live in retirement over the "long term," and there are already tools out there, FIRECalc and others, that show that some bonds can protect us from failure over our "shorter than long term" retirement, even though they do reduce potential gains over that ever illusive "long term."

 

[NW-Bound]

Well, I think someone with access to Bogle should ask the guru for clarifications. Bogle occasionally gives conflicting advices, or at least it seems so to me.