We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Drop in well paid using IFA's
Comments
-
I know you`ve come late on the scene but do try and read what`s already been posted before making useless comments.
You`ve obviously never read what I posted judging by your silly, inane post.
Stick to the "grabbit while you can board" which should be more for your liking where you don`t have to actually think too hard.
I tell you what, I'll show you my investment qualifications, you show me yours and we'll see who's the most knowledgeable in this area.
You're right, I came late to this thread so to save me the hassle of wading through your incoherent ramblings, why don't you just confirm my understanding of the following:
1) You 'researched' the market for investments. The total sum of your research involved comparing 4 With-Profit Bonds. Did you not look at anything else?
2) You chose what you thought the best one
3) Some IFAs were recommending With-Profits Bonds (many weren't) at the time
4) Your investment flopped because you didn't understand the risks involved - you ended up with a large MVR.
5) Looking back over 10 years, you calculated that you could have invested the money in cash deposits and obtained a better return.
6) Because some Financial Advisers were recommending With-Profits Bonds you're blaming them for YOUR choices, despite you not actually using an IFA.
If you didn't seek advice, how do you know the IFA wouldn't have recommended a different course of action like a Unit Linked Bond? Other investments have done well over that same period.
You're what I call a 'hindsight investor'. Rarely makes the right investment choice but is suddenly an expert after the event.0 -
That made me laugh. If quoting Forrest Gump, better take note he still did quite well with something in apples, despite being under-informed and uninterested.
Hey, maybe Forest Gump would make a great star fund manager?
(Of course, in the real world, he couldn't get such a cushy city job as he didn't go to the right school.)I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
The point I was making (once again) was I could have done better with a no risk fixed rate savings account.
Compared to going and getting ripped off by an IFA.
Sorry, I don't understand the relevance of the point you're making. Who's to say that if you'd gone to an IFA they might have recommended something that did better than both the bond and the no-risk savings account ? Or at the very least told you that you'd have been better off in the savings account than the bond.
In what way does your tale advance the discussion on this thread ?
Or are you saying that there was an IFA at the time recommending this bond to others. And even though you managed to avoid the commission by buying direct, you would still have been better off elsewhere, and so those who bought via the IFA must have done even worse than you ?0 -
gadgetmind wrote: »Hey, maybe Forest Gump would make a great star fund manager?
Definitely, Monkey with a pin would be right up his street, probably beat half the fund managers. Trouble is, not sure if he would be able to repeat it three years running.
JamesU0 -
Definitely, Monkey with a pin would be right up his street, probably beat half the fund managers.
Only half?Trouble is, not sure if he would be able to repeat it three years running.
Neither can most of the other monkeys with pins. Those that do (and probability theory tells us there will always be some) are hailed as heroes, feature in every hot fund list, and the thundering herd of hot money then heads their way.
A few years later, after reversion to mean, everything changes and they are mentioned nowhere except the dogs fund lists.
But they still get to keep the yacht.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
Definitely, Monkey with a pin would be right up his street, probably beat half the fund managers. Trouble is, not sure if he would be able to repeat it three years running.
JamesU
No fund manager can beat the index every single year but you shouldn't be investing if you only have a one year investment timescale. Surely, the relevant figure is the cumulative performance over 3, 5 or 10 years.0 -
No fund manager can beat the index every single year but you shouldn't be investing if you only have a one year investment timescale. Surely, the relevant figure is the cumulative performance over 3, 5 or 10 years.
Sorry to ask such a stupid question, but why can't a fund manager beat their benchmark index every year? I seem to remember that only around 8% of funds do this consistently over a three year period which does not sound very good at all really.
JamesU0 -
Sorry to ask such a stupid question, but why can't a fund manager beat their benchmark index every year? I seem to remember that only around 8% of funds do this consistently over a three year period which does not sound very good at all really.
JamesU
Because the fund manager can't do anything about Systematic Risk (inflation, interest rates, natural disasters) which invariably have quite a large impact over shorter time periods.
Let's take (as an example) a Japanese Equity fund manager who went overweight (against the index) into Nuclear energy because it provided a good stable dividend.
He may have beaten the index for the last 5 years but then Fukishima happened and his fund suffered more than the index. This wasn't a risk he could mitigate but surely the important figure is the cumulative performance figure?
This can, of course, work the other way. Some UK Equity fund managers may have gone underweight in Oil & Petroleum before the BP disaster0 -
Surely, the relevant figure is the cumulative performance over 3, 5 or 10 years.
Only 10 years? I'm more concerned about timescales well beyond that, so 20-30 years.
Some claim that over such timescales you can beat the index if you watch active funds like a hawk, continuously track manager changes, and move from one fund to another at the slightest hint of under-performance,
I have my doubts, but sticking with the same funds year after year certainly doesn't seem to work, so you can't blame people for jumping between those unstable ice bergs.
Of course, multi-manager funds try and do this so that investors and their advisers don't need to, and we've seen how "well" they perform.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
This wasn't a risk he could mitigate but surely the important figure is the cumulative performance figure?
Yes, but the cumulative performance versus the index over the *next* 20 to 30 years.
All that history tells us is that history tells us very little.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards