The latest Couch Potato Portfolio for 2017

After two years with no changes to my Couch Potato model portfolios, the 2017 edition comes with an update to the ETF version.

Before I get to the details, I feel compelled to stress that if you’re currently using the older ETF portfolio, there is absolutely no reason to change. The funds I’ve swapped here are a wee bit cheaper, but the cost of selling your existing ETFs and buying the new ones almost certainly outweighs the benefits. And if the transactions would involve realizing taxable gains, then making a switch is downright nutty. To put this in perspective, the new portfolios will reduce your management fees by 0.03% annually, which works out to 25 cents a month on every $10,000 invested.

I’ve also updated my  model portfolios page with historical returns to the end of 2016. As always, we’ve used actual fund performance wherever possible: for earlier periods we’ve used index data, subtracting the fund’s current MER to account for costs.

With that out of the way, here are the changes.

Zigging over to ZAG

First, I’ve replaced the Vanguard Canadian Aggregate Bond Index ETF (VAB) with the BMO Aggregate Bond Index ETF (ZAG). BMO’s aggressive cost-cutting has made ZAG the cheapest bond ETF in the country, with a management fee of just 0.09%. (Don’t be fooled by the old MER of 0.23% that still appears on the BMO website: the fee reduction took place in June 2016 and the fund needs 12 full months before it can report its updated MER.)

Another benefit of using ZAG is that it has a companion fund, the BMO Discount Bond Index ETF (ZDB),designed for taxable accounts. So if your portfolio includes bonds in both registered and non-registered accounts, you can use ZAG and ZDB to get similar exposure in both accounts with maximum tax-efficiency.

One small point to be aware of: VAB and ZAG have slightly different risk exposures. The Vanguard ETF is roughly 80% government bonds and 20% corporates, while ZAG is closer to 70% government and 30% corporates, which explains its slightly higher yield to maturity.

Worlds apart

The second change replaces the Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF (VXC) with theiShares Core MSCI All Country World ex Canada Index ETF (XAW). These funds cover the global equity markets outside Canada: they’re both about 55% United States, 35% international developed markets (Europe and the Asia-Pacific region), and 10% emerging markets.

XAW was launched just weeks after I launched my simplified ETF portfolios in 2015, and two years later it has emerged as a slightly better choice than its Vanguard counterpart. The lower fee is the most obvious advantage: with an MER of 0.22%, the iShares fund it’s five basis points cheaper. Less obvious is XAW’s tax advantage.

Although both of these funds hold several underlying US-listed ETFs, the iShares version uses a Canadian-listed ETF for international developed markets. This difference in structure means the Vanguard ETF will be subject to a greater amount of foreign withholding taxes. According to Justin Bender’s detailed analysis, this amounts to a drag of about 0.10% in an RRSP or TFSA (the difference would be smaller in a taxable account). Add that to VXC’s higher fee and the cost difference becomes significant in registered accounts.

Which option is right for you?

I haven’t made any changes to the other two model portfolio options, though I have stopped including performance data for the Tangerine Equity Growth Portfolio. This fund, which is 100% stocks, recently changed its target asset mix: it was previously 50% Canadian, 25% US, and 25% international. As of last November, it now holds equal amounts of all three asset classes. I think this makes it a more diversified fund, but the change makes its historical performance meaningless for anyone considering the fund today.

One of the age-old questions I get from readers is, “How do I know which option is right for me?” Many new investors look only at the differences in MER and immediately gravitate to the ETF version, even though one of the index mutual fund options would be more appropriate.

To help answer this question, I recently wrote a feature in MoneySense magazine that walks you through the decision-making process. It even includes a selector tool that asks you to describe your preferences and then suggests one of the three options. Both the article and the quiz are now linked on the model portfolios page.

This article originally appeared on CanadianCouchPotato.com.

Read more of Dan’s Canadian Couch Potato column entries here. 

[bc_video video_id=”6023947297001″ account_id=”6015698167001″ player_id=”lYro6suIR”]