Silly question time: one investment to buy NOW

capital0ne

aroominyork wrote: »

You have to buy it in the next ten minutes which rules out OEICs

Why are OEICs' ruled out?

Alexland

capital0ne wrote: »

Why are OEICs' ruled out?

Because of the 10 minute rule. Personally I would never be pressured into an investment decision so would decline this opportunity.

Still it's interesting people are picking ETFs with 50% to 60% US exposure - that's not where my thinking is leading me.

Alex

economic

It would be scottish mortgage inv trust for me

Also amazon as well - but thats included in scottish mortgage. maybe both.

Thrugelmir

aroominyork wrote: »

Now surely you're just showing off. 60% of holdings in five companies (and 25% in one), nearly all in insurance and 3.15% annual charge. But it rode out 2008 well and if you rode the discount shrinking from 65% to 15% you'd be laughing. Anyway, please explain.

One of the shares I've followed for some time. Very small capitalisation (sub £200m) so doesn't register on fund managers radars. Too small for them to buy a substantive enough stake.

Investments are all in early stage insurance start ups, via equity and debt finance.

If you followed the insurance sub sector over the years. Then you'd have noticed that UK listed companies have been bought up by US operations (only one still remains now). That's where my initial interest was generated from.

aroominyork

Alexland wrote: »

Because of the 10 minute rule. Personally I would never be pressured into an investment decision so would decline this opportunity.

Still it's interesting people are picking ETFs with 50% to 60% US exposure - that's not where my thinking is leading me.

Alex

Oh come on, Alex. I was counting on you to have a punt.

aroominyork

Thrugelmir wrote: »

If you followed the insurance sub sector over the years. Then you'd have noticed that UK listed companies have been bought up by US operations (only one still remains now). That's where my initial interest was generated from.

Then if only one remains isn't this the time to take your profit and get out?

aroominyork

Prism wrote: »

Scottish Mortgage

Monks with balls (so to speak).

grey_gym_sock

Alexland wrote: »

Still it's interesting people are picking ETFs with 50% to 60% US exposure - that's not where my thinking is leading me.

my actual portfolio has much less US exposure.

however, this is only for 50% of my investment wealth, so i can have little or no US in the other 50% to compensate.

i do also wonder whether scaling back the US allocation was such a good idea after all. but i reckon that, even if it won't do much good, it won't do much harm, either, so (in my real portfolio) i stick with it. in investing, changes of strategy should always be minimized.

aroominyork

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

however, this is only for 50% of my investment wealth, so i can have little or no US in the other 50% to compensate

Bear in mind the other 50% has to include your non-equity allocation as well as your non-US.

grey_gym_sock

aroominyork wrote: »

Bear in mind the other 50% has to include your non-equity allocation as well as your non-US.

that is a bit awkward

but i think VEVE is still the least bad choice for me, within these arbitrary rules.

there are investment trusts which have regional allocations i prefer, and which i generally like, and hold a bit of in the real world (viz. MYI and BTEM). but i wouldn't want to put so much in either of them. that's too much concentrated manager risk.