Vanguard

dunstonh

Deleted_User said:

dunstonh said:

Deleted_User said:

whatstheplan said:

I've recently started investing and, given my goals and circumstances, I opted for the Vanguard LS100 fund as for me, holding 20% bonds didn't make much sense.  I put cash into my stocks and shares ISA at the tail end of tax year 20/21 and will put more in during 21/22.  I've decided to invest all of my 20/21 allocation into the LS100 fund and in parallel will continue to educate myself on other options.  I might then elect to invest my 21/22 allocation into something different or it might end up also going into the LS100 fund if I conclude that's best for me.

I am similar - opted for LS100 last year and it was a great decision. Can't comment on the other funds held by Vanguard but I did some research beforehand and Vanguard LS was very often praised. LS60 or LS80 might be preferable but I'm in it for the long haul (also, I had very little knowledge of investing but found LS to be easy to navigate. Good luck!

Although VLS100 is the weakest of the VLS range. It is the only one that isn't a multi-asset fund. Instead it is a global managed fund and that means it is compared with other global funds, in particular global trackers.  It doesn't do so well up against them as the rest of the VLS range does against other multi-asset funds.

@dunstonh,
Thank you for this! Excuse my ignorance, but I thought the VLS100 was a strong fund (though admittedly don't know much about these things!) Do you have any recommendations for funds that perform more strongly? Is the VLS60 preferable, for example? Thank you!

I can't recommend funds on here because I am authorised by the FCA and it isn't allowed.  However, I can comment generically and others that are not authorised can pretty much say what they like (and may fill in the gaps)  
If you have the risk attitude to VLS100 then a global tracker may likely be the better alternative.  Not VLS60 as that completely changes your risk approach.

I would argue that VLS20 and 40 were the worst funds in the series as who wants to be that heavy on bonds? 

If the investor was looking for lower volatility, then the other fund houses that have risk targetted funds may offer a better solution at the lower risk end.   VLS seems stronger in the 60-80 end than the 20-40 end.

[Deleted User]

dunstonh said:

Deleted_User said:

dunstonh said:

Deleted_User said:

whatstheplan said:

I've recently started investing and, given my goals and circumstances, I opted for the Vanguard LS100 fund as for me, holding 20% bonds didn't make much sense.  I put cash into my stocks and shares ISA at the tail end of tax year 20/21 and will put more in during 21/22.  I've decided to invest all of my 20/21 allocation into the LS100 fund and in parallel will continue to educate myself on other options.  I might then elect to invest my 21/22 allocation into something different or it might end up also going into the LS100 fund if I conclude that's best for me.

I am similar - opted for LS100 last year and it was a great decision. Can't comment on the other funds held by Vanguard but I did some research beforehand and Vanguard LS was very often praised. LS60 or LS80 might be preferable but I'm in it for the long haul (also, I had very little knowledge of investing but found LS to be easy to navigate. Good luck!

Although VLS100 is the weakest of the VLS range. It is the only one that isn't a multi-asset fund. Instead it is a global managed fund and that means it is compared with other global funds, in particular global trackers.  It doesn't do so well up against them as the rest of the VLS range does against other multi-asset funds.

@dunstonh,
Thank you for this! Excuse my ignorance, but I thought the VLS100 was a strong fund (though admittedly don't know much about these things!) Do you have any recommendations for funds that perform more strongly? Is the VLS60 preferable, for example? Thank you!

I can't recommend funds on here because I am authorised by the FCA and it isn't allowed.  However, I can comment generically and others that are not authorised can pretty much say what they like (and may fill in the gaps)  
If you have the risk attitude to VLS100 then a global tracker may likely be the better alternative.  Not VLS60 as that completely changes your risk approach.

I would argue that VLS20 and 40 were the worst funds in the series as who wants to be that heavy on bonds? 

If the investor was looking for lower volatility, then the other fund houses that have risk targetted funds may offer a better solution at the lower risk end.   VLS seems stronger in the 60-80 end than the 20-40 end.

Ah, thank you. Sorry, wasn't aware of the rules but this is very helpful. I'm not risk averse, as intend to invest for the long term so VLS20 and 40 are not for me at this time. 

Thrugelmir

Deleted_User said:

dunstonh said:

Deleted_User said:

dunstonh said:

Deleted_User said:

whatstheplan said:

I've recently started investing and, given my goals and circumstances, I opted for the Vanguard LS100 fund as for me, holding 20% bonds didn't make much sense.  I put cash into my stocks and shares ISA at the tail end of tax year 20/21 and will put more in during 21/22.  I've decided to invest all of my 20/21 allocation into the LS100 fund and in parallel will continue to educate myself on other options.  I might then elect to invest my 21/22 allocation into something different or it might end up also going into the LS100 fund if I conclude that's best for me.

I am similar - opted for LS100 last year and it was a great decision. Can't comment on the other funds held by Vanguard but I did some research beforehand and Vanguard LS was very often praised. LS60 or LS80 might be preferable but I'm in it for the long haul (also, I had very little knowledge of investing but found LS to be easy to navigate. Good luck!

Although VLS100 is the weakest of the VLS range. It is the only one that isn't a multi-asset fund. Instead it is a global managed fund and that means it is compared with other global funds, in particular global trackers.  It doesn't do so well up against them as the rest of the VLS range does against other multi-asset funds.

@dunstonh,
Thank you for this! Excuse my ignorance, but I thought the VLS100 was a strong fund (though admittedly don't know much about these things!) Do you have any recommendations for funds that perform more strongly? Is the VLS60 preferable, for example? Thank you!

I can't recommend funds on here because I am authorised by the FCA and it isn't allowed.  However, I can comment generically and others that are not authorised can pretty much say what they like (and may fill in the gaps)  
If you have the risk attitude to VLS100 then a global tracker may likely be the better alternative.  Not VLS60 as that completely changes your risk approach.

I would argue that VLS20 and 40 were the worst funds in the series as who wants to be that heavy on bonds? 

If the investor was looking for lower volatility, then the other fund houses that have risk targetted funds may offer a better solution at the lower risk end.   VLS seems stronger in the 60-80 end than the 20-40 end.

Ah, thank you. Sorry, wasn't aware of the rules but this is very helpful. I'm not risk averse, as intend to invest for the long term so VLS20 and 40 are not for me at this time. 

The Target Retirement fund range would allow you to be hands off portfolio management. . 

Alexland

Deleted_User said:

This is really helpful, thank you. In that case, would you recommend staying put with the VLS100 or diversifying with another fund (of which I know very little about)?

You will find most of us never go as far as recommending anything but comment in general terms and maybe say what we do for our circumstances, objectives, knowledge and engagement levels and give a few pointers for consideration. The VLS funds are professionally constructed to be single fund solutions so no need to add more funds unless you want a particular tilt.

coastline

Deleted_User said:

Alexland said:

Deleted_User said:
Excuse my ignorance, but I thought the VLS100 was a strong fund

The UK bias in the VLS range has caused them to underperform in recent years. I would argue that VLS20 and 40 were the worst funds in the series as who wants to be that heavy on bonds? Until recently a global tracker would be clearly more preferable than VLS100 but as US valuations are looking so high there's an argument that VLS100 might now be a fairly good choice if you want 100% equities exposure as there's a fair chance we are heading towards a period in which the US disappoints.

This is really helpful, thank you. In that case, would you recommend staying put with the VLS100 or diversifying with another fund (of which I know very little about)?

VLS 100 has performed reasonably well over the last year. From the performance table under the chart its shows recent returns. Set the chart to 1year or less for another view. Maybe bookmark the link.

Chart Tool | Trustnet

As suggested above if you wanted a bit less in the UK then the Vanguard Global Tracker might be the answer.

Chart Tool | Trustnet

[Deleted User]

coastline said:

Deleted_User said:

Alexland said:

Deleted_User said:
Excuse my ignorance, but I thought the VLS100 was a strong fund

The UK bias in the VLS range has caused them to underperform in recent years. I would argue that VLS20 and 40 were the worst funds in the series as who wants to be that heavy on bonds? Until recently a global tracker would be clearly more preferable than VLS100 but as US valuations are looking so high there's an argument that VLS100 might now be a fairly good choice if you want 100% equities exposure as there's a fair chance we are heading towards a period in which the US disappoints.

This is really helpful, thank you. In that case, would you recommend staying put with the VLS100 or diversifying with another fund (of which I know very little about)?

VLS 100 has performed reasonably well over the last year. From the performance table under the chart its shows recent returns. Set the chart to 1year or less for another view. Maybe bookmark the link.

Chart Tool | Trustnet

@coastline and @Alexland thank you both for this. I can appreciate why you wouldn't recommend products, especially since circumstances and investing goals can vary so much. I agree that the VLS100 has performed well over the last year so probably no need to change funds at this point.

Thrugelmir

One year stats are generally misleading.  34% return looks impressive. Less so when the 3 year return is just 40%. The Covid global market blip was the time to buy. Though many didn't and the opportunity quickly passed.