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!
Investing for Book
A_Flock_Of_Sheep
Posts: 5,332 Forumite
In addition to Tim Hales book Smarter Investing I also have a book called Investing for Income (Grow Your Income Through Smarter Investing) by David Stevenson.
If, like me, you are interested in income investing so far and I am only about 25% through it is a very interesting read.
Basically:
Quantitive Easing = Misery for Income Investors.
Interestingly the focus and philosophy of each of the two books seems to be totally different.
If, like me, you are interested in income investing so far and I am only about 25% through it is a very interesting read.
Basically:
Quantitive Easing = Misery for Income Investors.
Interestingly the focus and philosophy of each of the two books seems to be totally different.
0
Comments
-
A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »In addition to Tim Hales book Smarter Investing I also have a book called Investing for Income (Grow Your Income Through Smarter Investing) by David Stevenson.
If, like me, you are interested in income investing so far and I am only about 25% through it is a very interesting read.
Basically:
Quantitive Easing = Misery for Income Investors.
Interestingly the focus and philosophy of each of the two books seems to be totally different.
I was reading a blog from an broker. He rated IPHI as we do - a slightly lower risk, defensive equity income fund. He then went on to say that JOHCM equity income was also good (higher risk than IPHI) and would be useful to compliment (IHPI) as it had a different share compliment.
That may be so but why would you mix up your risk profile wouldn't you go more heavily one way more than the other or simply just pick a general equity income?
Somebody may enlighten me ."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
The Investing For Income Book demonstrates some sample portfolios. For example their Low Risk Income Generator is made up from:
24.5% Equities
15.5% Infrastructure and Real Estate
60% Bonds Including Corporate Bonds
Example Funds are:
Equity Income such as IPHI, UNicorn UK Income
MacQuairie Global Infrastructure Fund
FTSE All Stocks Gilts Index
Barclays UKIndex Linked Gilts
iBoxx Sterling Corporate Index - Ticker SLXX
EPRA Developed World Property
DJ Euro Stoxx Select Dividend 30 Index0 -
Quantitive Easing = Misery for Income Investors.
I disagree. It depends on what is generating the income.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.0 -
-
grizzly1911 wrote: »I was reading a blog from an broker. He rated IPHI as we do - a slightly lower risk, defensive equity income fund. He then went on to say that JOHCM equity income was also good (higher risk than IPHI) and would be useful to compliment (IHPI) as it had a different share compliment.
That may be so but why would you mix up your risk profile wouldn't you go more heavily one way more than the other or simply just pick a general equity income?
Somebody may enlighten me .
Using an additional fund in the same sector that carries higher risk, but which has a different style, can actually reduce the investment risk for the individual: although the risk of the second fund is higher, the overall risk is reduced by being less reliant on the returns from the first fund - which might be the result of the particular type of share becoming out of favour (as has happened at times with Woodford's selections in the past), or the management has a bad patch.
The investor might also take a view that a certain sector or style might provide a better return going forward than is provided by the first fund. But not enough of a view to believe that a wholesale change is required. Making a small purchase in an additional fund can be used to deflect a portfolio towards a particular direction, rather than a 100% sale of the old and purchase of the new which might result in a totally different outcome.
My personal example of this is with Temple Bar IT. I've held it for approaching fourteen years and am happy to keep it. But a few years ago I decided to bring Lowland IT into my portfolio because I believed that it had enough of a different approach to TMPL, and one that would work out well going forward (operates across market caps, including AIM, and relies less on income and more on capital growth for the returns - but that may just be my perception). The LWI's volatility has been higher than TMPL in the past, although the 1-year figures are similar, but it is still only just over a third the size of TMPL. I could have moved the whole of the holding into LWI, but that would have potentially increased the volatility of the portfolio as well as cutting the yield slightly. And no - I would never contemplate using a dividend tracker...
Living for tomorrow might mean that you survive the day after.
It is always different this time. The only thing that is the same is the outcome.
Portfolios are like personalities - one that is balanced is usually preferable.
0 -
A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »Basically:
Quantitive Easing = Misery for Income Investors.
.
Quantitive easing reduces the value of cash and increases the price of assets. So it transfers wealth from the poor (no assets) to the rich (with assets) So you can see why its so popular with this Government.
In fact I am just off to do some Quantative Easing with my inkjet printer and earn myself a Knighthood
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” --Upton Sinclair0 -
Glen_Clark wrote: »In fact I am just off to do some Quantative Easing with my inkjet printer and earn myself a Knighthood
I thought he already had one ;-)0 -
Given that the program of QE was started in 2009 by Brown/Darling who purchased £200Bn compared to £175Bn since 2011 surely it follows that it was even more popular with the previous GovernmentGlen_Clark wrote: »So it transfers wealth from the poor (no assets) to the rich (with assets) So you can see why its so popular with this Government0 -
It's cumulative.Given that the program of QE was started in 2009 by Brown/Darling who purchased £200Bn compared to £175Bn since 2011 surely it follows that it was even more popular with the previous Government
If my wife gets 4 packs of toilet paper and then I get 2 more, that's because I think stockpiling is even more important than she does, even though she got twice as much as me."It will take, five, 10, 15 years to get back to where we need to be. But it's no longer the individual banks that are in the wrong, it's the banking industry as a whole." - Steven Cooper, head of personal and business banking at Barclays, talking to Martin Lewis0 -
Hmm that's a bit of a paradox you pose there, let's extend it a tad further. Your son's purchase of 1 toilet roll would demonstrate his motivation was even purer than yours? Your Andrex puppy's theft of one sheet from a neighbour (contrary to popular belief) would make him the Arch Stockpiler?If my wife gets 4 packs of toilet paper and then I get 2 more, that's because I think stockpiling is even more important than she does, even though she got twice as much as me.
You don't, by any chance, believe in homoeopathic medicine do you? 0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards