The Shift: The Returns Weren’t in the U.S.

With very few exceptions, my advisory portfolios include international exposure.

This isn’t fancy footwork. It’s structural diversification.

But, as you can imagine, the legacy portfolios I onboard are overwhelmingly U.S.-centric by default. So for simplicity, we add international through a broad basket or a low-cost fund like VXUS.

It’s not over-engineered.

Over time, international does exactly what it’s supposed to do. It adds geographic breadth, diversifies currency exposure, and reduces reliance on a single market regime. My portfolios had a strong 2025.

Importantly, I never needed international to significantly outperform for my portfolios to compound. That wasn’t the role it was meant to play.

But in 2025, it didn’t just diversify. International outperformed U.S. equities by a wide margin. That’s what forced my closer look.

As you know, under that “international” label sit countries with very different currencies, sector mixes, and valuation profiles.

When returns were broken down by country, the dispersion was stark. One market delivered nearly a 100% gain. Another widely owned growth market did almost nothing. A handful of quieter markets did most of the work.

If international equity is becoming a return driver, the way gold has, then broad exposure alone is no longer enough.

It’s time to get serious about international.

If you want to understand why international equity suddenly mattered, and how to position for what comes next, the full breakdown is below.