Where to invest now the coronavirus has hit the markets

ttmatt

dunstonh said:

The allegory to guide you here is to figure out the advantage between a supermarket selling ten varieties of baked beans and another selling every brand known. There is none.
Not quite. 
Most FAs are single provider tied.  So, they will be selling one variety of baked bean.
Those that are multi-tied tend to be selling a handful of varieties but often not the type that you would want but are on sale for reasons that have nothing to do with quality.
The other issue is not just beans.  It would mean buying the same brand for every item of shopping.   Is there a manufacturer that has good options for every single thing you buy?  No.   The same applies to investments.

thanks for this and the gold comments. The FA is linked to Quilter, any advice/knowledge on them??? do they only deal in Heinz or do they offer a wider selection to suit all palates and get the best brand/non brand for their clients.
cheers

dunstonh

The FA is linked to Quilter, any advice/knowledge on them???
They are restricted FAs.   Although I have heard that there may still be a few IFA holdouts still in their mix.     My understanding is based on media articles and its been a while since i have seen them mentioned in the media.
do they only deal in Heinz or do they offer a wider selection to suit all palates and get the best brand/non brand for their clients.
They retail their own investment platform  and operate a panel of investment funds.   Their advisers can be at various levels of restriction. Those that restrict to the quilter funds only get commercial benefits (lower costs) that those that do not restrict as much do not get.     (that is how it was presented to me when they tried to get us to move to them in the past - I didnt want to give up IFA status even though it would reduced my costs significantly by restricting).

If the adviser, platform and investments all have the quilter, intrinsic, old mutual or Cirilium brands then you know you are getting own brand FA advice.    

vacheron

I took the opportunity of picking up another 2000 barclays shares this morning at 141.99.

They seem to overreact and bounce off around 140 whenever the marked gets a twitch on, so tend to take punt on a few more each time it happens. Fingers crossed.

ttmatt

I've just had a proposal sent through by the Quilter FA who quoted me the fees of 1.5% for an initial one off fee followed by 2.19% annually, which would cover 1.25 from the DFM and 1.04 for my FA. Can anyone advise as to whether these fees seem normal/reasonable. I would be investing 350/400k so quite a bit. the annual fee to me seems to a bit on the expensive side, 
thanks

bostonerimus

Give me strength! Investing is not complicated. Invest just the same as you would have done before the coronavirus. Put it in a multi-asset fund or a portfolio of a few inexpensive tracker funds with an asset allocation appropriate to your circumstances. Make sure you always keep at least 6 months cash on hand for emergencies. Do that until you retire and develop a withdrawal plan. 

Malthusian

ttmatt said:

I've just had a proposal sent through by the Quilter FA who quoted me the fees of 1.5% for an initial one off fee followed by 2.19% annually, which would cover 1.25 from the DFM and 1.04 for my FA. Can anyone advise as to whether these fees seem normal/reasonable. I would be investing 350/400k so quite a bit. the annual fee to me seems to a bit on the expensive side, 
thanks

Eye-bleedingly expensive, St James's Place territory. See a local IFA or two.

DiggerUK

dunstonh said:......."I have been advocating gold since I first arrived here eleven years ago and I have been proved correct in its value and safety." (DiggerUK)

"No you haven't
1 - gold does not provide an income.  So only has an asset price.

2 - the asset price today is less than its peak 9 years ago.  That is not proof of safety or value"

Well, yes I have been advocating gold since I first signed in on MSE, as you well know. When Digger Mansions took the decision to transfer all retirement savings in to gold you and yours ridiculed such a move. I have been proved not to have made a mistake. Saying that gold doesn't provide an income is meaningless, as we are now selling amounts to finance our bucket list. With an average price paid of under £650 an ounce that profit is now being realised.

ttmatt, I don't know how you react when being misled, but for dunstonh to deceive you with a claim that the "asset price" of gold is less today than nine years ago is a fair example of such chicanery.
In 2011 the price of gold spiked at an all time high of £1180 in September that year. It peaked again at an all time high of £1305 in February just gone. Sandwiched in between those two dates were periods when gold could be bought for as little as £700.
In fact if you had been buying on a regular basis (averaging in) you would have paid a little over £940 per ounce. As I post the price of gold is over £1250 per ounce.
If gold is not for you, fine, just don't be deceived by the sexed up sellers of financial products and services. Your £8,000 fees would buy a lot of baked beans..._

Prism

DiggerUK said:

dunstonh said:......."I have been advocating gold since I first arrived here eleven years ago and I have been proved correct in its value and safety." (DiggerUK)

"No you haven't
1 - gold does not provide an income.  So only has an asset price.

2 - the asset price today is less than its peak 9 years ago.  That is not proof of safety or value"

Well, yes I have been advocating gold since I first signed in on MSE, as you well know. When Digger Mansions took the decision to transfer all retirement savings in to gold you and yours ridiculed such a move. I have been proved not to have made a mistake. Saying that gold doesn't provide an income is meaningless, as we are now selling amounts to finance our bucket list. With an average price paid of under £650 an ounce that profit is now being realised.

ttmatt, I don't know how you react when being misled, but for dunstonh to deceive you with a claim that the "asset price" of gold is less today than nine years ago is a fair example of such chicanery.
In 2011 the price of gold spiked at an all time high of £1180 in September that year. It peaked again at an all time high of £1305 in February just gone. Sandwiched in between those two dates were periods when gold could be bought for as little as £700.
In fact if you had been buying on a regular basis (averaging in) you would have paid a little over £940 per ounce. As I post the price of gold is over £1250 per ounce.
If gold is not for you, fine, just don't be deceived by the sexed up sellers of financial products and services. Your £8,000 fees would buy a lot of baked beans..._

Just a case of pricing in dollars vs pounds. So sure in pounds, due partly to currency, gold has done ok over the last 10 years. That difference helps to prove how unpredictable and volatile gold can be. Its affected by the strength of the pound for us, plus by the strength of the dollar before you add in inflation (or lack of) and risk events. I also don't think its a good return even if someone was to have bought it low GBP low of £700, especially for the risk. Bonds have done about the same and equities considerably better. So over the last 10 years gold was probably not the place to be - over the next 10 who knows.

soulsaver

afis1904 said:

Invest in mirrors. Just buy a whole house full of mirrors

I can see myself doing that.

maxmayer

It depends on the world situation so you're absolutely right. I guess it's better to wait some time till all rumours will end and investment funds will have the same influence and general situation as before.