Neither will predict the future.
Stock, bond and inflation results are correlated to each other and to the recent past in complex ways that cannot be captured by mathematical formula. Historical simulation gets around this problem by simply using real data. Whatever the correlation was, historical simulation captures it. Monte carlo simulation typically ignores the correlations or, at best, provides a poor approximation of some of the relationships. Historical simulation is limited to asset classes that have been accurately tracked and tabulated for 130 years. This is a serious limitation if you want to invest in real-estate, commodities, small-caps, . . . or anything other than the S&P 500 and bond indexes. Monte Carlo simulation can take whatever historical returns are currently available, assume the future will provide a similar distribution of returns and examine portfolios that include that asset class.
The best answer: Use both and try to understand the strengths and weaknesses of each. If they do not provide answers that are at least in the same ballpark, you or the simulation is doing something wrong. And getting in the ballpark is all either simulator is going to do as far as predicting your future.