Industrial (VIS) is very close to purchase territory with a BPI reading of 31.64,  Discretionary (VCR) and Utilities (VPU) are close with BPI readings of 35.63 and 35.48 respectively.  Last week shares of VPU were purchased for Utilities so we need only pay attention to Industrial and Discretionary.

Lowel

Lowell

Lowell

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GHJLVBXjD8&t=

Lowell

"Yes — there was a Vanguard-related recommendation for a 30% stocks / 70% bonds portfolio, but there is an important distinction.

In 2025, Vanguard's long-term capital-market forecasts led to commentary that a 70% bonds / 30% stocks allocation could be attractive for investors with a relatively short withdrawal horizon. Some media reports characterized this as "Vanguard recommending 70% bonds."

However, I would not describe 30/70 as Vanguard's current blanket recommendation for all investors.

What Vanguard is saying now

Vanguard's 2026 tactical/time-varying portfolio is currently approximately:

40% stocks / 60% bonds

Vanguard explicitly describes this as more conservative than the traditional 60/40 portfolio because it believes investors aren't currently being adequately compensated for the risk of U.S. equities.

Vanguard's 2026 outlook also says it favors high-quality bonds, with bonds offering attractive real returns and diversification if economic growth disappoints.

Where the 30/70 figure came from

The 30/70 allocation is not simply a mistaken number. Vanguard's research around 2025 was showing that, under certain assumptions and particularly for investors with shorter withdrawal horizons, substantially higher bond allocations could make sense. That's why you may have seen headlines saying Vanguard was recommending 70% bonds.

There is also a Vanguard Conservative LifeStrategy allocation of 20% stocks / 80% bonds, demonstrating that Vanguard does use allocations more conservative than 40/60 when the investor's risk tolerance and objectives warrant it.

For your situation

Given your repeated interest in protecting capital, preparing for a major market correction, and generating retirement income, I think the more useful question is not simply "30/70 or 40/60?"

I'd compare:

For a retiree concerned about a major correction, I would take the 30/70 proposal seriously. It is considerably more consistent with capital preservation than 60/40, while retaining enough equity exposure to provide long-term growth."

I will continue to look for the latest information from Vanguard and other major brokers.

Lowell

Lowell

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaKwK4Ztx88

Here at ITA we have been on this bandwagon for several months and readers will see all portfolios have seen a major reduction in equity exposure.

Lowell

PS If you come across a similar video, please post the link here in the Forum.

The three sector portfolios (Carson, Franklin, and McClintock) are all heavily invested in short-term treasuries (SCHO or SGOV).

Lowell

The three sector portfolios (Carson, Franklin, and McClintock) are all heavily invested in short-term treasuries (SCHO or SGOV).

Lowell

~jim

Jim,

Do you have the correct Tiingo code or number entered into the ITA file that resides under Documents/ITA?

Lowell