Sorry being late to this discussion. Our oversea exposure is about 7-8%, with mostly actively managed funds and ETFs. In taxable account, VEA and DIVI are the only one we use and they are tax efficient.
1. For large cap developed market, ARTKX and FMIJX are the main vehicles.
2. Lately CCGO was added to gain exposure to the “growth” stocks in Europe as BF mentioned the “Fantastic Five”. Capital fund does a good job so far managed the downside risk than that of Vanguard Int’l growth (we moved on when Ian Anderson retired).
3. For EM exposure, we have 2% and it is getting smaller; largely invested in Seafarer funds with Andrew Foster and his teams.
4. The only stake on int’l small caps we have is Seafarer EM Value.
5. We continue to seek actively managed funds and ETFs with lower ER; preferable less than 1%.
6. Back in the 80-90’s when US currency was less dominated to other currencies, many international funds often out-performed the US counter-parts. This has changed in the last 10 years as it reflects in our lowered exposure.
7. In our 529 plan, Vanguard Total International stock index fund is used as part of the portfolio but we have limited choice there. Preferably, the Total Stock Market index would be better.

IF one wants to follow Bengen's original paper, then one should (I think) be using large cap domestic stocks and intermediate term Treasuries. (He is clear about intermediate term treasuries but says only "large cap" stocks.)
These days, many allocation funds invest a significant fraction of their equity sleeve abroad. IMHO that's not a bad thing, but it is different. A related "problem" is that allocation funds often invest some money into small cap stocks. While this is different from Bengen's original work, it could be an improvement:

Bill Bengen ...has increased the withdrawal rate he uses on his own retirement portfolio to 4.7%, largely because of the upside he’s gained by adding small and microcap asset classes to his portfolio, he told the Bogleheads Live podcast this week. [Dec 2022]

https://www.fa-mag.com/news/creator-of-4--rule-says-new-withdrawal-target-is-4-7-71026.html
That page goes on to say that these days, Bengen says that "the optimum stock allocation that allows the highest withdrawal rate over the long term is between 55% and 60% over the long term."
That suggests that you might look at 60/40 funds, of which there are many. As to what Bengen himself is doing, rather than using his stated static allocation "he uses a third-party service that recommends changes to his asset allocation based on perceived changes in the marketplace."
In short, consider looking at funds closer to 60/40. VBIAX (0.07% ER) is a good starting point if ER is paramount, or VSMGX (0.12% ER) to add foreign exposure.
FWIW, here's a portfolio visualizer comparison of three 60/40 funds: AOR, VSMGX, and VBIAX. over roughly ten years (PV limitation). Starts with $10K, $400 (4%) annual withdrawal (inflation adjusted).

"Isn't Intl investing really a currency play on a weaker dollar...which might be in our near future, no?"
Foreign currency weakness / strength against the dollar affects returns but there is more to the story.
S&P 500 companies derive a significant portion of their revenue overseas.
However, some excellent companies are domiciled outside of America.
I would like to own these companies.
Foreign stocks may provide diversification during longer periods
where S&P 500 performance is dismal (e.g., 2000 - 2009).
Of course, diversification works both ways.
Foreign stocks have lagged U.S. stocks for approximately 15 years.
This is an unusually long period and U.S. / foreign stock outperformance tends to run in cycles.

William Bengen published Conserving Client Portfolios During Retirement, Part III
in the Dec. 1997 Journal of Financial Planning. His recommended range for stock allocation
was between 50% and 75% for a 65 year-old investor.
"Because withdrawal rates within the recommended range of stocks are essentially equal,
they are not very useful in selecting stock allocation.
For another view of the matter, consider Chart 10, which depicts the nominal wealth built up
in a portfolio after 30 years, for a retiree who began withdrawing four percent the first year.
The two stock allocations displayed, 50 percent and 75 percent, represent the extreme ends
of the 'recommended range' for this investor at age-65 retirement."
PDF1
Edit/Add: Bengen published Conserving Client Portfolios During Retirement, Part IV
in the May 2001 Journal of Financial Planning. Two alternative withdrawal strategies are explored.
PDF2

Came across this & thought , did an MFO's bit on this deal of a life time !!
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/traders-scooped-warren-buffett-berkshire-105754520.html

I believe the 1994 paper called for 50/50 and adjust withdrawals for inflation.

Thanks for the info. USSH is a new fund, inception date 3/12/24, with $495K asset.
Pros and cons exist in either ETF or treasury approaches. Once can extend the duration of the ladder % from 6 months to 1 to 3 year treasury. Also keep some in money market.

Increased cash from around 12% to 12.65% today. Sold a few shares of NSRGY and FOF. (Anticipating some significant cash withdrawals before year’s end.)

For taxable account, you can consider USSH, WisdomTree 1-3 yr Laddered Treasury, ER 0.15. Same as USFR.
We are shifting to 1 and 2 year treasuries as they are rising in recent weeks.

With less than $1M AUM and an average daily volume of < 300s that sounds kinda dangerous if you ever want/need to exit it quickly to use the cash elsewhere. UTWO might be a better option if you want more liquidity (and AUM) as a cash substitute --- albeit it wouldn't be laddered.

For taxable account, you can consider USSH, WisdomTree 1-3 yr Laddered Treasury, ER 0.15. Same as USFR.
We are shifting to 1 and 2 year treasuries as they are rising in recent weeks.

maybe slightly off topic but a couple thoughts/comments;
See Thornburg article dated May 17, "forget mag 7 and look at Euro fantastic 5"...SAP, ASML, AstraZen, LVMH, Novo...has actually outperformed since Jan 2022...hmm, no kidding, really?.
Isn't Intl investing really a currency play on a weaker dollar...which might be in our near future, no?
I've got monies in TSUMX Thornburg Summit Fund...multi asset...hold intl stocks and bonds to some degree...
Good Luck and Good Health to ALL,
Baseball Fan

Dumped the cash into SGOV. Far cheaper than Schwab's Treasury MMFs and I won't be paying Schwab an insane fee for the privilege of holding my cash.

@rforno why did you decide against USFR?

Didn't feel 100% going into floaters at this point in time, especially in large amounts. Rather than cogitate about it too much, I just went with a straight treasury fund instead ... will draw that down as I buy other equities over the next several months if/when/as volatility presents itself.

+1

Hi, guys.
Cool stuff at the end of a whirlwind period.
Devesh did a really thoughtful analysis of why the Yale-default allocation to international developed - about 18% and passive - has been a really bad idea, and what the data suggests as a healthier exposure along the efficient frontier.
Lynn, in between stints with Habitat for Humanity, asked a simple and useful question: when it comes to equity ETFs, which advisers get it right?
Shadow shared several shout-outs to the board and a bunch of stuff on the industry's eternal churn.
I shared a bit about the FPA Investor Day in Chicago (short version: less cash, more quality, sticky inflation) and, in follow-up, about the FPA Queens Road Small Cap Value fund which continues to offer exposure to high-quality small caps plus nearly unparalleled downside protection.
At some risk to reputation and sanity, I also wrote a letter to my graduates about managing the role of money and desire in their new lives. In general higher ed is pilloried for being leftist / socialist but sometimes the translation of that allegation is "you're criticizing the rich and powerful again! Stop it!" I teach a class that's guilty of that crime: since my college days in the 1970s, there has arisen a profound addiction to possessions. (Hmmm ... the number of outfits we own has tripled?) That obsession is engineered rather than organic. And so I wrote an affectionate letter to the young urging them to shift a bit from spending (six suggestions) to investing (three easy steps!).
Let me know if there's anything in particular you think we should pursue at the (much-reduced) Morningstar conference at the end of the month!
David

Just noticed - it’s at 4.366% as of 9 AM today. That’s down from over 4.5% last week. Was off sharply yesterday. Don’t pay a lot of attention to bond funds. My two “bond” holdings, PRIHX and LSST both gravitate to the short end of the curve. It hasn’t escaped me that PRWCX has suffered this year due to its bond holdings, as have virtually any other funds with exposure.
Mainly posted FYI

More kudos for that article. I'm at 15%, half of it indexed, because "that's what the experts say." (Actually, some of them suggest much more than that but thank goodness I didn't go there.) Still rue the opportunities to get into ARTKX that I skipped over ("too expensive, it'll revert to the mean"). Live and learn, and I think this article has added to my learning.

Thank you for the feedback. I think it’s good to criticize in the right spirit because we learn from it when done correctly. Boards, as you probably know, work slowly and step wise. Goal number 1 was to stop doing what didn’t make sense: investing in companies based on domicile in a passive international etf. Goal number 2, which is already in motion and implementation is to get comfortable with a few active managers in that area. To invest, and to scale up the percentage weights back up to mid teens. I think we can get there by middle of next year. Transitions are not perfect and neither are my ideas. Just trying to make sense of what I see.
The July MFO article will try and highlight some of these funds, the international stocks, and hopefully inspire some to switch from passive to active in that area. Only time can tell if such active decisions work. One thing we do know is passive has not done what it promised abroad. It works beautifully in the USA but not abroad, at least not consistently.

I read with great interest Devesh Shah thoughts this morning and reasoning on helping to take the international allocation on the endowment he serves on down substantially.
The question I have for him with zero criticism is I have read and watched Nobel prize winners like William Sharpe and Eugene Fama and Fama’s frequent collaboration Ken French suggest that there is very little signal in observations five , ten, or even twenty years out.
Shah who is clearly a very smart person must know that.
In order to move as sharply away from where the global portfolio clears or reaches equilibrium he is in fact making a big tactical bet.
If we enter a period like 2000-2010 where essentially the S&P had zero returns ( not impossible given the elevated valuation of US stocks) the “bet” the board made goes against the idea of being market agnostic.
I’m curious if they aren’t succumbing to recency bias even though the recency has persisted for a very long time?

Using Savings Bonds for education has many restrictions.
https://treasurydirect.gov/savings-bonds/tax-information-ee-i-bonds/using-bonds-for-higher-education/
We bought some DECADES ago, and when these "new" rules came along, our bonds didn't qualify for one reason or another. By that time, we had stopped buying them, but just held them. Now, all have matured naturally (30 years) and we are Savings Bond free except for the I-Bonds we bought in 2021-22 during the mad rush when inflation was very high.
But the rules for using Savings Bonds for education could certainly be simplified.

Mark +1