Liquidate entire portfolio until virus is over?

Ciprico

So...looking at the maths...
- Vacination    (12 months away ?)
- Herd immunity (at 60% ?)
UK pop 66M    (60% =40M)
So far 20,000 contracted CV and hospitals are nearing saturation
If possible to maintain current rate, so as not to over saturate NHS (probably isn't) it will take 2000 years to hit herd immunity levels
My two conclusions.
- We need a vaccination !
or there will be a lot of deaths, over a long time.
Herd imunity is not a policy, it is the "no nothing" eventuality if something better doesn't materialise
Would seem rather unlikely that  things will get back to normal in 6 months, even if the figures above 
are way out, without a vaccination

Prism

123mat123 said:

So far 20,000 contracted CV and hospitals are nearing saturation
If possible to maintain current rate, so as not to over saturate NHS (probably isn't) it will take 2000 years to hit herd immunity levels
My two conclusions.
- We need a vaccination !
or there will be a lot of deaths, over a long time.
Herd imunity is not a policy, it is the "no nothing" eventuality if something better doesn't materialise
Would seem rather unlikely that  things will get back to normal in 6 months, even if the figures above 
are way out, without a vaccination

We have no real idea how many people in the UK have contracted Covid-19 but its a lot more than 20,000.
I agree we do need a vaccination or at least something to reduce chance of death

Thrugelmir

123mat123 said:

Would seem rather unlikely that  things will get back to normal in 6 months, even if the figures above 
are way out, without a vaccination

The UK might have a sense of normality. Can the virus be contained on a global level though? 

saoliver

Alexland said:

darkidoe said:

I didn't quite understand 'cashflow business value destruction'. Do you mind trying to explain it in layman's terms. 
How do you know forward value of investments might be less for UK investors? Because of the exchange rate?

Although governments are providing some support while businesses are in hibernation they are continuing to burn cash incurring cost with no revenues. Once spent this cash is gone from the value of their business and if they run short they will need others to provide cash into the business (eg issuing bonds or new shares) so would end up owning a less profitable business or a smaller proportion of the business.

For a UK based global investor they are buying mostly US based investments and the weak pound hampers their buying power so they end up paying a bit more (via the exchange rate) for things that are now lower cost (but less valuable).

....ok so for the last comment, just so I can get this right in my head - is there a reason you wouldn't invest in UK-centric equities instead at the moment (so as to not be exposed to the weakened exchange rates), instead of funds holding US-biased stocks?

Alexland

saoliver said:

....ok so for the last comment, just so I can get this right in my head - is there a reason you wouldn't invest in UK-centric equities instead at the moment (so as to not be exposed to the weakened exchange rates), instead of funds holding US-biased stocks?

No the comment wasn't about UK equities but being a UK based investor - someone living in the UK and thinking in pounds. UK equities can also be exposed to currency movements as many have a high proportion of overseas earnings.
The pound has recovered from it's exceptional low against the dollar in recent days so getting less value due to exchange rates is less of an issue (although it's still a lower than before the Brexit vote). While it was exceptionally low I used a currency hedged global ETF to add some more money into the market. When GBP next gets to around 1.30 USD then I will probably switch those units to an unhedged global ETF.

Thrugelmir

If you buy a US income fund. Then yes you will get less investment for you money. If the exchange rate is poor. However the income generated will be higher. Not as cut and dried as it first appears. 

eskbanker

doe808 said:

Now that experts seem to be back in vogue, can we all refrane from posting the Daily Express as a source please.

Perhaps their expertise extends as far as mastering that most sophisticated example of complex technology, the spellchecker....

NorthernJoe

We have no real idea how many people in the UK have contracted Covid-19 but its a lot more than 20,000.
I agree we do need a vaccination or at least something to reduce chance of death

20,000 are the number of hospitalised cases. Remember, to date the UK has only been testing the sickest i.e. those in need of hospitalisation (along with politicians & a handful of castle-dwellers)

Latest model from Imperial suggests 2.6% of population may have already been infected (approx 1.8 million)

LHW99

123mat123 said:

So...looking at the maths...
- Vacination    (12 months away ?)
- Herd immunity (at 60% ?)
UK pop 66M    (60% =40M)
So far 20,000 contracted CV and hospitals are nearing saturation
If possible to maintain current rate, so as not to over saturate NHS (probably isn't) it will take 2000 years to hit herd immunity levels
My two conclusions.
- We need a vaccination !
or there will be a lot of deaths, over a long time.
Herd imunity is not a policy, it is the "no nothing" eventuality if something better doesn't materialise
Would seem rather unlikely that  things will get back to normal in 6 months, even if the figures above 
are way out, without a vaccination

Or a suitably re-purposed medication that reduces the severest symptoms from the infection, which may be found more quickly than a vaccine if all goes well.

Thrugelmir

The Germans themselves say that their test figures are skewed. Many of those tested to start with were those that had returned from sking in Northern Italy. The fit and healthy types! Not representative of the wider population. Who on an average basis are older than in the UK.