Rebalancing portfolio

Aged

I have started looking at my retirement portfolio with a view to 'fixing' it, and getting it ready to provide me with an income for what's left of my life. I simply do not have enough trust in financial advisers to go through the process of choosing another one at random. If an IFA were to come along with a recommendation from someone I trusted I would be delighted to hand it over, but that isn't going to happen so I must go it alone. 
There's a big hole where the Woodford Fund used to be and a fair bit of cash sloshing around from what's been returned. I reckon that the most important job is to replace that with another equity fund, and since almost everything in the portfolio was UK, I figure that a global equity fund would fit the bill nicely. I've been studying and looking at the various active funds like Fundsmith, Trojan Global Income etc etc but it seems impossible to tell whether a fund is 'good' or not. One source might list x as a 'best fund' then when you look at another source, they only give it one star. Under the circumstances, I think I may be best to stick with tracker funds and HSBC FTSE All World Index C seems to be highly regarded. Is there any reason why this course of action would be a disaster? I really hope someone can help.

El_Torro

A global tracker fund can be very suitable, depending on your circumstances. It’s volatile, so you might want something less volatile depending on your age and whether you regularly need to access your investments to live off.

Aged

El_Torro said:

A global tracker fund can be very suitable, depending on your circumstances. It’s volatile, so you might want something less volatile depending on your age and whether you regularly need to access your investments to live off.

But as part of a balanced portfolio? 

MX5huggy

If you had 100% in HSBC All World you could call it balanced. Add a global bond fund and that’s it. All you’ve got to decide is the balance between the 2 and when to rebalance. 

El_Torro

Aged said:

But as part of a balanced portfolio? 

Short answer: Sure, that's fine. 

Longer answer: Without knowing your circumstances, what your other investments are, how much you want to invest in a global tracker, how much cash, etc... you have and how much you plan to live on it's not really possible for us to comment or suggest anything.

Aged

El_Torro said:

Aged said:

But as part of a balanced portfolio? 

Short answer: Sure, that's fine. 

Longer answer: Without knowing your circumstances, what your other investments are, how much you want to invest in a global tracker, how much cash, etc... you have and how much you plan to live on it's not really possible for us to comment or suggest anything.

Basically all I'm proposing to do at this point in time is to restore the existing elements of the portfolio back to their original weightings, and replace the missing one (a UK equity income fund) with a global equity income fund. 

masonic

Aged said:

El_Torro said:

Aged said:

But as part of a balanced portfolio? 

Short answer: Sure, that's fine. 

Longer answer: Without knowing your circumstances, what your other investments are, how much you want to invest in a global tracker, how much cash, etc... you have and how much you plan to live on it's not really possible for us to comment or suggest anything.

Basically all I'm proposing to do at this point in time is to restore the existing elements of the portfolio back to their original weightings, and replace the missing one (a UK equity income fund) with a global equity income fund. 

Without knowledge of any of the "existing elements of the portfolio" or the size of hole left by the missing one, and without knowing whether the Woodford fund was 5% or 95% of your original portfolio, it is impossible to comment, but if the rest of your portfolio was invested in UK equities and you're proposing to end up with 80+% UK equities and 20% or less global, then I'd suggest that is not very balanced.

Aged

masonic said:

Aged said:

Basically all I'm proposing to do at this point in time is to restore the existing elements of the portfolio back to their original weightings, and replace the missing one (a UK equity income fund) with a global equity income fund. 

Without knowledge of any of the "existing elements of the portfolio" or the size of hole left by the missing one, and without knowing whether the Woodford fund was 5% or 95% of your original portfolio, it is impossible to comment, but if the rest of your portfolio was invested in UK equities and you're proposing to end up with 80+% UK equities and 20% or less global, then I'd suggest that is not very balanced.

There were 10 holdings. Woodford accounted for 1/10th of the portfolio. 4 x equity funds accounted for 40% - all UK. Fixed Interest 20%. UK Property 10%. Cash 10%. Mixed Investments 20%. This is just one step - I'm trying to get some more equity income rolling in, and to get away from being too heavily reliant on UK equity income. 

masonic

Aged said:

masonic said:

Aged said:

Basically all I'm proposing to do at this point in time is to restore the existing elements of the portfolio back to their original weightings, and replace the missing one (a UK equity income fund) with a global equity income fund. 

Without knowledge of any of the "existing elements of the portfolio" or the size of hole left by the missing one, and without knowing whether the Woodford fund was 5% or 95% of your original portfolio, it is impossible to comment, but if the rest of your portfolio was invested in UK equities and you're proposing to end up with 80+% UK equities and 20% or less global, then I'd suggest that is not very balanced.

There were 10 holdings. Woodford accounted for 1/10th of the portfolio. 4 x equity funds accounted for 40% - all UK. Fixed Interest 20%. UK Property 10%. Cash 10%. Mixed Investments 20%. This is just one step - I'm trying to get some more equity income rolling in, and to get away from being too heavily reliant on UK equity income. 

So from 40% equities, all UK to 10% global, 30% UK. That's a step in the right direction, but the proportion of companies listed in overseas markets paying a high dividend is considerably more limited, so it may make more sense to go global with a more general fund.

bostonerimus

masonic said:

Aged said:

masonic said:

Aged said:

Basically all I'm proposing to do at this point in time is to restore the existing elements of the portfolio back to their original weightings, and replace the missing one (a UK equity income fund) with a global equity income fund. 

Without knowledge of any of the "existing elements of the portfolio" or the size of hole left by the missing one, and without knowing whether the Woodford fund was 5% or 95% of your original portfolio, it is impossible to comment, but if the rest of your portfolio was invested in UK equities and you're proposing to end up with 80+% UK equities and 20% or less global, then I'd suggest that is not very balanced.

There were 10 holdings. Woodford accounted for 1/10th of the portfolio. 4 x equity funds accounted for 40% - all UK. Fixed Interest 20%. UK Property 10%. Cash 10%. Mixed Investments 20%. This is just one step - I'm trying to get some more equity income rolling in, and to get away from being too heavily reliant on UK equity income. 

So from 40% equities, all UK to 10% global, 30% UK. That's a step in the right direction, but the proportion of companies listed in overseas markets paying a high dividend is considerably more limited, so it may make more sense to go global with a more general fund.

I think it should be closer to 10% UK and 30% Global Equity...probably even less of a UK weighting. I'd take this opportunity to reduce the number of holdings. Is it really necessary to have 3 or 4 x UK equity funds?

Aged

masonic said:

Aged said:

There were 10 holdings. Woodford accounted for 1/10th of the portfolio. 4 x equity funds accounted for 40% - all UK. Fixed Interest 20%. UK Property 10%. Cash 10%. Mixed Investments 20%. This is just one step - I'm trying to get some more equity income rolling in, and to get away from being too heavily reliant on UK equity income. 

So from 40% equities, all UK to 10% global, 30% UK. That's a step in the right direction, but the proportion of companies listed in overseas markets paying a high dividend is considerably more limited, so it may make more sense to go global with a more general fund.

Can you explain what you mean by 'more general' please?