VXUS
Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
stock NASDAQ ETF

non ce un perché o un come ce solo una cosa chiamata diversificazione che abbassa appunto il guadagno ma mette al sicuro dal vedere il portafoglio giu per anni… nessuno può prevedere il futuro se fosse cosi ovvio che gli USA continueranno a fare il triplo rispetto a ogni altro paese… ti potrei fare mille esempi ma sta di fatto che appunto il futuro non si può prevedere. dal tronde maggior rischio maggior rendimento no? (si) dal tronde si parliamo degli USA ma stai anche mettendo a confronto tanti stati che sono compresi nel VXUS contro 1 solo compreso nel VOO.
ci vuole sempre una ruota di scorta anche se fosse che dopo 10 anni non l hai ancora mai usata.

Try replacing VXUS with AVDV, IDMO and/or EMEQ. There are also some flexible funds like COPY that can go in and out of international to US stocks when the value is good, so you get exposure to international without dedicating a portion of your portfolio to it.

VXF is riskier than VOO (smaller caps riskier than large).
VXUS eliminates the uncompensated risk of single country that VOO has, but adds risk in both the forms of smaller caps and emerging markets.
What would you do after a multi year under performance by VOO compared to VXF and/or VXUS?

VXF is only necessary if you are a completist. Your portfolio's ratio of VXF to VOO seems high to me. Personally, I would not bother with VXF. Similarly, if you prefer VOO, you should invest in VEU internationally rather than VXUS.

So, I'm at least a year away from retirement. I'll inherit a significant managed account that has 24% bonds, 28% large caps, 29% mid-caps, 10% international, and 8% cash & "other". I'll fire that manager and Boglify the account's holdings over several years. (It's WAY too complicated, which I feel, is the point.) My own current holdings (about the same as I'm inheriting) is currently 75% VTI, 10% VXUS and 15% BND. I plan to go up on the BND to 20% soon, but "recommended practices" is a hard sell at this point. I should probably give it more time. I'm working on my "and chill". ;-)

No, it's a different risk from them.
SMH has 25 sector related holdings with 5 stocks representing 50% of the holdings. VOO has 519 US large cap holdings with 10 stocks representing 40% of the ETF. Both of these are highly concentrated in just a few stocks and carry more risk because of it.
VXF has 3000 mid and small cap market holdings and VXUS has 8000 international holdings. All are different. Both of these are not highly concentrated in a handful of companies like VOO or SMH but are diversified and have less individual stocks risk.

SMH has more risk but more reward people pick VOO because it’s pretty much confirmed gains but less reward. Compared to VXF and VXUS though it’s significantly higher gains with the same amount of risk.

What you are reacting to is mostly recent performance, not proof that VXF and VXUS are pointless. VOO has crushed lately, but that does not mean US large caps will always be the only place you want exposure. Owning VXF and VXUS is basically paying for diversification before you feel like you need it, which is exactly why it feels hardest to keep.

I’m thinking about selling all my VXF and VXUS and putting it all in VOO

You should understand the answer to this question so you can make an informed decision. Nobody really knows what investments will outperform. There is a theory that diversification is the best we can do since the future is unknown. I subscribe to that theory, as do many Bogleheads, so to me VT is a great choice. There is also a case for rolling your own combo of VTI/VXUS, 100% VOO, or, especially for retirement, a Fidelity or Vanguard Target Date Index Fund. Other choices are more akin to gambling and will, I believe, incur uncompensated risk. But there are those who love these alternatives.

Asset allocation is just how much of your money you put in each investment, I personally split my portfolio into roughly 60% US total market (VTI), 10% Large cap growth (SCHG), 10% small cap (VB), 20% international (VXUS). Just because that works for me does not mean its right for you. So when I add money to my portfolio and buy the funds that are under my targeted allocations. If the balance between my investment really gets away from my target allocation then I could sell a little of the over performers and buy some of the under performers.

VT is like one toy box that already has US and international toys mixed together. VTI + VXUS is like having a US toy box and an international toy box, so you have to decide how many toys go in each and move them around later. VT = easy, no fixing. VTI + VXUS = more work, but you get to choose.

Depends how much US exposure you want going into the future. The past century, the US has benefit from being the dominant superpower and falling rates for the past 40+ years. That foundation is fracturing - heading to a more multi-polar world and a rising rate environment. I'd go something like 75/25 VT/VXUS to GDP-weight it and make the USA vs rest of the world more 50/50 vs VT's \~63% US-tilt.

VOO for S&P500 (this or total market should always be a core pillar of your portfolio), SPMO as an alternative to growth (you could get QQQM, SCHG, or VUG instead here if you wanted, I just personally find SPMO the most appealing option), and VXUS for international exposure (people typically recommend anywhere from 20-40%, I personally have 30% but it's up to you to determine how much you want to hedge into the non-US market)
obligatory this is not financial advice. I'm also 28M for context on my retirement timeline.

I don't dca into stocks but multiple ETFs (VOO, SPMO, and VXUS)

Yes, it appears that 100% of your 401k is invested in this fund. We would need to know more about what funds are available to you in your 401k.
Since it's a 2060 fund, that's 34byears from now. Assuming that's your anticipated retirement year you should be all about growth. A VTI or VOO equivalent would work well for you over the long term and is diverse. Some will say VTI and VXUS for global diversification. Either is acceptable.
Also, check if your company offers a Roth 401k. If so, switch to that and you future self will thank you.

I currently have a few hundred thousand dollars invested in the market, primarily in VOO, with a portion allocated to SMH, VTI, VGT, SCHD, QQQ, and VXUS.
My financial advisor wants to create a proposal to manage my portfolio and minimize the risk of losing more than 30% or 50% of my assets in a bearish market.
I’m wondering if it’s worth investing in a financial advisor for the amount I’ve invested (300,000 dollars). I understand that many of these stocks are correlated and overlapping, but I’m also curious to know if the stocks I’ve chosen will eventually yield a return.

VTI/VXUS

I've got a good amount that I can invest into an ETF right now, where my portfolio mostly consists of VOO, VXUS, and considering AVUV too.
Mostly just ETFs, not going single stock route right now.
My concern is that when I look back in 08 crash, it took the market a long time to recover its value, and investing during that time paid back quite a lot in returns.
I still hear that most of the times it makes more sense to lump sum invest instead of timing and waiting for a crash? Why is this? Is it just because timing a crash is far too uncertain to outvalue compounding growth from being in the market?

Everyone is gonna tell you to throw it in VOO, VTI, or one of these with VXUS. You are really young and those are good funds but I would consider some additional risk as well, depending on your tolerance. Honestly, I like VT paired with a number of funds like AVUV, CHPY or SMH, VFMO, and NASA, with most of the concentration in VT. NASA and CHPY are both relatively new funds and they cover sectors but I have great hope for both sectors from a long term outlook and like the holdings in each. However, if you aren’t interested in learning more about other funds and just want to set it and forget it, the S&P is never a bad choice. At 20, whatever you do is already ahead of the curve.