We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide

need suggestions for some reputable actively managed funds?

124»

Comments

  • bostonerimus
    bostonerimus Posts: 5,617 Forumite
    Sixth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    robatwork said:
    dunstonh said:
    Funnily enough, even back when they were trading, many did question how they could afford to offer guaranteed annuity rates that were so much higher than the rest.  There were claims of it being too good to be true but as GARs were still under market rates, no-one predicted that things would change so much and suddenly GARs would become an expensive liability. Those voices were ignored.

    Back in those days, the marketing men ran the bonus rates.  Not the accountants and actuaries. 

    My point that I've made before is that the man-on-the-street-or-omnibus/unsophisticated investor should always look away from the lone voices but to the institutions setup to rate and oversee the financial companies.  In the case of Equitable, those were Standard & Poor and Micropal (and I am sure others). How would that person know to ignore the gold plated ratings and listen to the voices?  I wasn't attracted to EL by the guaranteed rates, but instead by my father who also told me what a fine institution it was...

    I expect and hope things are better now, because fundamentally a lot of people want to believe someone out there really wants them to get rich, whereas the reality is the opposite.   To the OP I'd say if you're here then you're half way to knowing enough to do it all yourself (and that could be in a low cost tracker). No fund manager wants you to make money more than you.
    Regulation and the independence of organizations like S&P is key; unfortunately both of those have been lacking in the greatest abuses like leading up to 2008.

    Hubris and the desire of fund managers and financial firms to "make money" sometimes produces a Woodford or an Equitable situation, although there are other less spectacular examples who die a smaller and quieter death.

    Fundamentally all investment strategies come down to asset allocation whether you have an active or index fund. So the investor must have some understanding of how their money is invested and then they should stick with reputable companies, thankfully Equitiable is not a common occurrence.
    “So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 354K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 247K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.3K Life & Family
  • 261.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.