diversification is a good thing, but with international stocks underperforming U.S. stocks for the last

50 plus years, retirement investors are naturally questioning if it's time to finally give up on

this struggling asset class. Was the late John Bogle right when he said that investors don't need

to own international stocks? That, quote, we do better than the rest of the world?

Well, technically, he was right. U.S. stocks have done better than the rest of the world since

1970, as far back as the data goes. And not only have U.S. stocks delivered higher returns

over the last five decades, but they've done it with less risk and less volatility.

Welcome to the Stay Wealthy podcast. I'm your host, Taylor Schulte, and today I'm sharing

why owning international stocks for the last 50 years, despite the disappointing track record,

was actually a winning strategy. I'm also sharing why owning international stocks inside

of a diversified portfolio for the next 50 years and beyond is likely a wise decision as well, especially for those in retirement.

For the links and resources mentioned in today's episode, just head over to you staywealthy.com forward slash 188.

From January 1, 1970 to December 31st, 2022, U.S. stocks, as measured by the S&P 500,

had an average annual rate of return of about 10.4%. Developed international stocks during

that same time period delivered an average annual return

of about 8.2%. 10% versus 8%, both very respectable returns that I think most investors would

be happy with. But those percentages don't tell the whole story. So let's put some dollar figures to this.

Let's say that you invested

$10,000 in the SMP 500 in 1970. If you reinvested all of your dividends and stayed the course,

by the end of 2022, your original investment would have grown to about $1.9 million. On the other

hand, if you invested that $10,000 in developed international

stocks instead, you would have only ended up with about $660,000. To make matters worse,

...