multi asset and sector weightings

flopsy1973

Hi
I have been looking to reorganise my portfolio and after much discussion on here i have been doing lot of research and trying to learn bit more, most of the multi asset funds that are mentioned on here seem to follow a index what do people think about the actively managed ones like the jupiter merlin funds?. Surely if your following just a index then some of those companies are going to fail and drag performance ?
Also my funds seem to be very much overweight in UK 47%,which was a surprise to me and yet very little in the US. Given the situation in the world now are there certain regions/sectors that people are favouring more. What are peoples thoughts on this
thanks

masonic

flopsy1973 said:

Surely if your following just a index then some of those companies are going to fail and drag performance ?

Some of the companies will fail and drag performance. Some of the companies will soar and lift performance. The rest will be somewhere in between. If you believe you can identify a fund manager that can consistently avoid the former then go with them, but it's highly unlikely you'll be right.

flopsy1973 said:

Also my funds seem to be very much overweight in UK 47%,which was a surprise to me and yet very little in the US. Given the situation in the world now are there certain regions/sectors that people are favouring more. What are peoples thoughts on this

That's a very high UK bias, which I don't think you'll find replicated in many multi-asset funds or recommended portfolios. It wouldn't be to my taste.

dunstonh

, most of the multi asset funds that are mentioned on here seem to follow a index what do people think about the actively managed ones like the jupiter merlin funds?.

There are actually very few good active multi-asset funds.    Jack of all trades, master of none comes to mind.

Surely if your following just a index then some of those companies are going to fail and drag performance ?

Trackers give mid table discrete short term performance.  However, they give consistent mid table discrete performance which ends up with them moving up cumulative performance charts as managed funds have a bad year or two.

Also my funds seem to be very much overweight in UK 47%,which was a surprise to me and yet very little in the US.

Is there a strategy being followed?   Is the asset allocation recently arranged or a long time ago?

Given the situation in the world now are there certain regions/sectors that people are favouring more.

All of them.  nothing has changed.

flopsy1973

No real strategy being followed just a mix of investment  I have picked over the years and some more I inherited. I posted the portfolio on here some months ago and everyone said it was far too complicated. So now I am trying to thin it out and re balance

coyrls

I think you would be better off thinking about replacing rather than thinning out and rebalancing based on your previous thread.

eskbanker

flopsy1973 said:

No real strategy being followed just a mix of investment  I have picked over the years and some more I inherited. I posted the portfolio on here some months ago and everyone said it was far too complicated. So now I am trying to thin it out and re balance

I'd stand by my thoughts from six months ago on your other thread, i.e. "there's no particular (visible) reason to have any attachment to existing holdings, especially if the rationale for buying them has been lost in the mists of time" - it still seems that revolution rather than evolution would be more appropriate, but starting with a clearer strategy would help.

port_of_spain

flopsy1973 said:

No real strategy being followed just a mix of investment  I have picked over the years and some more I inherited. I posted the portfolio on here some months ago and everyone said it was far too complicated. So now I am trying to thin it out and re balance

This may be pedantic, but rebalancing is something you can do when you have a plan for what your portfolio should look like, but the portfolio is now a bit different (due to prices of different things going up or down), and you're now moving the portfolio back to match the plan. Without a plan, you can't rebalance!

What you can do is come up with a plan, and then implement it. Most likely, that would (as already suggested) involve selling everything you currently hold, and replacing it with what the plan says you should be holding. It would be rather a coincidence if you happened to be holding some of what your plan says you should hold, since you bought (or even inherited) it when you didn't have the plan!

Is all the portfolio inside an ISA (or pension)? Because there is no issue with selling and replacing inside an ISA (or pension). But if part of it is outside any tax wrapper, you should first check whether there is any issue with capital gains tax if you sell the existing investments. Though recent market falls might have solved that problem for you.

Sue58

As dunstonh mentioned there a very few multi asset active funds so most people tend to go with HSBC GS, L&G Multi Index, VLS etc. However depending on your risk tolerance I do like the Baillie Gifford Managed B Acc fund. This active fund is most probably similar in risk profile to HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic or VLS80. 

badger09

@ flopsy1973
I would humbly suggest that you, and anyone else tempted to post, should read/reread bowlhead99's post on P9 of this thread, posted 5 months after you started the thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6065437/ifa-versus-hl/p9

Are you familiar with the term 'paralysis by analysis'?

Audaxer

Sue58 said:

As dunstonh mentioned there a very few multi asset active funds so most people tend to go with HSBC GS, L&G Multi Index, VLS etc. However depending on your risk tolerance I do like the Baillie Gifford Managed B Acc fund. This active fund is most probably similar in risk profile to HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic or VLS80. 

I've got investments in VLS and HSBC Global Strategy, but for an active multi asset fund I also like the look of Baillie Gifford Managed B Acc fund. It had about 75% equity when I last looked, so quite high risk, but it has a very good long term performance record over the last 30 years or so and is also has a relatively cheap ongoing charge for an active fund.

Thrugelmir

How has your portfolio performed since you originally asked for help?  Have the dice rolled favourably or not as the case maybe. 
Given the current economic climate should now be easier to draw up a list of the pro's and con's of each of your holdings. Particularly the individual shares. Which I recall I suggested should be the first to receive your attention for disposal. As lacked any cohesion or strategy.