Income Portfolio's

AlanP_2

TBC15 wrote: »

I’m sure Terry put this income v growth thing to bed some time ago.

Who is Terry?

ColdIron

Some ghastly oik, one of those barrow boy types

Prism

AlanP wrote: »

Who is Terry?

TBC15 is referring to this https://www.fundsmith.co.uk/news/article/2018/10/03/financial-times---busting-the-myths-of-investment-who-needs-income

Alexland

AlanP wrote: »

Who is Terry?

Surely you know Terry, the Referendum Party candidate for Guildford?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Efs5lwUMy4o

Alex

Thrugelmir

Audaxer wrote: »

Maybe that's another reason to look for dividends as well as growth?

In using 10 year data how much account have you taken of the falling £ exchange rate against major currencies, i.e. Yuan, Euro , US $ and Yen. When assessing income opportunities?

talexuser

Alexland wrote: »

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Efs5lwUMy4o

I thought it ironic at the time that our state pension is paid in exactly the same way as his valid criticisms (especially inflation proofed public ones) and since then we have effectively killed off the final salary schemes that contributed to investment.

Audaxer

dunstonh wrote: »

Regular is most typically taken monthly. I dont think frequency is overly important in the scheme of things.

Significantly negative is always a judgement call. if you hold 18 months in cash you can delay further moves to cash should markets fall. Most recoveries occur in under 18 months. So, you can reduce the worst of the impact. Its semi-timing of the markets but statistically, most crashes recover within that period.

Plus, with income units with income feeding the cash account, you can actually get closer to 24 months if needed.

I know historically most big equity crashes recover with a couple of years, but is there a possibility that after such a long bull run that we could have a long sequence of negative returns rather than a big equity crash? If portfolios lost say about 10% each year for 4 consecutive years in early retirement, I think you would need a larger cash buffer to avoid selling at falling capital values?

dunstonh

I know historically most big equity crashes recover with a couple of years, but is there a possibility that after such a long bull run that we could have a long sequence of negative returns rather than a big equity crash?

Anything is possible. The dot.com (and associated events)period was a long slow decline for overall equities. Again, statistically, most are sudden drops. So, its all an odds game and inevitably, it is possible you would need to sell during a decline.

With no cash buffer, you are going to be impacted regardless. With a cash buffer, you do have some scope to ride out some corrections/crashes.

Thrugelmir

Audaxer wrote: »

I know historically most big equity crashes recover with a couple of years, but is there a possibility that after such a long bull run that we could have a long sequence of negative returns rather than a big equity crash?

What drives share prices?

AlanP_2

Prism wrote: »

TBC15 is referring to this https://www.fundsmith.co.uk/news/article/2018/10/03/financial-times---busting-the-myths-of-investment-who-needs-income

So a Fund Manager who doesn't offer an Income focused option says they aren't needed - well there's a surprise.

He might be right, I have no idea, but I wouldn't base my decision on the views of one individual who has an alternative to "sell".