novice investing £1000

catoutthebag

I have 1000 that I want to put away in my stocks and shares wrapper.

Something cheap and simple and low maintenance

I am thinking 10-20 years...I guess I could generate 10-20% yield in this time potentially?

Would a tracker be best and safest best? What tracker and platform?

I want to put 1000 away and not worry about it and hopefully come back with profit.

I know things can go down. It's what I'm willing to lose.

I'd like low to medium risk.

Amy suggestions please?

colsten

monevator.com

ACF95

Vanguard LifeStrategy 40 Perc Equity Acc through Iweb would be my suggestion.

catoutthebag

Thank you:beer:

N1AK

catoutthebag wrote: »

I have 1000 that I want to put away in my stocks and shares wrapper.

I'd like low to medium risk.

Amy suggestions please?

Monevator; they have plenty of easy to follow info on passive investing, including suggestions on which platform depending on amount invested. There's nothing I could post hear that you wouldn't get more from reading the key articles on there for.

inflationbuster

If you're young i.e., under 30 go for more risk, you won't make a healthy return with low risk and £1K. My suggestions are medium risk.

£500 in Barclays and £500 in Vedanta both blue chip FTSE100 stocks. Both pay a dividend and have plenty of capital growth to come.

Vedanta

Annual div (IAD) 39.40 GBX
Annual div yield (IAD) 6.64%

http://markets.ft.com/research/Markets/Tearsheets/Summary?s=VED:LSE

Barclays

Annual div (IAD) 6.50 GBX
Annual div yield (IAD) 2.53%

http://markets.ft.com/research/Markets/Tearsheets/Summary?s=BARC:LSE

Gadfium

Suggesting that someone buys just two individual stocks seems reckless to me. Especially as it sounds like it is their only investment. Advising that one of those stocks are a bank given the issues dogging that sector seems even more reckless.

inflationbuster

Gadfium wrote: »

Suggesting that someone buys just two individual stocks seems reckless to me. Especially as it sounds like it is their only investment. Advising that one of those stocks are a bank given the issues dogging that sector seems even more reckless.

As opposed to suggesting ONE fund by someone above. Did you miss that?

My suggestion has reduced risk by 50%.

We're talking £1000 not £1 million, Jesus.

Barclays have maintained their dividend despite litigation, which will reduce significantly during 2016. You have to think ahead, that's how the markets work. Long term OP will have significant capital gains and increasing dividends from Barclays.

Gadfium

inflationbuster wrote: »

As opposed to suggesting ONE fund by someone above. Did you miss that?

My suggestion has reduced risk by 50%.

Your idea of reducing risk by 50% is choosing two single stocks (both FTSE100) over a diversified fund of funds that covers the globe and a range of asset types???:eek:

inflationbuster wrote: »

We're talking £1000 not £1 million, Jesus.

Even more reason to be super cautious of the costs of trading. And we don't know much about the OPs overall amounts available. £1k might their only investment amount.

inflationbuster wrote: »

Long term OP will have significant capital gains and increasing dividends from Barclays.

The two important words that you've missed out are "I think". You do not know how Barclays will perform over 20 years. Yes, they might do well, but then again, yet another massive scandal might be round the corner. Picking two single stocks and using that as your sole investment vehicle sounds nuts to me. But, hey ho YMMV.

Archi_Bald

inflationbuster wrote: »

As opposed to suggesting ONE fund by someone above. Did you miss that?

Oh dear.

You clearly shouldn't be giving any investment recommendations if you don't understand the difference between funds and individual shares.

Two individual shares are on the extremely high risk scale, whatever the shares are. One fund, particularly a Vanguard Lifestrategy fund, is a lot lower risk as your investment is automatically spread across many shares - and in the case of Lifestrategy, you can choose how much you want in stocks and how much in bonds. This is much more appropriate for the OP, who said they'd like low to medium risk.

As it happens, I think ACF95 was a bit conservative to suggest the 40% Lifestrategy fund for the OP as it seems very low risk. With a 10-20 years investment horizon, I would go for a higher stock allocation - at least 60, may be 80% as that would still be medium risk over so many years. But one of the Lifestrategy funds seems an excellent choice for the OP.

catoutthebag, please ignore inflationbuster. Instead do as has been suggested already - read up further detail on http://monevator.com/category/investing/passive-investing-investing/

jimjames

inflationbuster wrote: »

As opposed to suggesting ONE fund by someone above. Did you miss that?

My suggestion has reduced risk by 50%.

We're talking £1000 not £1 million, Jesus.

Insane.

How can you possibly suggest that 2 shares is half the risk of a global fund investing in a wide range of shares and bond? Hopefully the OP will have the sense to ignore it as it's these kind of suggestions that put people off investing.