Too much information - or how often do you check your pension pot?

JustAnotherSaver

bigadaj wrote: »

Any particular reason why you are in vls as opposed to an all world tracker?

There's a heavy uk bias to vls that some would argue constrains performance.

Well if i'm being perfectly honest my earlier comment of staying in VLS 100 is not completely true.
I'm aware of the UK bias. Looking at this link it says just over 22% when i've read the UK market is like what, 5%, 6% of the world market? Certainly not 22%. So i was going to do something about that.


I was looking at the HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic, which shows as just over 4% as one alternative. I don't even pretend to know the ins and outs of all this so i'm just trying to find other/better ways. After the last book i read i don't actually think VLS100 is for me going forward. I'd be looking at less UK exposure. I'm not entirely sure how i'll select the VLS replacement. Perhaps it'll be the HSBC one i don't know but whenever the alternative is chosen the point remains the same - it'll be stuck with, i wont be changing it. When i selected VLS100 i wasn't really aware of the whole UK weighting thing.

AnotherJoe wrote: »

except its not really home bias,

Deleted_User wrote: »

It is home bias

See THIS ^^^^^ Is the frustrating thing to someone like me (someone who knows very little about this & lacks the confidence).


I recognise both you guys as regular posters around here so while that doesn't guarantee anything, i'd take a fair stab at you knowing more than I do about this whole thing, so you're the type of people i'd probably look towards to learn something. Not just me but i assume many other newbies would do the same. And it's not just you two.


The thing is here ...... you can't both possibly be right, yet you don't agree. So to me as a know nothing, which one of you is right and why does the wrong person think they're right? I have no knowledge on this topic to work out the answer to those 2 questions.

EdSwippet

I'm on the cusp of the lifetime allowance, and plan to crystallise my entire pension exactly on it. As a result, at the moment I check my SIPP balances far more frequently than I would like, to make sure I won't go over it before crystallising everything.

The way the LTA operates is bonkers. It's making me hyper-vigilant, and as a committed passive investor, I look forward to being able to drop back to once every couple of months.

cfw1994

michaels wrote: »

Those who say they check more often because they are close to retirement, is that because you intend to buy annuities or otherwise derisk on retirement? When I run the cfiresim simulations I but in an anticipated retirement timeframe of 40 or 45 years and expect to keep the same risk profile as I have during accumulation. Thus no point worrying about short term fluctuations as I am not going to act on them.

(My plan if I have one is to retire in 2.5 years but I can see things might change in the next 6 months in which case I would need to think very hard about how I went forward)

Partly a bad habit (as Lisyloo said.....I too check Facebook and indeed email more often than I should!).

Partly like EdSwippet, a bit of a focus on the LTA (thx again for clarifying some questions on that in the past, btw!), which I agree 100% is bonkers: I have crystallised some on the basis of my 'predictions' on what could happen, based on my records.....(& at least appearing justified, as my funds have gone up a few % since I did that)

That said, I am also still of the view that "the markets" are again overdue a correction, which could change things a bit.....perhaps another reason for my near daily interest in things. I don't believe in "changing strategy" based on this, but I have perhaps lowered my risk a little with minor some tweaking over the past 18 months to get to this stage.

[Deleted User]

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

I recognise both you guys as regular posters around here so while that doesn't guarantee anything, i'd take a fair stab at you knowing more than I do about this whole thing, so you're the type of people i'd probably look towards to learn something. Not just me but i assume many other newbies would do the same. And it's not just you two.


The thing is here ...... you can't both possibly be right, yet you don't agree. So to me as a know nothing, which one of you is right and why does the wrong person think they're right? I have no knowledge on this topic to work out the answer to those 2 questions.

Anything you read about investment anywhere should be taken with caution, particularly so on a social media site. We all read different opinions and it’s not a bad thing to see opposing points of view and pick what makes sense. None of it is Gospel.

AnotherJoe made a point that UK’s market is overweight in certain industries and a small number of companies have high weightings. He is right. If one invests in FTSE 100, he is not as well diversified as he could be. Funds like VLS have UK exposure in excess of 4%, so they do have home bias but it is sufficiently low so as not to introduce unnecessary risk. Analysis can be found in the White Paper I quoted earlier.

bigadaj

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Well if i'm being perfectly honest my earlier comment of staying in VLS 100 is not completely true.
I'm aware of the UK bias. Looking at this link it says just over 22% when i've read the UK market is like what, 5%, 6% of the world market? Certainly not 22%. So i was going to do something about that.


I was looking at the HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic, which shows as just over 4% as one alternative. I don't even pretend to know the ins and outs of all this so i'm just trying to find other/better ways. After the last book i read i don't actually think VLS100 is for me going forward. I'd be looking at less UK exposure. I'm not entirely sure how i'll select the VLS replacement. Perhaps it'll be the HSBC one i don't know but whenever the alternative is chosen the point remains the same - it'll be stuck with, i wont be changing it. When i selected VLS100 i wasn't really aware of the whole UK weighting thing.






See THIS ^^^^^ Is the frustrating thing to someone like me (someone who knows very little about this & lacks the confidence).


I recognise both you guys as regular posters around here so while that doesn't guarantee anything, i'd take a fair stab at you knowing more than I do about this whole thing, so you're the type of people i'd probably look towards to learn something. Not just me but i assume many other newbies would do the same. And it's not just you two.


The thing is here ...... you can't both possibly be right, yet you don't agree. So to me as a know nothing, which one of you is right and why does the wrong person think they're right? I have no knowledge on this topic to work out the answer to those 2 questions.

Vanguard do all world trackers, as wel as fidelity, HSBC, black rock and many others, they often track slightly different benchmarks, so you can check costs and see which best matches your intended asset allocation. Monevator may be a good place to have a look.

The other thing to check is whether you actually want all equity, there seem to be few other alternative asset classes that offer value but it is all eggs in one very large basket, and at least some in bonds or property will reduce volatility.

In terms of the discussion over home bias then it depends on how you view things. The U.K. Market is small and so a higher weighting is both not unusual and can have a dramatic effect. Large ftse companies are also dominated by oil, mining, banks etc so a bit all in one basket. However assuming you are uk based then uk investments reduce currency risk, and big multi national firms make most of their earnings overseas so not dependent on uk economy. However overseas earnings in dollars, euros, yen etc do introduce exchange rate risk, so Circles within circles.