International stocks? China?

[TravisRADMD]

I'm setting up my 401K portfolio that for the most part has good options to pick from. The emerging market funds unfortunately track the same index and both are heavily weighted in China. Given the current civil rights violations in Xianjiang and Hong Kong in addition to nefarious trade/business practices with and within the united states on behalf of the CCP I was considering passing on these funds and keeping all my international allocation in developed blend and/or developed value. Loosing exposure to China will mean loosing exposure to other emerging countries but wouldn't one agree it's an inconsequential loss if almost half the fund is in China anyways? If not obvious, this criticism has nothing to do with the Chinese people or culture only the CCP's practices.

Any thoughts on loosing exposure to such a massive market?

[Random1]

Chinese stocks with partial CCP ownership can be difficult to evaluate because of the way they report fianances

[TravisRADMD]

Chinese stocks with partial CCP ownership can be difficult to evaluate because of the way they report fianances

Yea, I'd worry that it be nearly impossible

[jacoavlu]

wouldn't one agree it's an inconsequential loss

depends on how much you would potentially allocate

China is half the index bc it's big

[TravisRADMD]

depends on how much you would potentially allocate

China is half the index bc it's big

inconsequential was in regards to the other countries included in that index the funds follows.

[jacoavlu]

inconsequential was in regards to the other countries included in that index the funds follows.

half of anything isn't inconsequential

[Peds]

seeing as the rec AA to intl is 0-50% if you are bothered by it, then exclude it. i wouldnt allocate any more brain power to it than that.

[VagabondMD]

I would not criticize you for going 100% Developed Markets in your investment portfolio, for this, or any other, reason.

That said, it is very difficult to exclude Chinese industries from your life, unless you are going to live off the grid, in a cabin that you built by hand, with wood that you chopped with an axe, etc.

[TravisRADMD]

half of anything isn't inconsequential

lol, I'll rephrase to ease the disturbed logic. Only half the market cap of the fund is split between all the 1000+ remaining countries on the index making them seem "more inconsequential" in reference to my central contextual question about China. For every dollar I spend in my 401K's international emerging allocation I'm trying to decide if a 1% bite of let's say India's market is worth a 40% donation to the CCP.

[TravisRADMD]

I would not criticize you for going 100% Developed Markets in your investment portfolio, for this, or any other, reason.

That said, it is very difficult to exclude Chinese industries from your life, unless you are going to live off the grid, in a cabin that you built by hand, with wood that you chopped with an axe, etc.

haha, yea forssure. Consumption items are impossible but I don't have to double down with capital. And theoretically if we direct our capital with a little more awareness the consumption would change down stream, for better or worse.

[jacoavlu]

lol, I'll rephrase to ease the disturbed logic. Only half the market cap of the fund is split between all the 1000+ remaining countries on the index making them seem "more inconsequential" in reference to my central contextual question about China. For every dollar I spend in my 401K's international emerging allocation I'm trying to decide if a 1% bite of let's say India's market is worth a 40% donation to the CCP.

You can invest in other EM via total INTL funds that don’t include China A shares if that’s what you want. Might have to do some of that in taxable if not offered in 401k

[VagabondMD]

You can invest in other EM via total INTL funds that don’t include China A shares if that’s what you want. Might have to do some of that in taxable if not offered in 401k

Or an emerging markets ex-China etf:

https://www.ishares.com/us/products/...china-etf-fund

[aetech]

you might want to take your rose glasses off. the world is harsh.

There are lots of morally objectionable countries, companies and people.
It's fine you object to china, what about the usa (potus objecting to democracy), south east asia (child labor), amazon (killing small bus), boeing (weapons contractor), airlines (pollution), banks (money laundering), etc. there's so many, you'll need a custom index.
also, lots of people steal IP before 2010 (or so). I work in IT. Before companies implimented emails blockers/readers, lots of people were stealing code. Proof? Well, i notice some code was exactly identical (names/functions)- co-incidence? probably not. i bet if the programs were run through a plagiarism checker, it's likely it was stolen.

[Random1]

I think the growth rate of Chinese companies partially owned by CCP have been subpar in compared to returns in other markets. If you are going to take risks with your own money the companies should at least attempt to play by the same rules. I dont care what ever there business is , but I think CCP does a good job of taking money out of the company with out reporting it as profits and cant be accounted for, therefore leaving the stock holder with returns that less than the projected growth rate of the company.

[TravisRADMD]

you might want to take your rose glasses off. the world is harsh.

There are lots of morally objectionable countries, companies and people.
It's fine you object to china, what about the usa (potus objecting to democracy), south east asia (child labor), amazon (killing small bus), boeing (weapons contractor), airlines (pollution), banks (money laundering), etc. there's so many, you'll need a custom index.
also, lots of people steal IP before 2010 (or so). I work in IT. Before companies implimented emails blockers/readers, lots of people were stealing code. Proof? Well, i notice some code was exactly identical (names/functions)- co-incidence? probably not. i bet if the programs were run through a plagiarism checker, it's likely it was stolen.

I agree with the general tone of your cynicism but I'm not sure how the current Muslim labor camps in Xianjiang and the destruction of the free state of Hong Kong is the moral equivalency of the current administration legally disputing election results, Amazon outcompeting smaller businesses through cheaper consumer prices for billions around the world, Boeing being a business that makes weapons that protect as well as destroy, climate models of fossil fuel usage or the history of bank corruption. As far as the epidemic of child labor in south east Asia, you might just be making another point for avoiding most emerging market indices.

Of course, we can can object to the many actions of companies and sovereigns nationally and internationally and still make a judgement that the investment is worth it but you have to draw a line somewhere. Concentration camps and a global campaign to destroy democratic ideology is where I draw mine.

FYI, for those who are not familiar.

"The Intelligence Law, by contrast, repeatedly obliges individuals, organizations, and institutions to assist Public Security and State Security officials in carrying out a wide array of “intelligence” work. Article Seven stipulates that “any organization or citizen shall support, assist, and cooperate with state intelligence work according to law.” Article 14, in turn, grants intelligence agencies authority to insist on this support: “state intelligence work organs, when legally carrying forth intelligence work, may demand that concerned organs, organizations, or citizens provide needed support, assistance, and cooperation.” Organizations and citizens must also protect the secrecy of “any state intelligence work secrets of which they are aware.” These clauses appear to limit the obligations on individuals to Chinese citizens, but they do not stipulate that only Chinese “organizations” are subject to these requirements."

https://www.lawfareblog.com/beijings...efense-offense