Hargreaves Lansdowns own recommendations. Your view?

margaretclare

jamesd wrote: »

DMGT is a media company, once of whose properties is Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail. The question was effectively asking if you'd want to own the owner of the Daily Mail.

Not specially, James. At present my investments are pretty broad-based and I hadn't thought of going into individual media companies.

gadgetmind

margaretclare wrote: »

Not specially, James. At present my investments are pretty broad-based and I hadn't thought of going into individual media companies.

The only media company we hold directly is Reed Elsevier, but that's a different kind of animal.

Linton

K_P83 wrote: »

I don't understand the question so can't answer. Plus i don't know who the question was directed at.

The question was to check the limits of your stated willingness to invest in anything, even the Daily Mail. Never mind....

Nine_Lives

margaretclare wrote: »

I'm no expert. Back to what HL say:

HSBC: "This is a passively managed fund that closely replicates the constituents of the FTSE World Asia Pacific ex. Japan Index with the aim of tracking its performance, before fees. Once fees are taken into consideration our research suggests passively-managed tracker funds are likely to underperform the index they aim to track over the long term."

That applies to both the Accumulation and Income funds.

With your stated objective of making enough money as possible, I would have thought that funds described as 'passively-managed' or 'likely to under-perform' wouldn't be for you.

Vanguard UK Inflation Gilt Index Acc: Not much said about this except: "Please note Vanguard levies a 0.2% dilution levy on all purchases, which becomes part of the property of the fund. We have shown this as an initial charge to the left."

I'm quoting HL's Mark Dampier here. No doubt jamesd and dunstonh will give you some more informed and logical ideas.

I'm not doing too good on the selection front. Each time i've selected, when it's been broken down to me it doesn't sound too clever.
Obviously, i can't go knocking on an IFA's door every time i consider selecting something.
In short, it's disheartening.

Linton wrote: »

The question was to check the limits of your stated willingness to invest in anything, even the Daily Mail. Never mind....

Maybe i should pay more attention to the news/newspapers & then maybe i'd understand what the point is regarding the mention of Daily Mail.
By paying more, i mean start paying.

margaretclare

Maybe i should pay more attention to the news/newspapers & then maybe i'd understand what the point is regarding the mention of Daily Mail.
By paying more, i mean start paying.

I didn't understand this either.

Nine_Lives

margaretclare wrote: »

I didn't understand this either.

My post that you quoted or the mention of Daily Mail?

gadgetmind

K_P83 wrote: »

I looked at the:
- Vanguard UK Inflation Linked Gilt Index Acc
- HSBC Pacific Index Acc

Would those be your only significant holdings?

If so, you'd be rather over-weight (understatement!) in Australia and Hong Kong, with perhaps more financials that you might be happy with. As you move away from developed markets, and as you have Pacific and EM as larger and larger parts of your portfolio, then you do need to be careful and perhaps even consider active investment.

Regards the gilts, you need to be aware that gilt yields are such that you *will* lose money in real terms unless something *very* bad happens in the world of equities, something worse than we've seen in the last decade.

Again, this might seem odd coming from Mr. Passive, but a strategic bond fund might work better for you; these are unusual times for fixed interest.

Anyway, that's just my take on it.

margaretclare

My post that you quoted or the mention of Daily Mail?

Didn't understand the reference to the Daily Mail.

About the suggestion from gadgetmind for a strategic bond fund, I have M&G Strategic Corporate Bond Class X Income, and here's what Mark Dampier says about it: "Richard Woolnough has reduced exposure to the financial sector, where he remains bearish. There has been a small increase in holdings in higher risk high yield bonds, and exposure to government bonds has been positive for performance."

For us non-experts who want to DIY but not to lose, it really is 'you pays your money and you takes your choice'. Only, I would never invest in anything that was described as 'passively-managed' or 'likely to under-perform'.

I started with the idea of having a good solid basis in the UK before I ventured into foreign parts. Jupiter Ecology is global, but apart from that, this is my next one to be entrusted with my £200 a month savings: Old Mutual UK Select Mid Cap Income.

'Income' is not because I want to take the income out, but because I want it reinvested.

This is what Mark Dampier says about this one: "Medium-sized companies, or mid-caps (the 250 largest quoted companies outside the FTSE 100) represent a dynamic area of the market. A diverse range of businesses operating both at home and abroad, they have outperformed the largest UK companies significantly over the last decade.

One reason for this outperformance is the FTSE 100 is dominated by a narrow range of sectors and a handful of giant companies, whereas the mid-cap arena is more diverse. Companies here are smaller and more nimble, so they can frequently capitalise on avenues of growth more quickly such as expanding overseas. It can enable them to increase their profits at a faster rate if things go well, though the risks are typically higher and they are more volatile than larger, more stable companies.

The area offers expert stock pickers tremendous opportunities to invest in companies with exciting potential. It is less well studied or understood, so those willing to go the extra mile in terms of research can really add value. One investment team we believe can do so is Old Mutual.

In striving to identify companies with the strongest growth prospects, the manager of the Old Mutual UK Select Mid Cap Fund, Richard Watts, believes keeping an open mind is important. The best investments can crop up in counterintuitive areas. Although he feels it is generally better to avoid businesses dependent on UK consumer or government spending, he believes there is hidden value to be found in specific companies.

One example is brewer and public house operator Greene King, which he perceives as having resilient earnings, a good dividend yield and strong management committed to growing the business. Similarly, bus operator Stagecoach might not seem the most glamorous of investments, but has recently announced excellent results, especially from its US operations, which are growing strongly.

A sector Richard Watts particularly likes is technology and media, an area where a good idea can sustain growth for a long period. He prefers companies with clear growth paths such as Rightmove, which continues to benefit from the shift to marketing property online. Other technology-related holdings have a global dimension, such as ITE, which runs international trade fairs, and SDL, a global leader in language translation software."

Judwin

margaretclare wrote: »

I started with the idea of having a good solid basis in the UK before I ventured into foreign parts. Jupiter Ecology is global, but apart from that, this is my next one to be entrusted with my £200 a month savings: Old Mutual UK Select Mid Cap Income.

'Income' is not because I want to take the income out, but because I want it reinvested.

Sorry if you already realise this - if so ignore.

Be aware that the income versions of funds pay out their "yield" dividends once or twice a year. If the yeild was (say) 4.5%, and you had £1000 invested, then once a year you'd get £45 paid into the cash account within the ISA.

But - HL's ISA only re-invest your income once it exceeds £50. Therefore, with smaller amounts invested, it could be several years before the income is re-invested.

The mentioned Old Mutual income fund pays it's income once a year at the end of September. I don't know what the yeild is likely to be, but, if you start now and pay in £200 a month, it's unlikey that the income paid to you in September will exceed £50, so the money will just sit in your cash account till September 2013.

For these reasons, I don't think it makes any sense buying the 'income' version of funds unless you actually need the income. Better off buying the accumulation version, at least untill your fund value is sufficient such that the income payment is more than £50.

IMHO
Cheers
Judwin

gadgetmind

General comment intended in a friendly way: all of that quoting of Hargreaves Lansdown "advertising copy" on those funds makes it hard for me to find your comments/questions.

margaretclare wrote: »

I would never invest in anything that was described as 'passively-managed' or 'likely to under-perform'.

Fair enough, your money. However, 1) Hargreaves Lansdown make less money from trackers, and more money from funds they promote heavily, so always apply a pinch of salt, 2) Yes, tracker under-perform the index they track, but so do many active funds.

As for your bonds, strategic bond funds use their skill and judgement to decide how to position themselves in the very complex area of fixed interest. I spent a long time looking at a wide variety of them and found that they all had their day in the sun.

I finally (and without great conviction) went for Old Mutual Global Strategic Bond as they have been more "Steady Eddie" and I'd rather have low volatility that leading short/medium term performance.