Best way to make my money work

Archi_Bald

Sigh, the never-ending proclamation of active investors that they can beat the market in the long term.

OP, if you have time, there is lots and lots of good stuff to read up about: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5043692. A lot better than the random recommendations for funds or what have you of a stranger on the internet.

Ryan_Futuristics

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Sigh, the never-ending proclamation of active investors that they can beat the market in the long term

If you're talking about my recommendations, none of them have conventional benchmarks or tracker equivalents

Absolute Return funds hedge against unpredictable market conditions, while Woodford's is a private equity fund

Typically, hedge funds are less likely to lose you money than broad equities exposure, while Private Equity funds are more likely to make you money (see: Modern Portfolio Theory) ... And coming up to 2 decades in which the FTSE 100's barely returned more than a Cash ISA, it might be time to pull your head out of where it's evidently been

Gadfium

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

Vanguard LifeStrategy whilst ignoring every analyst article on MorningStar?

Have you got a link to some of these articles, Ryan? I'd like to have a read.

kidmugsy

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Sigh, the never-ending proclamation of active investors that they can beat the market in the long term.

I did, over 27 years. As they say, what you want to do is make a few, rare decisions, and get them right.

In my experience it's much easier to see when to sell equities than when to buy them. I haven't much idea what to do next. I have no confidence that I can beat the market for another quarter century, not least because I won't live that long. Probably I'll just mark time until things look a little clearer. If I were younger I think that I'd take the view that you should buy equities when you have spare cash available and they are not poor value. There's probably little point in hanging about waiting for them to become wonderful value because that may not occur more than once or twice in your investing life. I also think that you should be prepared to flee equities when you think they've become ludicrously overvalued, as so many were in 1999.

Archi_Bald

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

And coming up to 2 decades in which the FTSE 100's barely returned more than a Cash ISA, it might be time to pull your head out of where it's evidently been

I am not going to engage with you as I don't think we would reach even a broad agreement. I - like others on here - am just pointing out where you are posting misinformation, or are jumping to irrational conclusions. Like: who on here said people should only invest in the FTSE 100 (trackers)? Specifically, where did I say that? To save you from responding, the answers are: Nobody. Nowhere.

Archi_Bald

kidmugsy wrote: »

I did, over 27 years.

WOW. What's the title of your book / blog? Would love to read it.

Ryan_Futuristics

Gadfium wrote: »

Have you got a link to some of these articles, Ryan? I'd like to have a read.

I think it'd be harder to find articles that didn't warn of overvaluation in bonds and US equities

Front page:
"Equities maybe a bit pricier as well, but bonds in particular are looking very pricey in this environment and if you are looking for a five to 10-year portfolio, you have to be very wary and cautious in how you manage those diversifiers in your portfolio."

http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news/135535/where-should-you-invest-your-isa-portfolio-now.aspx

Gadfium

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

I think it'd be harder to find articles that didn't warn of overvaluation in bonds and US equities

Thanks for taking the time. I was referring to articles on the VLS as per your earlier post:

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

Yours seems to involve shovelling money into Vanguard LifeStrategy whilst ignoring every analyst article on MorningStar?

Gadfium

Ryan_Futuristics wrote: »

I think it'd be harder to find articles that didn't warn of overvaluation in bonds and US equities

Front page:
"Equities maybe a bit pricier as well, but bonds in particular are looking very pricey in this environment and if you are looking for a five to 10-year portfolio, you have to be very wary and cautious in how you manage those diversifiers in your portfolio."

http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news/135535/where-should-you-invest-your-isa-portfolio-now.aspx

Hmm...I think that you might be reading a bit too much into that article to be honest (confirmation bias?)

" So, looking at bonds then, you still need to include bonds in a portfolio because they do offer that diversification and they can offer the only ‘fixed’ income, whereas equities’ income can fluctuate, but where should you be looking for those bonds, because as you mentioned some of them look very expensive?
Port: Yes. I think short-dated, the short maturity corporate bonds are less than five years to mature. I think they still got a reasonable yield, certainly going to do better than cash and even in a rising rate environment those bonds are still going to deliver you a reasonable return whereas longer-dated government bonds, like the 20 or 30-year bonds, you could have some losses of 10, 15, maybe even 20% on those bonds over the next few years"

As for the "overvaluation in ...US equities"
"Yes, the U.S. does look expensive by historical reasons, but Europe looks reasonably valued and Japan looks reasonably valued as well. So, you don't have to just focus on U.S. Developed markets still are the place to invest for us. I still think emerging markets are going to underperform for some years yet even though they are quite cheap at the moment. So, valuations aren't the only guide and I think there is a lot of momentum in these markets still. - "

Now, it might be my lack of sophistication, but that doesn't read like a damning over valuation of the US?

Ryan_Futuristics

Vanguard LS is heavily weighted towards US equities and bonds .. Do the maths

It doesn't hold many short-dated bonds - main holdings are the global bond index and UK gov bonds