Your Biggest Investment Losses

talexuser

Worst investment was Morgan Grenfell European, it doubled for me in a few years, and many piled in as it climbed. Then it turned out that some investments were fiction and it halved in a day. Had to be taken over by another firm, performance never went anywhere so it wasn't worth hanging on, The Morgan Grenfell name was poison so the firm folded, and the manager turned up in court in women's clothes with a ga-ga defence and more or less got away with it. 
Those were the glory days of Jupiter Income when Woodford made bundles for his investors, and at least Grenfell was only one fund in 9 or 10 for me.

jimjames

Saga said:

I can't think of any situation in recent times where someone who diversified, didn't panic and held long term would have lost "a lot" of their investment...

Sounds too good to be true 😊 Sorry, couldn't resist.

But it's the whole premise of investing long term isn't it? I'm not sure what's too good to be true, compounding isn't magic but there are periods where your investment could be lower than the amount you put in. Long term that shouldn't be the case but isn't guaranteed. 

Thrugelmir

Poly Peck a stock market darling.  FTSE100 company. 100% loss. 

Ultimately companies are all about people. Whether it be Maxwell Publishing, Northern Rock, RBS, Wirecard, Enron , Lehman Brothers, MG Rover group.  Or names previously mentioned. Quality and integrity of the management is key. 

_theinsider

Probably buying lastminute.com shares at the IPO. Not a huge £ loss but probably my biggest % loss on an individual stock. I saw the light some time after that and now stick strictly to trackers rather than buying individual shares.

Alexland

I have never made any notable losses from having a sensible long term investment strategy although the gradual erosion of return in the past from not having a keener eye on costs, asset allocation and tax efficiency was a hidden drag. Similarly, I was in a small share club at work for a few years where we picked shares and although we made money it was underperforming the market. A few other investments have underperformed but not by much.

In more recent years my biggest cost has probably been dismissing some well qualified opportunities in the active space in particular SMT and Fundsmith that did so well in recent years. It would have been worth being more adventurous. I was never going to invest in Woodford's fund as the strategy didn't make coherent sense. SMT was, and still is, too high risk for me but I should have got over the high PE, price/book ratio and charges found in Fundsmith which still looks a pretty solid choice even if interest rates and inflation pick up that will only be a minor setback to those companies. I remember years ago one of my best friends telling me about their Microsoft employee share options and thinking how nice that would be - not to get the shares discounted or for free but to have the chance to hold investments in such a high quality company with above average future prospects. Earnings growth in the US seems to be better than expected this year so I can now see a path to valuations getting back to reasonable (unless the prices get pushed further which is more likely) without needing any big crashes to correct so maybe I should do it.

london21

Invested in M&S sharesave scheme and when I left I was sentimental and did not reduce my holdings or diversify.

Over time shares dropped massively.

5 years ago made the biggest financial mistake buying penny mining  shares, I was not informed or educated about and invested large amounts = huge loss.

Started over again 2-3 years ago and now only invest in passive low cost funds.

Much more knowledgeable now and do extensive due diligence. I do not follow the crowd but make my own informed financial decisions.

Novice_investor101

Not me personally, I stick to the very mainstream global equity trackers now. 

At work I’ve seen many people with investments in the Woodford fund & VT Garroway, which i think was City Financial. Equity funds that folded & appear to be practically “lost it all” funds. 

bostonerimus

I'm pretty much a broad index tracker investor so my failures aren't about what I bought, but when I bought or sold. In 2008 I lost a lot before I rebalanced at Dow around 10500, and I kept rebalancing all the way down to 6000. By the time things were done my pot had lost 30%. But all the equities I bought at 6000 are now looking good as the Dow is around 35000 today. So short term losses can become long term gains...that's a truism for diverse funds, but sometimes not the case for single stocks.

Saga

jimjames said:

Saga said:

I can't think of any situation in recent times where someone who diversified, didn't panic and held long term would have lost "a lot" of their investment...

Sounds too good to be true 😊 Sorry, couldn't resist.

But it's the whole premise of investing long term isn't it? I'm not sure what's too good to be true, compounding isn't magic but there are periods where your investment could be lower than the amount you put in. Long term that shouldn't be the case but isn't guaranteed. 

It was a – obviously very poor – play on your signature...

Audaxer

Saga said:

It's always made very clear that investing isn't saving and your capital is always at risk.  What tends to be missing, for newbie/potential investors, are actual real life cautionary tales of ordinary everyday sensible people who have invested at an appropriate level of risk for them, not tried to beat the market, not panicked, played the 10+ year long game etc etc but who still lost a lot of their investment.

I'm sure we have all made mistakes in investing, but I think the investors who will have lost a lot of their investment will mostly be those that did panic and sold during an equity crash.