Selling long term investments at loss

ermine

Herbalus wrote: »

Whether this all matters on a sub£4k pot I have no idea.[...]I understand that selling at a loss is a mistake, especially when investing over 30 years

You are really waaay overthinking this, and no, it doesn't matter on a sub 4kpot. Leave it be.


I actually share your fondness for the L&G international index, and there's some good argument for a tilt to the UK given it's so suspect from Brexit, the hammering may be overdone. There's also something to be said for EMs, which will probably be a much larger part of the world market in 30 years time.


Keep on keeping on. Stock markets are tidal. but has also been a general slow accretion. Sure, people say growth is done, in which case the slow accretion won't happen. But if it's done then you'll have bigger problems than your SIPP flatlining or going pfft.


Don't tinker. and maybe don't add more complexity. Have a read of Monevator, perhaps make absolutely dead-certain sure that HL's ongoing platform costs are the cheapest - they may be for a relatively small amount, and chill and enjoy the break.


If the markets are down and you invest regularly, you're getting more for your money. You're doing okay. Leave well alone. Step back from your brokerage account and do something better with your time. You've probably only started this in the last few years, and markets have been pumped up over that time. Over 30 years you will see this happen time and time again. What you must never do is sell into a suckout. That's much easier said than done.

steampowered

With a sub-£4k pot, I don't think you should worry too much about being a bit overweight on the UK.

You can always rebalance away from the UK as you build up your portfolio over time.

dqnet

Agreed with Alex and Ermine on this. Leave and let be. I would certainly not start a new strategy and open up the possibility for more mess and even more fees. My funds are also in loss yet two months ago they were firmly in profit. I didn't sell a little then because I was still new to rebalancing and greed took its toll but now I won't miss the opportunity to buy at low prices and sell when I see a little profit is to be made.

talexuser

It's all relative. My ISA is around 40% UK and 6% down on the year, but only back to where it was last April. My larger unbundled trusts are only 15% UK and are 3% down on the year - but only back to where they were last April.

If you feel that Brexit is going to be a hit on the economy then reducing UK exposure is what an awful lot of investors around the world have been doing. But on a 30 year timescale being contrarian might pay off, nobody knows till after the fact.

If you are absolutely certain you are not happy with performance the hardest lesson to learn is not to wait until you are back to where you invested before selling. But this is from someone who has held some funds for 25 years plus, and never completely sold out a fund in less than over 3 years at most (and that short a time very rarely).

cjv

Sometimes I feel that not knowing much about investing actually helps me.

I have Vanguard LifeStrategy 80 and HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic in my SIPP, to supplement my NEST Higher Risk fund for employer contributions. I am confident I am diversified enough, with an acceptable risk for my age. I may top up my funds when there is a real crash in the market just to buy extra when they are cheap.

Other than that I would have no idea what to do and when, when it comes to switching funds or rebalancing so I plan to just leave things alone until I am closer to retirement.

dqnet

That is a fantastic response and quite simply the approach I am currently adopting (I know it probably isn't ideal though).

Ignorance can really be bliss!

Voyager2002

I am surprised that no-one has commented on fees and other costs...


HL is generally one of the most expensive platforms out, while the funds mentioned are also not cheap. On a 'pot' of this size you are unlikely to get any noticeable benefit from the active management for which you are paying, but you will certainly notice the fees.


My suggestion: choose some low-cost trackers that give you the kind of diversified exposure that you seek; shift the whole lot over to whichever platform is most cost-effective for this level of investment; then forget about it until your savings are closer to the £50,000 level at which it makes sense to put a small percentage into more "interesting" funds.

A_T

Voyager2002 wrote: »

I am surprised that no-one has commented on fees and other costs...


HL is generally one of the most expensive platforms out, while the funds mentioned are also not cheap. On a 'pot' of this size you are unlikely to get any noticeable benefit from the active management for which you are paying, but you will certainly notice the fees.


My suggestion: choose some low-cost trackers that give you the kind of diversified exposure that you seek; shift the whole lot over to whichever platform is most cost-effective for this level of investment; then forget about it until your savings are closer to the £50,000 level at which it makes sense to put a small percentage into more "interesting" funds.

Or better still stick with your original strategy - just because you've got more savings doesn't mean a new strategy will work any better than the old one.

Alexland

Voyager2002 wrote: »

HL is generally one of the most expensive platforms out, while the funds mentioned are also not cheap. On a 'pot' of this size you are unlikely to get any noticeable benefit from the active management for which you are paying, but you will certainly notice the fees.

The LISA market is less competitive than the ISA market so HL is not a bad option especially if using discounted funds. Once the OP gets enough money in the account it would make sense to switch to investing in ETFs or ITs for the £45 fee cap which is a lot cheaper than the £180 that I pay for my Halifax SIPP.

I don't understand your reference to high fund fees for active management? Everything we have discussed is fairly low cost (even before the HL discounts) unless you are comparing to the ultra low fee funds only available to institutions?

Alex

Novice_investor101

As an anecdote, I work in a job where I regularly look at other people's investments. These can have been held for anything from a month to 40 odd years.
The one trend I have noticed is that the people who invested (either regularly or via a lump sum) into one or two funds, usually a global equities tracker or 40-85% multiasset type fund & then just left well alone for a couple of decades have come out much better than the people who have allocations across numerous funds/sectors/regions & switch funds a lot etc etc. By much better, I mean that they achieved a much higher growth than those with complicated portfolios with 3% in EM, 2% in Natural Resources, 5% in Asian smaller co's etc etc. When comparing portfolios that have been invested for a similar time frame & a similar contribution, the single fund strategies have always out performed in terms of growth, often by a lot.

It's always baffled me why some FA's put their clients in about 10 or more different funds with single digit splits & myriad additional fees for each fund when the investor is an ordinary Joe bloggs saving £100 a month into a SIPP or stocks & shares ISA. I've even seen one paying 1% (£1 a month) into a Gold fund.

Keeping it simple til you you have a decent amount accumulated seems the best idea.