Starting with funds

EmilyG2010

I'm just saying if the market is consistently falling, then why would I keep putting £25 a month (again minimal amount) in? It's only a large risk on a small percentage of my savings. So overall, not a great risk at all. Plus hoping my carefully selected fund managers will cover me.


But I admit, I have a lot to learn - hence my posting questions.

EmilyG2010

firestone wrote: »

I also assume you are not a complete novice as you say you already have LTGE which has given high returns but with what some would say has a higher risk due to its concentrated holdings.So assume you have invested before & done some reading at that time and made a decision.So If you don't think a multi asset fund or tracker is enough possible high risk/return for you why not look at other managed global funds which would also save you the effort of trying to pick the regions/sectors.

thanks. I started a few months ago. I think though if I got another managed global fund, I would end up with such similar exposure/maybe same companies. I would prefer just one fund per sector type. But I take on board your comment and will consider.

lpgm

EmilyG2010 wrote: »

I'm just saying if the market is consistently falling, then why would I keep putting £25 a month (again minimal amount) in?

That's an easy one - because it's costing you less money than it did the month before.

firestone

Take your point about global funds investing in the same companies but many have their own ideas such as income or value etc.Without double checking i would assume that using some well known names as an example i.e Fundsmith,Fidelity special sits & Rathbone global opps you would not get much crossover (except for the usual FANGS stocks) Even within the same company Scottish mortgage IT would maybe have different stock to Monks IT and then again Saints IT so you need to dig deep
Or you could go all in on Bio Tech or Robotics etc for the high risk rush:)

bostonerimus

EmilyG2010 wrote: »

I'm just saying if the market is consistently falling, then why would I keep putting £25 a month (again minimal amount) in? It's only a large risk on a small percentage of my savings. So overall, not a great risk at all. Plus hoping my carefully selected fund managers will cover me.


But I admit, I have a lot to learn - hence my posting questions.

EmilyG2010. You have been given lots of good advice and your questions about allocation and market timing have been answered. If you follow the course you have described you could easily lose a lot of money and as you seem to bounce between wanting more risk and not wanting to lose capital I'd say that you don't yet understand enough to invest in equities.
On an open forum you need to decide if the comments are honest and well informed and how to fold them into your plan....Good Luck.

Malthusian

EmilyG2010 wrote: »

I'm just saying if the market is consistently falling, then why would I keep putting £25 a month (again minimal amount) in?

Because if you were happy to pay £25 for X number of shares, why wouldn't you be happy to pay £25 for even more shares?

EmilyG2010

My point is, if the market is consistently falling (going with personal sentiment based on research), would it not be better to wait say 6 months and purchase 150 pounds worth of shares then? Rather than keep paying in my £25 a month. Or I could come out of the market completely and buy back in when I think the market is heading back up. I understand they are cheaper whenever the market has dipped, just thinking long term strategy.

bostonerimus

EmilyG2010 wrote: »

My point is, if the market is consistently falling (going with personal sentiment based on research), would it not be better to wait say 6 months and purchase 150 pounds worth of shares then? Rather than keep paying in my £25 a month. Or I could come out of the market completely and buy back in when I think the market is heading back up. I understand they are cheaper whenever the market has dipped, just thinking long term strategy.

You assume that you know the direction of the market....you don't, so your proposal is not sensible. You claim not to be interested in short term variations and then use them in your strategy, don't try to time the market. Choose a good multi-asset fund and invest in it every month for 30 years. It's that simple so as a novice don't make it anymore complicated than that. That's essentially what I did and after 30 years of consistent buying I'm a multi-millionaire now. Of course I had the advantages of being a reasonably numerate physicist with a good understanding of statistics and probability, a frugal nature, making an early start to investing, a good salary and several strong market cycles.

bowlhead99

EmilyG2010 wrote: »

My point is, if the market is consistently falling (going with personal sentiment based on research), would it not be better to wait say 6 months and purchase 150 pounds worth of shares then? Rather than keep paying in my £25 a month. Or I could come out of the market completely and buy back in when I think the market is heading back up. I understand they are cheaper whenever the market has dipped, just thinking long term strategy.

Over the 'long term' strategy you will find it incredibly difficult to successful second-guess whether the market will be higher or lower six months in the future. Your 'research' is something that all the people who participate in the global equities markets, with $50 trillion to spend between them, will also have access to.

And history shows that people aren't usually very good at calling the absolute bottom of a market dip. Quite a risk that you will think it's going back up again so you buy in and it tanks. Or you think it's short lived so you don't buy back in and then it soars up without you and it's more expensive to buy back in once you eventually realise you should have got back on board earlier.

So probably, slow and steady wins the race, unless you really do have psychic powers driving your personal sentiment.

Also, whether you choose to drip feed £25pm, or instead invest all at once today, or instead try to market-time with your relatively small 'starter' amounts of money as a learner over a certain time period... that won't tell you which of those three strategies will work best in the following time period when you are actually investing your 'big money' to fill your ISA allowances. Because the shape of the market (e.g.) this year or the next two years, won't be the same shape next year or the two years after that.

Given you think you'll be uncomfortable watching your funds lose value (which they will do at some point) I'd suggest drip feeding, or investing larger sums but choosing lower-volatility funds, would be more comfortable for you than using high risk funds and trying to time everything perfect, and then being worried or frustrated when you see things going down and you're in the market, or going up when you're out of the market, and you're blaming yourself for calling it wrong every time you have it wrong (which will be frequently).

Far more comfortable to just have a 'set and forget' direct debit to take the judgement out of it, or just invest it all today in something with only medium risk instead of high risk.

kidmugsy

Wassa123 wrote: »

"put it in and forget about it and look a few times a year"

Nah, too active. Look once a year.