ISA portfolio advice

jimjames

stringer_bell wrote: »

Do you mean a US tracker similiar to the HSBC FTSE?

Yes there is a USA version of the HSBC fund which tracks the S&P 500 index there. Cheaper TER and no need to worry if the manager will beat the index.

Topping up ones that have dropped a lot is tough to do but when they bounce back will pay off.

stringer_bell

jimjames wrote: »

Yes there is a USA version of the HSBC fund which tracks the S&P 500 index there. Cheaper TER and no need to worry if the manager will beat the index.

Topping up ones that have dropped a lot is tough to do but when they bounce back will pay off.

Thanks, I will add the HSBC usa to my list, Might throw in the HSBC japan tracker too

I have a fund also, close special situations.. I can't buy or sell any more and apparently its closed and the assets are being sold off, anyone know what the process is and how long it takes?

stringer_bell

I have decided I will add an USA tracker and a europe tracker, perhaps even a japan tracker too

Would it be worth keeping the US mid cap if I have a USA tracker?

System

stringer_bell wrote: »

I have decided I will add an USA tracker and a europe tracker, perhaps even a japan tracker too

Would it be worth keeping the US mid cap if I have a USA tracker?

If you are considering the above, have you considered the Vanguard FTSE Dev World Ex UK tracker? Covers US, Eur, JPN and a little developed asia.

Just remember of course that trackers have no facility to protect in a market correction. The US in particular is looking quite toppy....

stringer_bell

so looking to for some more tips, or regions I've missed.. there is so many to chose from and I have another £15k ready to add. The fund size below amounts to around £32k, with all equal holdings apart from biotech which has more and the japan which I just bought and will topup intermittently

AXA FRAMLINGTON BIOTECH
AXA FRAMLINGTON GBL TECH
AXA FRAMLINGTON HEALTH
BLACKROCK GOLD & GENERAL
HSBC AMERICAN INDEX
HSBC FTSE 100 INDEX
HSBC FTSE 250 INDEX
HSBC JAPAN INDEX
MARLBOROUGH SPECIAL SITS
THREADNEEDLE AMERICAN SMALLER COS
FIDELITY UK SMALLER COS
VANGUARD US EQUITY

bowlhead99

You still haven't done anything about the suggestion from post #2 that you were missing a glaring omission right on your doortstep, in Europe; it's been mentioned by two people and you said back in March you were going to add one and you haven't.

What was the reason for getting rid of your emerging markets exposure between March 2013 and March 2014? The only advice I saw you get was to increase it, and instead it disappeared. In the 6 months following March 2014 the sector rallied significantly although has since fallen back in the last month and a half. You have to be in it to win it.

Given markets are (relatively) booming - certainly relative to 2009 - what's the rationale for the 'special situations' fund which is about investing into recovery plays?

Typically most people holding twelve funds would be looking to cover all the geographical sectors, perhaps with an extra tilt towards a particular industry or theme. Then simply rebalance from time to time. Alternatively just hold fewer funds. Whereas you seem to be holding lots of funds and still dropping some in and out entirely. That implies you have some psychic knowledge about what is going to happen next.

Also in 12 funds one would think there would be space for something more than just equities but you don't have any bonds or real estate or anything particularly 'lower risk' - just all out for equities. Again that was mentioned before and you didn't comment on it. If you are pro equities and gung-ho for potential growth opportunities, missing emerging markets and Europe seems bizarre.

And what about asia pacific ex-Japan in general? HK, Singapore, Australia, South Korea, Taiwan, China/India (latter two could perhaps be covered by an EM bucket). You seem to have dumped the Asia-Pac ex-Japan fund you had from March '13 (Aberdeen), acquired a different Asia-Pac ex-Japan fund by March 14 (Schroder), then abandoned the sector entirely and simply added a little bit of Japan.

There doesn't seem to be a great deal of consistency in what you are trying to achieve over time, although maybe you just have very strong feelings against huge regions of the world in favour of the general concept that healthcare should be good (dedicated healthcare fund, dedicated biotech fund with high weighting) as well as tech?

Or is it that you wanted to ignore Asia and Europe and Emerging Markets generally in favour of getting 3 funds in North America? The US has decent projected GDP growth and its large companies have a good spread of international revenues. But presumably the quality differential compared to Europe (which is relatively struggling) is already baked into today's prices, so you don't need to pile into 3 funds in North America (two of which, HSBC and Vanguard will produce very similar results to each other) and have zero in Europe.

I'm struggling to suggest any more tinkering as you haven't really defined what your goals are or explained your rationale for the changes or the rejection of other advice.

stringer_bell

bowlhead99 wrote: »

You still haven't done anything about the suggestion from post #2 that you were missing a glaring omission right on your doortstep, in Europe; it's been mentioned by two people and you said back in March you were going to add one and you haven't.

What was the reason for getting rid of your emerging markets exposure between March 2013 and March 2014? The only advice I saw you get was to increase it, and instead it disappeared. In the 6 months following March 2014 the sector rallied significantly although has since fallen back in the last month and a half. You have to be in it to win it.

Given markets are (relatively) booming - certainly relative to 2009 - what's the rationale for the 'special situations' fund which is about investing into recovery plays?

Typically most people holding twelve funds would be looking to cover all the geographical sectors, perhaps with an extra tilt towards a particular industry or theme. Then simply rebalance from time to time. Alternatively just hold fewer funds. Whereas you seem to be holding lots of funds and still dropping some in and out entirely. That implies you have some psychic knowledge about what is going to happen next.

Also in 12 funds one would think there would be space for something more than just equities but you don't have any bonds or real estate or anything particularly 'lower risk' - just all out for equities. Again that was mentioned before and you didn't comment on it. If you are pro equities and gung-ho for potential growth opportunities, missing emerging markets and Europe seems bizarre.

And what about asia pacific ex-Japan in general? HK, Singapore, Australia, South Korea, Taiwan, China/India (latter two could perhaps be covered by an EM bucket). You seem to have dumped the Asia-Pac ex-Japan fund you had from March '13 (Aberdeen), acquired a different Asia-Pac ex-Japan fund by March 14 (Schroder), then abandoned the sector entirely and simply added a little bit of Japan.

There doesn't seem to be a great deal of consistency in what you are trying to achieve over time, although maybe you just have very strong feelings against huge regions of the world in favour of the general concept that healthcare should be good (dedicated healthcare fund, dedicated biotech fund with high weighting) as well as tech?

Or is it that you wanted to ignore Asia and Europe and Emerging Markets generally in favour of getting 3 funds in North America? The US has decent projected GDP growth and its large companies have a good spread of international revenues. But presumably the quality differential compared to Europe (which is relatively struggling) is already baked into today's prices, so you don't need to pile into 3 funds in North America (two of which, HSBC and Vanguard will produce very similar results to each other) and have zero in Europe.

I'm struggling to suggest any more tinkering as you haven't really defined what your goals are or explained your rationale for the changes or the rejection of other advice.

Thank you for your highly detailed post, I will admit first off, that I'm a tweaker, I can't stop tweaking things and I need to stop, I hold my hands up.

Regarding the growth and high risk, I'm 30 with good job and large cash savings, so I won't be touching this for a long long time.

Your probbaly right, would it be worthwhile selling one of US funds, and then adding a european tracker and maybe a european smaller company fund?

Emerging markets, I had them but sold them and I can't remember for life of me why, maybe to topup biotech which was on a huge rush at time and is over %110 in my portfolio

I feel I may have too many funds, however my ISA portfolio size is £50k. I would love to add more things like bonds and property, but perhaps a portfolio size of 15-20 is too much for this size?

regarding Asia, I'm thinking " First State Asia Pacific Sustainability B GBP Acc " there is so much to choose from though

Mistermeaner

Have you considered giving up the towers in favour of investing in down town real estate development?

mark13

My strategy is to drop the underperforming funds, Blackrock & JPM and move them to Japan / India.
I also tinker, at least once a month, dropping the underperformers and moving to funds that are giving returns. At the moment its biotech.
I no longer have Russia or china or brazil (my last sell) If they do start to recover then I may start to include them.

jimjames

stringer_bell wrote: »

Emerging markets, I had them but sold them and I can't remember for life of me why, maybe to topup biotech which was on a huge rush at time and is over %110 in my portfolio

Selling out of areas without even knowing or remembering why and fiddling with allocations so frequently just seems to be a recipe for underperformance especially if you sell out poor performers just before they jump back as per emerging markets in this example.