Should I supplement a passive VLS?

pinkllama

yep, you could go for LS80, increasing volatility though

how about;
85% LS80
15% Vanguard Short-Term Global Bond Index (Duration 2.6 yrs)
you're average bond duration would be lower than just having the ones in LS60
just re-balance every couple of years or after a big equities crash.
you'd have 68% equities & 32% bonds.

dunstonh

greenglide wrote: »

But strangely people with £9.33bn find it a place to invest with a yield of 3.4%!

He certainly knows how to play the game. It can't all be DIY investors can it?

I have two investors in it. One is through my advice as we use defensive options in all the allocations as a means to reduce risk but retain allocations. The other is upon instruction from the client who overruled my advice.

I decided to avoid at this time as I have seen several big name fund managers go into new ventures on their own and not many succeed.

Eco_Miser

munkee_saver wrote: »

I mean interest rates can only realistically go up.

They were saying that when BoE rate was a historic low of .5%. Then it halved.
But yes, interest rates rising, and therefore bond rates falling is much more likely in the long run.

traineepensioner

"I've decided to drop the L&G and Woodford funds and consolidate back into VLS60. I could choose to run funds into VLS80 for the gains but I think I'm safer (if possible to be) with the 40% bonds. With that being said, is the representation of Bonds in VLS safe? I've noticed a few blogs recently mentioning the "bond bubble". I assume this would matter more on a self created portfolio rather than the allocations in VLS but wondered if anyone has an opinion on this?"

......Rightly or wrongly, I've gone with the VLS100 for most of the equity proportion of my portfolio. I've used fixed rate interest accounts (incl NS&I) and a couple of actively managed "strategic" bond funds for the remaining 50% bond allocation. I just have to rebalance the equity/bond allocation about once a year and chase the ever decreasing interest rate I'm sort off hoping that the bond fund manager is going to do better than I would.

MonroeM

traineepensioner wrote: »

"I've decided to drop the L&G and Woodford funds and consolidate back into VLS60. I could choose to run funds into VLS80 for the gains but I think I'm safer (if possible to be) with the 40% bonds. With that being said, is the representation of Bonds in VLS safe? I've noticed a few blogs recently mentioning the "bond bubble". I assume this would matter more on a self created portfolio rather than the allocations in VLS but wondered if anyone has an opinion on this?"

......Rightly or wrongly, I've gone with the VLS100 for most of the equity proportion of my portfolio. I've used fixed rate interest accounts (incl NS&I) and a couple of actively managed "strategic" bond funds for the remaining 50% bond allocation. I just have to rebalance the equity/bond allocation about once a year and chase the ever decreasing interest rate I'm sort off hoping that the bond fund manager is going to do better than I would.

Why would you mix VLS 60 and 100? Why don't you just go VLS80?

MonroeM

MonroeM wrote: »

Why would you mix VLS 60 and 100? Why don't you just go VLS80?

Also bonds are literally paying nothing at the moment but obviously that can change! I prefer strategic bonds because they work on some sort of strategy however others seem to think that International Corporate Bonds or HighYield are better so I am welcome to your comments?

Superscrooge

MonroeM wrote: »

I prefer strategic bonds because they work on some sort of strategy

Might be worth making sure you understand what the strategy is? Some strategies are better than others!

coyrls

MonroeM wrote: »

Also bonds are literally paying nothing at the moment but obviously that can change! I prefer strategic bonds because they work on some sort of strategy however others seem to think that International Corporate Bonds or HighYield are better so I am welcome to your comments?

I think you mean a strategic bond fund; there is no such thing as a strategic bond, although there are such things as International Corporate Bonds and High Yield Bonds, that may or may not be held by a strategic bond fund, depending on its strategy.

jdw2000

munkee_saver wrote: »

Thanks for all of the valid input. As mentioned in my original post, the initial jump to funds outside of VLS60 and the additional research made me question the whole reason for adding those funds (plus maybe some others) in the first place. It was becoming slightly less muddied for me realising I was essentially trying to build my own custom portfolio of funds which at the end of the day VLS had already done for me, in no doubt a much better way (especially thinking about the lack of rebalance worries even if its just done automated).

I've decided to drop the L&G and Woodford funds and consolidate back into VLS60. I could choose to run funds into VLS80 for the gains but I think I'm safer (if possible to be) with the 40% bonds. With that being said, is the representation of Bonds in VLS safe? I've noticed a few blogs recently mentioning the "bond bubble". I assume this would matter more on a self created portfolio rather than the allocations in VLS but wondered if anyone has an opinion on this?

I couldn't decide between VLS 60 or 80 either. So in the end I did half of each for a VLS70.