My SaS ISA portfolio, any thoughts?

Flatulentoldgoat

Just wondering what people's thoughts might be on my portfolio as it stands...

SMT

BG American

BG Pacific

BG Health Innovation

iShares Edge MSCI World Value

VWRL

VFEM

I know there's some overlap but nevermind!

Steve182

I'm also a fan of BG, with SMT as a core holding.

However you've not said what % you have in each so hard for anyone to judge how well balanced it is.

Steve182

Also I see you have pretty much ignored the UK.


I would ignore UK large cap but I would include some UK small to mid cap in a managed fund.


I have some in BG UK growth fund

Flatulentoldgoat

Steve182 said:

I'm also a fan of BG, with SMT as a core holding.

However you've not said what % you have in each so hard for anyone to judge how well balanced it is.

Stupid maths question, remind me how do I calculate the distribution %? Ugh. I'm adding the portfolio up, times by 100 or something.

Roughly it's 35% VWRL, the rest divided equally by the other instruments.

Steve182

So if you had say £10K each in 6 investments and £34K in VWRL

The total amount in this example is £94K

£10K/£94K X 100% would give you 10.6% in the 6 smaller investments

£34K/£94K X 100% gives 36.1% in VWRL

Obviously does not quite add up to 100% due to rounding to 1 decimal place, but close enough.

Flatulentoldgoat

Here we go.

VFEM 11.5%
VWRL 27.5%
SMT 11.6%
BG American 10%
Ishares WV 16.6%
BG Pacific 13.9%
BG Health Innovation 8.7%

Steve182

I'm slightly disappointed that nobody else has stepped in here. I'm a growth focused investor and assessing appropriate diversity in equity portfolios is not my strong point.

I did google "Ishares WV" to try to understand what it meant but the search indirectly returned some graphic article about female athletes which I had to close as my wife was sitting next to me. I emphasise "indirectly" as I can no longer find it now she's gone to bed.

Joking aside, as a growth investor with high risk tolerance I don't see too much wrong with OP's portfolio other than the absence of a UK small to mid cap managed fund.

dunstonh

I'm slightly disappointed that nobody else has stepped in here. I'm a growth focused investor and assessing appropriate diversity in equity portfolios is not my strong point.

There has been a lot of similar threads recently and perhaps it is repeated subject fatigue.

I don't know if the op is following a model or just picking random numbers (suspect the latter).   It's a spread that you cannot immediately work out the underlying allocations.   So, its difficult to comment without actually putting some effort in.  It goes without saying that it's a very high risk spread (on conventional risk scales)

Thrugelmir

How did you select these investments initially?  

MaxiRobriguez

High concentration in US large cap through your VWRL, SMT and BG American funds, add on another 17% to US allocation if you meant ishares IWV which is US small cap. Suits some, but not me, I'd be underweight US personally. 

I don't mind a punt on EM and health innovation myself and those allocations seem aggressive but if you know the risks then fine.

I don't get the pacific inclusion - it doesn't really fit in with the rest of the portfolio which is heavy on growth.

There's no allocation to Europe or UK and no consideration of value stocks anywhere. If that's intentional then it's fine but if you've based the portfolio on chasing winners then you're too concentrated.

Is it a good portfolio? Who knows - as Thrugelmir asks, how did you select the investments? Knowing the answer to that will determine whether the portfolio is appropriate. 

underground99

MaxiRobriguez said:

I don't get the pacific inclusion - it doesn't really fit in with the rest of the portfolio which is heavy on growth.

The Pacific fund's top holdings include Tencent, JD.com, Meituan, Taiwan Semi, Samsung SDI? Seems quite in line with a portfolio heavy on growth - similar to the types of companies held in the other growth-heavy funds (e.g. SMT also holds Tencent and Meituan within its top ten)

There's no allocation to Europe or UK and no consideration of value stocks anywhere.

I'm don't understand the reason to focus away from Europe and UK which would only be represented at relatively small weights in the trackers or the odd holding within SMT. However, you can't say 'no consideration of value stocks' when one of the holdings is literally the MSCI World Value Factor index which uses a rigid formula to determine which stocks represent 'value'. It's just that there's no human vetoing the choices of what represents value.


But generally I agree with others that it is a list of funds that have 'had a good run' and there doesn't seem to be an obvious structure being followed in the selection or the ratios being used, so difficult to comment on what is trying to be achieved. It doesn't seem to be that the funds are being chosen for having low correlations to each other; more, 'spread half the money around using indexes and then throw the rest of the money at some high-conviction growth plays that focus on US or APAC or healthcare'.