Works Pension Lifestyling

dunstonh

.The fund is losing me money year on year.

Compared to what?

I think it would be better served in in one or any of the other options.

Of the same volatility level and strategy or a different volatility level and strategy?

It may be naff and need changing but if you dont know why it is naff then you won't know if the alternative is naff.

A fund that is in the second quartile in a discreet period can be worse than a fund in the third quartile in the same discreet period. Despite the performance being better in that period.

I have seen people pull out of funds to go into alternatives which are worse but the claim they are better because they were either not comparing like for like and jumping around the risk scale without realising it or comparing different periods where the old fund did better in the new period but the new fund did better than the old fund did in the period they held it.

It doesnt have to be rocket science but you do need some understanding as random hit and hopes tend to result in lower returns over the long term.

Malthusian

dunstonh wrote: »

A fund that is in the second quartile in a discreet period can be worse than a fund in the third quartile in the same discreet period.

Because of hidden charges? https://www.dictionary.com/browse/discrete

Doglegger

dunstonh wrote: »

Compared to what?

Compared to how much was in the fund the year before!!

dunstonh

Doglegger wrote: »

Compared to how much was in the fund the year before!!

That is a very bad way to measure.

There was a stockmarket fall over Spring this year. There wasnt last year.

if you had changed last year, then your new funds would have suffered that fall. So, you would now be saying your new funds performed badly.

Doglegger

dunstonh wrote: »

That is a very bad way to measure.

There was a stockmarket fall over Spring this year. There wasnt last year.

if you had changed last year, then your new funds would have suffered that fall. So, you would now be saying your new funds performed badly.

The rest of the investments I'm fine with. Even the Consolidation Fund I'm OK with as at least it has been performing in the +ve. The equities have been doing great so overall I've had no gripes.

However, this fund has been performing poorly. The pension roadshow guy admitted last year it was a dog but it's still there in the portfolio, reducing the money that's in it (I'm amazed you say this is a bad way to look at it but you're the IFA and know better than me). I think I'll move them....just for the hell of it!

michaels

Isn't the OPs question more about whether a gradual switch to only 10% equities starting 7 years before planned retirement date makes sense for a draw down strategy where the majority of the funds will remain invested for a much longer period?

FatherAbraham

MallyGirl wrote: »

I opted for self selection as I didn't like the Lifestyling approach. I do not intend to buy an annuity so I don't need to be ultra cautious and cash heavy at the point of retirement. I am hoping to be invested for another 30 years at that point. I also want to retire earlier than the 65 it uses for retirement date.

You should never be cash-heavy when lifestyling for an annuity. You should be long-dated-gilts heavy.

If you're going to do your own asset-reallocation when approaching retirement, remember to plan for the 25% tax-free lump sum by building a cash holding. Falling to take the tax-free withdrawal would be a large blunder.

greatkingrat

FatherAbraham wrote: »

You should never be cash-heavy when lifestyling for an annuity. You should be long-dated-gilts heavy.

If you're going to do your own asset-reallocation when approaching retirement, remember to plan for the 25% tax-free lump sum by building a cash holding. Falling to take the tax-free withdrawal would be a large blunder.

Yes, but you don't have to take the full 25% the day after you retire. So if you don't need the lump sum immediately, there is no point having a large percentage of your fund sat in cash doing nothing.

FatherAbraham

greatkingrat wrote: »

Yes, but you don't have to take the full 25% the day after you retire. So if you don't need the lump sum immediately, there is no point having a large percentage of your fund sat in cash doing nothing.

If you have decided to take an annuity when you retire, then you must take the full 25% tax free lump sum at that time, otherwise the option will be lost.

LHW99

If you have decided to take an annuity when you retire, then you must take the full 25% tax free lump sum at that time, otherwise the option will be lost.

Genuine question - why can't the annuity be bought with the whole pot?