Drawdown portfolio - views

Options
24

Comments

  • bowlhead99
    bowlhead99 Posts: 12,295 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary Post of the Month
    edited 30 May 2017 at 8:24AM
    Options

    My thinking in moving to all income producing ones is to avoid my natural aversion to selling funds that are growing well ( top slicing) but I do fully understand the point you are making in that I am reducing the size of the pool I can pick from.

    With relatively low fuss and effort you can reduce emotional involvement and natural aversions by simply setting up a little spreadsheet showing your target percentage allocations to each fund.

    As one fund "has a good run" and another fund or funds have a less good run or go down, your portfolio will be relatively higher weighted to fund A than your target percentage suggests you want, and under-allocated to fund B and C. Especially if B has been paying you out some income a few times a year and A has not. So, your spreadsheet tells you that you have more A than you need in the context of your overall portfolio size, and not enough B and C. So, when it's time to top up your cash pot to make sure you can accommodate the coming months' cash withdrawals, you know which fund to sell and which (if any) to perhaps even buy a bit more of.

    You might like to overlay a couple of rules, for example you are not going to bother selling anything that's no more than x% away from its target, and you're not going to action any sales for less than £4000 because the ten pound transaction fee would be a high percentage of say, a £500 sale.

    With a simple "rebalance" strategy like that a couple of times a year you can get away from the mindset, the voice in the back of your head, that says "I must 'run my winners' or 'don't want to sell that, it's doing well'."

    The key is just to determine the sensible allocation in the first place and review periodically whether it still makes sense.

    The spreadsheet allows you to keep your marbles by selling very mechanistically, rather than emotionally. You don't need to 'top slice' based on gut feel. You could even give your grandkids the spreadsheet as a homework problem every six months and say ok kids you can do basic maths problems, so if Mr Smith has £700k split 30% in A and 20% in B and 10% C and 25% D and 15% E, but wants only £690k of investments remaining because he needs £10k to top up his income for the next few months, and he wants the split to be 25%, 25%, 5%, 30% 15% - how much value does he want left in each fund and how much should he now sell or buy of each fund to get him there? You could of course divide all figures by ten to avoid telling the kiddies exactly how much wealth you have.

    The spreadsheet would do it automatically in two seconds after keying in or uploading the valuations and the amount you want to take, it only becomes a "tricky maths puzzle" if you want a mental arithmetic challenge for somebody. It certainly isn't an emotive top slicing problem, as it's just a bunch of numbers. You could even anonymise the funds to A B C etc if you don't want to keep thinking "ooh, but I don't want to sell any Aberdeen Asian, it's been good to me over the years".

    It's a dilemma for me, I have grown my portfolio quite well over the last few years but I dont enjoy it and as I get older and retire I just want to enjoy life and not be stressing over my income.
    .
    Well, one way to stress less is to not restrict yourself to purely income stocks, so that you have more sources of potential growth, and not to be scared of viewing the whole portfolio as something you can spend even if it hasn't "produced an income" that month.
    I do envy people with company pensions that just pay a monthly income with no fuss or effort.
    You could of course buy guaranteed income in the form of an annuity but you'd find it incredibly expensive because by removing risk you remove rewards and so you need to spend more.

    I do commiserate with the "not wanting to top slice" problem. Every time I look at my dad's portfolio and say ok we are going to sell some of this or that because we have more of it than we need, he will say something like, "are you mad, I'd really rather not sell any of that because can't you see, its been doing very well! Why aren't you selling that property fund that only went up 5% last year when the equities fund you want to sell has just gone up 40%... I thought you were supposed to be the one who was good at maths! More is better than less, isn't it?!"

    And then I show him the allocation spreadsheet and he understands, sort of. So, a spreadsheet or even a piece of paper if you are old school, will help you stay organised as well as focused on a plan. Once you have a plan, of course ;)
  • Joey_Soap
    Joey_Soap Posts: 410 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    WAY too many funds. With that number of funds you may just a well use a tracker, because that is what you have created. In my SIPP I have four funds in a GBP 300+k SIPP.
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 116,387 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    With that number of funds you may just a well use a tracker,

    How would that work? i.e. what tracker would mimic the asset allocation of the selection of funds?
    , because that is what you have created.

    I dont agree. I haven't checked but statistically, the odds of the asset allocation on that spread of funds matching a tracker have to be enormous.
    In my SIPP I have four funds in a GBP 300+k SIPP.

    On a bespoke portfolio, I am typically around 10-12 on that amount. 4 would not be sufficient. 4 is doable but some sectors would see little or nothing allocated.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
  • Joey_Soap
    Joey_Soap Posts: 410 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    dunstonh wrote: »
    How would that work? i.e. what tracker would mimic the asset allocation of the selection of funds?

    I dont agree. I haven't checked but statistically, the odds of the asset allocation on that spread of funds matching a tracker have to be enormous.

    On a bespoke portfolio, I am typically around 10-12 on that amount. 4 would not be sufficient. 4 is doable but some sectors would see little or nothing allocated.

    1 I never said a tracker would mimic those holdings. Just that the returns from such a huge number of holdings will be distinctly average and the return could be compared (IMO) to a tracker. Holding all those funds, each holding dozens, even hundreds of investments, means your chances of beating a benchmark are greatly reduced. Hence, just buy a tracker and save yourself 1% or more a year in fees.

    2 I never said it would match. See above.

    3 Not so interested in sectors for the sake of it. We all want the best bang for the buck we can get at as little risk as reasonably manageable? Worrying too much about whether you have the right % of your portfolio in Peruvian Widget Makers or you're too much exposed to Mongolian Sheep Farmers isn't really that worthwhile. Again, IMO.

    4 Effectively, I am outsourcing my portfolio to a very few (at the moment four) carefully selected high performing managers. I am happy to let them worry about all the rest of the stuff. As long as they deliver, I'm happy to hold. HTH.
  • bostonerimus
    bostonerimus Posts: 5,617 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    Rebalancing is a great way to "sell high and buy low". It would be almost impossible with the OP's portfolio because of the large number of funds. So I think some pruning is necessary. However, we don't know the level of income the OP requires and for how long and that will also be important in determining the asset allocation.
    “So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
  • Chickereeeee
    Chickereeeee Posts: 1,186 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Options
    Joey_Soap wrote: »
    1 I never said a tracker would mimic those holdings. Just that the returns from such a huge number of holdings will be distinctly average and the return could be compared (IMO) to a tracker. Holding all those funds, each holding dozens, even hundreds of investments, means your chances of beating a benchmark are greatly reduced. Hence, just buy a tracker and save yourself 1% or more a year in fees.

    I have never really understood that argument. If you believe you can pick a fund manager for a sector that will perform better than most of the rest, then presumably you think you have a reasonable shot of picking 2 or 3 in the top half of the performance table. Presumably, the average performance of those three would be better than the performance of the whole market sector (or a tracker)?
  • Joey_Soap
    Joey_Soap Posts: 410 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    I have never really understood that argument. If you believe you can pick a fund manager for a sector that will perform better than most of the rest, then presumably you think you have a reasonable shot of picking 2 or 3 in the top half of the performance table. Presumably, the average performance of those three would be better than the performance of the whole market sector (or a tracker)?
    If you're worried by that, just pick one. You'll still have dozens if not hundreds of holdings underlying investments. In fact, I think if I picked any one of the four managers I currently "sub contract" to I'd be happy.
  • Linton
    Linton Posts: 17,173 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary Hung up my suit!
    Options
    Joey_Soap wrote: »
    1 I never said a tracker would mimic those holdings. Just that the returns from such a huge number of holdings will be distinctly average and the return could be compared (IMO) to a tracker. Holding all those funds, each holding dozens, even hundreds of investments, means your chances of beating a benchmark are greatly reduced. Hence, just buy a tracker and save yourself 1% or more a year in fees.

    This is only valid if the OP was investing broadly across the whole of global or UK equity. But he isnt, he seems to want a large push towards those companies that pay dividends. What trackers can you suggest that would do this job?

    On the bond side the OPs portfolio has a significant amount of "Strategic Bond" funds that adjust their allocations to low interest safe government and corporate bonds, higher interest riskier government and corporate bonds, index linked bonds etc from across the world depending on economic conditions. How would you achieve this by trackers?
  • Joey_Soap
    Joey_Soap Posts: 410 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    Linton wrote: »
    This is only valid if the OP was investing broadly across the whole of global or UK equity. But he isnt, he seems to want a large push towards those companies that pay dividends. What trackers can you suggest that would do this job?

    On the bond side the OPs portfolio has a significant amount of "Strategic Bond" funds that adjust their allocations to low interest safe government and corporate bonds, higher interest riskier government and corporate bonds, index linked bonds etc from across the world depending on economic conditions. How would you achieve this by trackers?
    Again -
    I never said a tracker would mimic those holdings. Just that the returns from such a huge number of holdings will be distinctly average and the return could be compared (IMO) to a tracker.

    At the end of the day, it matters not a jot whether your return has an "income" label or a "growth" label attached to it. It is all money you can spend. In other words, total return.

    I am not going to even attempt to do this, but I suspect, very strongly, if bench marked, such a huge portfolio with thousands of underlying investments, the total return from it over the last 10 years would be very similar if not inferior to a world index tracker fund. Let's be clear, I am not a fan of trackers, but neither am I fan of holding dozens of funds for the sake of it either.
  • dunstonh
    dunstonh Posts: 116,387 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    I never said a tracker would mimic those holdings. Just that the returns from such a huge number of holdings will be distinctly average and the return could be compared (IMO) to a tracker.

    That is not correct. The returns could be higher or lower. The underlying assets will depend on that and you cannot infer from the quantity of holdings that they will be lower or higher.
    but I suspect, very strongly, if bench marked, such a huge portfolio with thousands of underlying investments, the total return from it over the last 10 years would be very similar if not inferior to a world index tracker fund.

    it is unlikely a drawdown investor would be 100% equity. So, it shouldnt be similar.
    but neither am I fan of holding dozens of funds for the sake of it either.

    I get what you are saying. There does come a point where adding funds doesnt have a noticeable impact. I wouldn't want to put a finger on it but would think somewhere between 10-15 is typical. If you used a global equity fund to capture the individual global sectors than 6-8 would be typical.

    If someone had 30 funds, I would be more concerned as to whether they are a victim of fashion investing and lacking structure. However, if they had a structure then there is no reason why 30 would not work. Even if it is unlikely to bring much to the party other than creating extra work.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 248K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards