AOA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF
stock NYSE ETF

I really like the methodology behind iShares AOA/AOM/AOR/AOK. Very "boglehead" and tax-friendly, in my opinion.
(And if you want a higher % allocation of bonds as you age, simply buy more bonds.)

Remembering the “developed” stock indices now contain real estate stocks (REITs), look at asset allocation funds (iShares has aa ETFs like AOA) .. or TDFs = target date funds.
On the later I think iShares has great TDF ETFs to explore (even if you don’t buy) as you’ll see what goes into them; they divide them not only with various stock ETFs, but also all the global bond ETFs, real estate, and even infrastructure ETFs.
After looking at them, doubt you’d want to replicate because of all the rebalancing. If DIY, could do something like replicate Vanguard’s TDF mutual funds (mostly 4 funds) in ETFs (the 4 ETFs or just % of VT and BNDW) and maybe add iShares/Blackrock’s infrastructure ETF in proportion.
Now there’s limits to what stock markets etc .. financial firms can buy (their own limits, govt restrictions, etc..) and think they differ slightly between FTSE and MSCI.

As someone from Latin America, I'm already heavily biased towards my own country and currency (I live here, work here, earn and use this currency, own property here and so on...), therefore my portfolio is almost entirely international (now essentially AOA), save for an inflation-protected bond cushion also in my own currency

Thoughts:
* Are you fully funding your own retirement? Setting your kid up for the future is great, but an even better gift would be for your kid to not worry about you being destitute and dependent on them when you're retired
* You can rollover $35K from a 529 into a Roth IRA, so you should consider doing some of that for your kid first.
* There's nothing magic about the S&P 500 (VOO/IVV/SPLG/etc.). It's done well over the last 15-ish years, but nobody knows whether it'll continue to outperform for the next decade. The decade before the current outperformance, it actually finished down.
* If you do decide to invest for your kid in conventional accounts, consider more diversified offerings like VT, a combination of VTI+VXUS or ITOT/IXUS, or an all-in-one target allocation fund like AOA. 10 years isn't that long, so you might want to do something more conservative like AOR or AOM.

Furthermore, not sure about your timeline but if you are fine with bonds then AOA is good too for simple and safe medium term investing

I recently saw Robert Kessler talking about going all in on STRIPS as a retirement investment strategy. I wasn’t persuaded, but he did cause me to wonder whether a small STRIPS commitment could be useful.
I am weighing two specific allocations for a hypothetical $1M tax-advantaged account. I’m trying to determine if the potential "rebalancing alpha" from a high-convexity bond tilt is worth the structural yield drag.
The Baseline Portfolio:
• 85% AOA (iShares Aggressive Allocation - 80/20)
• 10% VTIP (Short-Term TIPS)
• 5% SGOV (0-3 Month Treasuries)
• Characteristics: High dividend/interest yield, steady compounding, simple.
The "STRIPS Tilt" Portfolio:
• 75% AOA
• 10% ZROZ (PIMCO 25+ Year Zero Coupon Treasury)
• 10% VTIP
• 5% SGOV
• Characteristics: Lower yield, extreme negative correlation potential during crashes.
The Strategy:
The goal of the second portfolio is to use ZROZ as a "volatility spring." I am intentionally trading 10% of AOA’s equity growth and dividend yield (a "drag" of roughly $2,500–$3,000 annually) for the potential of a 30–50% windfall spike during a flight-to-safety event. The plan is to capture that price appreciation through a rebalance back into the equity side during periods of high market stress.
Questions for the Forum:
1. Yield Drag vs. Rebalancing Alpha: On a $1M portfolio, am I likely to lose more in compounding dividends over 5–10 years than I could realistically gain from a single "super-rebalance" out of a ZROZ spike?
2. The "Spring" Tension: In the ZIRP era, STRIPS had nowhere to go but down. With long-term rates now around 4%, is the asymmetric upside of ZROZ now high enough to justify the 10% tilt?
3. Inflation vs. Recession: 2022 showed that STRIPS can crater (-40%) when stocks and bonds move in tandem. Is this tilt too risky for a retiree, or is the 15% VTIP/SGOV sleeve enough of a "safe haven" to allow for a 10% bet on duration?
4. Portfolio Utility: Is there a compelling reason to stick with the 85/15 baseline and rely on the lower-volatility 15% sleeve for rebalancing, or does the added convexity of the 10% ZROZ slice offer a distinct enough diversification benefit to justify the complexity?
I’m interested in whether this "barbell" approach (Global Equities + Cash + High-Duration STRIPS) is seen as a legitimate hedge or just over-engineering a portfolio that would be better off in a simple 80/20 or 70/30.

Stick it in ENDW, TRTY, GAA, or AOA depending on my investment philosophy and go enjoy my life.

I like AOA as well. Good “all in one” fund that auto rebalances and is diversified

AOA, FFNOX

Separate from the ETF advice, if you're actually planning to stop working, look into Rule 72(t), often called SEPP, regarding how to withdraw from your 401k without penalties before 59.5. If you only have $500K liquid and the rest is in your home equity and retirement accounts, I think you'll probably need to go this route.
As for whether or not you should focus on dividends or just selling, I think just selling is appropriate for most people, so long as you understand how to mitigate sequence of returns risk (either a cash buffer so you don't have to sell when your assets are down or the ability to greatly lower your expenses, so you don't have to sell as much).
As for which funds, it's going to depend on your risk profile and how adverse you are to your principal dropping. I would probably consider one of the following: VT, AOA, AOR, or AOM. All are globally diversified portfolios, the difference is how much is allocated to bonds. VT is 0%, AOA is 20%, AOR is 40%, and AOM is 60%. This results in VT being the most volatile and subject to the largest drawdowns while AOM is the least volatile and subject to smaller drawdowns. Though, on the flip side of that, VT is expected to have the highest long-term returns while AOM would have the lowest. So the choice is largely about balancing long-term growth against short-term volatility.

VT is fantastic IMO, unless you are considering a fixed bond allocation. If so, maybe AOA or FFNOX (FFNOX if you are at Fidelity, AOA is good anywhere).
Or if you want little to no bonds now, but would be interested in gliding into more bonds as you get closer to retirement, an index target date fund. The iShares LifePath ETF series can be bought anywhere, or Fidelity Freedom Index at Fidelity or Vanguard Target Date at Vanguard. Schwab does have an index TDF as well but truthfully I prefer the iShares ETF to the Schwab product and would likely just buy the iShares one if I were at Schwab.

The large caps (especially US of late) will still pack a punch in market weighted broad index or even a global asset allocation ETF w/bonds, .. such as AOA or AOR. You can check those iShares holdings btw to see how small % these small cap index ETFs are in relation to the larger caps (vanguard just includes them in all-cap funds),
Think on the other side of the market cap spectrum getting too many small caps probably jusr results in “noise” at market cap. A typical small cap blasting off to record heights within an all-cap index is still a minor decimal. Now a factor portfolio (see below) where SC and/or SCV are at 10% is a different story .. if small caps rise.
Otoh, mid to small caps show when an economy is doing well (or not) as large cap multinationals more reflect global business. Then again, the larger caps tend to have a lot of cash flow on average.
If going with a factor portfolio (“slice and dice” various index ETFs out on their own), then over the long haul the small cap “blend” historically/theoretically returned more than large cap “blend”, value more than growth (especially small), non-U.S. more than US. Those could take some time to show up however.

Yes, that geography includes bonds... but really, the easy way to look at the exposure is to take a look at the underlying funds (FoF structure)... AOA just buys SP1500 (IVV + IJH + IJR) and IEMG + IDEV for stocks (IMHO could be IXUS, but that's Blackrock's call), trying to mimick a VT... then it balances it with bonds using IUSB + IAGG... AOR, AOM etc are the same thing, just a different % of stock/bond split

I suggest you check your quick math again, because AOA is supposed to tilt US/Intl approximately the same way a world index would (check SPTGAU methodology), which is closer to 60/40 than to 75/25 (stocks)

AOA by iShares on the OG forum is cited a lot in the thread for people who want one ticker.
It is better constructed as a fund of funds so should get doing foreign tax credit and has 20% bonds/treasuries.
My quick math is that it is 75% of its 80% in stocks in US thus a small US bias.
Again… I would much rather just pay $5 a month and use Fidelity baskets to have an equivalent of a one ticker than the obvious downsides that come with oversimplification.