S&S ISA jitters!

vigman

Alexland wrote: »

Pick the ratio you want and stick to it (unless markets have fallen significantly and look particularly cheap in which case maybe increase your equities).

However if you decide to go with low volatility VLS 20/40 then you have to question if you might be better with a cash savings account.

Alex

The whole reason for going to an S&S ISA was that we have too much in cash ISAs and interest paying bank accounts which are only paying c 1.5% ( about £60k in both types). In discussions here it was suggested trying an established S&S ISA like Vanguard. When a couple of smaller ISAs came to date I put £25k in the Vanguard accounts. I put higher amounts in the 20% and 40% funds, less in the 60% and even less in the 80% thinking I was spreading the investment to a medium to medium high risk level. I may still take this to 20 40 60 to give a medium risk level although I take notice of comments to go 20/40 only.

I actually had a tester account of £5k and this initially went up 3% so put the balance over to Vanguard

As there is no cost in moving funds I may wait until the 80% has levelled off its loss and then move it to the 20% fund?!

My 'portfolio' if it is such consists in order of value of properties, cash ISAs, interest paying bank accounts, gold in storage and finally this new S&S ISA.

Although these have mostly done well I would be disappointed if the S&S ISA had actually lost money after 10 years. I just wanted to improve the 1.5% on cash returns

Vigman

AnotherJoe

vigman wrote: »

The whole reason for going to an S&S ISA was that we have too much in cash ISAs and interest paying bank accounts which are only paying c 1.5% ( about £60k in both types). In discussions here it was suggested trying an established S&S ISA like Vanguard. When a couple of smaller ISAs came to date I put £25k in the Vanguard accounts. I put higher amounts in the 20% and 40% funds, less in the 60% and even less in the 80% thinking I was spreading the investment to a medium to medium high risk level. I may still take this to 20 40 60 to give a medium risk level although I take notice of comments to go 20/40 only.

Vigman

Theres no need for 3 its pointless. With the appropriate ratio of just two funds you can get to any desired level between 20 and 60. If you had for example, 100 in all 3, you might as well hold 300 in 40, as it comes to the same thing. If you want something less than 40, hold only 20 and 40 in the appropriate ratios.

You have to be able to take on board volatility and risk. If you cant, or you havent come to that point yet, then investing isnt for you, use higher rate savings (though be aware then that in real terms your money is losing value every year at 100% certainty.

With investments, its in the long term extremely likely to gain and outpace inflation*, but theres a risk there, especially over short timescales, and if you cannot stomach that risk just get out because you are likely to compound the problem by buying at say low to medium risk, suffering drop anyway and then selling and crystallizing your loss.

vigman wrote: »

As there is no cost in moving funds I may wait until the 80% has levelled off its loss and then move it to the 20% fund?!

Why would you sell it if its being doing well?

vigman wrote: »

My 'portfolio' if it is such consists in order of value of properties, cash ISAs, interest paying bank accounts, gold in storage and finally this new S&S ISA.

Although these have mostly done well I would be disappointed if the S&S ISA had actually lost money after 10 years. I just wanted to improve the 1.5% on cash returns

Vigman

Gold. Jeez. Flip a coin. Why do you think thats a good idea? Golds done nothing the last 5 years so in real terms its lost about 15-20%. Since its priced in dollars then its probably appreciated that much in Sterling, which means you broke even but have now become a currency speculator ! But this apparently doesnt worry you though a minor dip in investments does.

Either pick a level with VLS and dont look at it for ten years (and you'd be very unlucky if it hadn't gained more than savinsg rates over ten years* , or get out and go back to savings accounts.


* because thats what companies do, otherwise theres no point investing in them if the money would be better in the bank. But its a long plan not a 5 minute job.

vigman

Ive done well with gold bought at c £5 grm for 9ct, now £10-£11 and Kruggerands bought for £400 which last time I checked were about £1000 (have been to £1300.)

It was only a small investment of C £5000 now worth more than £10k. I don't think that is too bad a return?

Vigman

PS .....and yes I realise I put gold before the SS ISA in my value list. Happy to flip a coin with the sovereigns that were bought c £140 and now are c £220!

PPS What puts all this into perspective is having paid £1200 per week for my F-I-L to be in a specialist care home for nearly 4 years. Was it worth owning a nice house just to have most of the proceeds spent on care!?

AnotherJoe

vigman wrote: »

Ive done well with gold bought at c £5 grm for 9ct, now £10-£11 and Kruggerands bought for £400 which last time I checked were about £1000 (have been to £1300.)

It was only a small investment of C £5000 now worth more than £10k. I don't think that is too bad a return?

Vigman

PS .....and yes I realise I put gold before the SS ISA in my value list. Happy to flip a coin with the sovereigns that were bought c £140 and now are c £220!

My point is, gold is just a coin flip. So you are happy gambling money on a coin flip ( i make no criticism with that on a stand alone basis ) but then you are wobbling about a mere 6.5% drop in investments when in the long term, investments have a clear upward trend and gold doesn't and gold routinely fluctuates up and down by 20%. There's no logic to your worry about VLS80 given your attitude to gold.

Why arent you selling your sovereigns that are now £220 up from £140 when that was your proposal as to what to do with VLS80 if it went back up a mere 20%, yet when golds gone up 50% you are happy to hold??

vigman

AnotherJoe wrote: »

My point is, gold is just a coin flip. So you are happy gambling money on a coin flip ( i make no criticism with that on a stand alone basis ) but then you are wobbling about a mere 6.5% drop in investments when in the long term, investments have a clear upward trend and gold doesn't and gold routinely fluctuates up and down by 20%. There's no logic to your worry about VLS80 given your attitude to gold.

Why arent you selling your sovereigns that are now £220 up from £140 when that was your proposal as to what to do with VLS80 if it went back up a mere 20%, yet when golds gone up 50% you are happy to hold??

I don't see gold items and coinage as a gamble (as opposed to pure bullion) as you do. With many up and down spikes gold has always been on an upward trend. I bought coins to keep in a dip at a good price. I have previously traded by buying low and selling high and then buying low again. I have never lost money on gold over 30 years+. It will go to $2000 per gram 24 carat. I'm not selling the sovereigns or Kruggerands as they will be worth at least double in ten years time.

Given my poor state of health I don't think I will be able to 'meet' you here then for one of us to say "I told you so!"

Vigman

PS. If we get a bad EU exit deal and if we start using 'Corbyn Credits', I believe gold price is going to go sky high

Herbalus

vigman wrote: »

PPS What puts all this into perspective is having paid £1200 per week for my F-I-L to be in a specialist care home for nearly 4 years. Was it worth owning a nice house just to have most of the proceeds spent on care!?

I have had relatives in similar positions, and whilst it seems an extreme amount of money:

Point 1 - you will have the use of a nice house whilst your health enables you to enjoy it.
Point 2 - you can afford a specialist care home without relying on the local council to put you wherever they can and potentially a lower quality of care if the choice is theirs and not yours.

vigman

I do understand and appreciate those comments, Herbalus.

There were people in the same home who were completely paid for by their local authority which does grate a bit when having to sell a house and pay £4,800 a month for 4 years.

In context of this thread, if my family were in the same situation with me it doesn't really matter if I lose the S&S £25k as this will just be a quicker way to the 'below £23,250 savings' limit!

Vigman

AnotherJoe

vigman wrote: »

PS. If we get a bad EU exit deal and if we start using 'Corbyn Credits', I believe gold price is going to go sky high

Why on earth would the UK's exit from EU and what Corbyn does affect the price of gold?
Other than on a currency basis (£ to $) it won't raise a ripple.

jimjames

vigman wrote: »

I don't see gold items and coinage as a gamble (as opposed to pure bullion) as you do. With many up and down spikes gold has always been on an upward trend.

It's interesting that you state that about gold but are twitchy about a tiny drop in the value of a stock market investment. Stock markets also have up and down spikes and have been on an upward trend. You wouldn't say gold was always on an upward trend if you bought in 1980.