Funds...why bother

campins

dunstonh wrote: »

No.

Was the fund a poor performer in its sector or was the sector you were just didnt have the best of periods?

What, over ten years ?!

Lokolo

campins wrote: »

What, over ten years ?!

I don't think you understand what he said....

Was the sector bad or was the fund bad? <-- thats what he asked, with your response as 'What, over ten years?' makes no sense.

MrMicawber_2

Is this thread just a wind up?

Myrmidon_J

MrMicawber wrote: »

Is this thread just a wind up?

I was wondering that...

campins

Lokolo wrote: »

I don't think you understand what he said....

Was the sector bad or was the fund bad? <-- thats what he asked, with your response as 'What, over ten years?' makes no sense.

Yes it does, was the sector/fund bad over a period of ten years.

campins

O.K. 36 days of trading and the fund is up by £2600 !!! using the remains of my savings from the defunct fund. just what the hell have they been doing :mad:

Scrapper

campins wrote: »

O.K. 36 days of trading and the fund is up by £2600 !!! using the remains of my savings from the defunct fund. just what the hell have they been doing :mad:

Well done. It is a bold man who has been a buyer recently.

Myrmidon_J

campins wrote: »

O.K. 36 days of trading and the fund is up by £2600 !!!

Congratulations.

But your "fund" could equally have dropped £2,600 - or more. Investing directly in equities at a time of record volatility in the market, it is easy to make a killing, or to lose a fortune.

What's not easy is to make the correct call!

I wish you luck, certainly... But I expect that if you continue to use such a high-risk strategy, you will soon experience the downside as well as the upside. If your risk tolerance "allows" for such losses, all well and good; but if not, perhaps you'll not look so harshly on underperforming life funds!

Lokolo

campins wrote: »

Yes it does, was the sector/fund bad over a period of ten years.

No.

He was asking - Was it the sector or the fund bad?

i.e. example, was it sector Y or was it Fund X that did badly.

campins

Lokolo wrote: »

No.

He was asking - Was it the sector or the fund bad?

i.e. example, was it sector Y or was it Fund X that did badly.

I don't know but they were supposed to invest with a view to providing £60K in twenty five years time to pay off the amount owed on my mortgage. I think the ten year factor safely puts it into the unreasonable category regardless of sector or fund performance, if they are bad they should have spotted it and moved to better performing investments. I did pay charges after all. :mad: :mad: