📖John Bogle
Quality at a Fair Price
Seek quality businesses at fair prices.
The ideal investment is a high-quality business purchased at a fair price. Quality compounds wealth; fair prices protect capital.
🏠 Everyday Analogy
📖 Core Interpretation
John Bogle emphasizes durable business quality over short-term noise. A strong model, real competitive edge, and disciplined capital allocation matter more than quarterly excitement.
💎 Key Insight：Quality and fair price together create optimal investments.
AI Deep Analysis
Get personalized insights and practical guidance through AI conversation
❓ Why It Matters
Without business-quality filters, investors drift toward stories rather than economics. Durable cash generation is what supports long-term valuation.
🎯 How to Practice
Use a checklist covering moat, management, unit economics, and capital allocation; track long-term cash generation instead of quarter-to-quarter noise.
⚠️ Common Pitfalls
Buying narratives instead of cash-generating economics
Overreacting to short-term operating noise
Ignoring management quality and capital allocation
📚 Case Studies
1
Vanguard Boglehead vs. Aggressive 30-Something in the GFC (2008)
During the 2008 financial crisis, many U.S. index investors on Vanguard’s Bogleheads forum compared outcomes. A 30-something investor following Bogle’s ‘age in bonds’ rule had ~30% in bond index funds and 70% in stocks when the S&P 500 fell over 50% from October 2007 to March 2009.
✨ Outcome：Their portfolio dropped roughly 30–35%, versus 45–55% for peers near 100% stocks. The smaller loss helped them avoid panic selling and stay invested, illustrating how age-based bond allocation can reduce behavioral mistakes in severe bear markets.
2
Near-Retiree with Age-in-Bonds vs. Tech-Heavy Peers (2000)
Around the 2000 dot-com bust, many investors nearing retirement were heavily concentrated in tech stocks. A typical Bogle-style 60-year-old with about 60% in high‑quality bond funds and 40% in broad stock index funds saw only modest declines when the NASDAQ collapsed nearly 80% from 2000–2002.
✨ Outcome：While tech‑heavy retirees lost 40–70% and delayed retirement, the age‑in‑bonds investor’s portfolio decline was far smaller and more tolerable, preserving retirement plans. The case, documented in retrospective interviews and advisor reports, highlighted the protective role of higher bond allocations in later years.
See how masters handle real scenarios?
30 real investment dilemmas answered by legendary investors
Explore Scenarios →