Drawdown Strategy: VLS60 Or VLS20 and VLS100

[Deleted User]

“I like this approach in particular as it allows me to add a couple of funds where Multi asset funds don’t really cover - I.e smaller companies and Emerging markets.“

That’s not accurate. There certainly are multi-asset funds which include both. 

green_man

Deleted_User said:

“I like this approach in particular as it allows me to add a couple of funds where Multi asset funds don’t really cover - I.e smaller companies and Emerging markets.“

That’s not accurate. There certainly are multi-asset funds which include both. 

To be fair, Global Strategy does include Emerging markets, but not really Smaller Companies.  

[Deleted User]

green_man said:

Deleted_User said:

“I like this approach in particular as it allows me to add a couple of funds where Multi asset funds don’t really cover - I.e smaller companies and Emerging markets.“

That’s not accurate. There certainly are multi-asset funds which include both. 

To be fair, Global Strategy does include Emerging markets, but not really Smaller Companies.  

I am not familiar with the specific offering from HSBC but VLS funds include US total market index, which includes very small companies. And UK All Share. And so on for other markets. 

shinytop

green_man said:

I'm doing almost exactly the same as your original idea, although I've split the core part 50-50 between HSBC Balanced and VLS60.  I am trying to keep the cash outside the SIPP to generate at least a small amount of return

You aren’t doing quite the same. You are in effect hedging your bets on the fund manager approaches, there being a fundamentally different strategy between the two funds. (In reality I expect performance of both to be very close).  I on the other hand are using the funds differently one as a proxy for a bonds fund and one as an equity fund, and trying to convince myself (or as it seems possibly not) that it gives an advantage over just using ‘Balanced’.

I said I was doing almost the same as your original intention and putting most in a balanced multi asset fund.  Yes, I have used two; that's where the 'almost' comes in. And I also expect them to perform similarly despite their different strategies (and in fact they have).  I suppose I'm hedging a bit but I'm also just curious to see what the difference is.  As both are OK choices it can't do any harm.  (hopefully ). I agree your new approach is different.    

green_man

Deleted_User said:

green_man said:

Deleted_User said:

“I like this approach in particular as it allows me to add a couple of funds where Multi asset funds don’t really cover - I.e smaller companies and Emerging markets.“

That’s not accurate. There certainly are multi-asset funds which include both. 

To be fair, Global Strategy does include Emerging markets, but not really Smaller Companies.  

I am not familiar with the specific offering from HSBC but VLS funds include US total market index, which includes very small companies. And UK All Share. And so on for other markets. 

Indeed you are correct but what neither of these do is have specific smaller companies funds forming part of their asset mixes, their philosophy seems to be to just weight by market cap, which on a world basis leaves smaller companies with a tiny overall weighting.