For a novice is Vanguard Lifestrategy 60 Isa and Lifestrategy 80 SIPP a reasonable combination?

Albermarle

25_Years_On said:

masonic said:

However, using such an argument to suggest that opting for 100% equities is the best option would be misguided. As would be an assertion that bonds are just as risky as equities just because both had fallen to the same extent over the short term. Unusual times admittedly, but "past performance is no guide to the future" has perhaps never been so prescient.

Yes I agree. It's more about the right balance. I'm in with VLS 60/40 and 80/20 but if I was recommending I'd go for 80/20 and I'm not sure that the 40/60 or 20/80 are good options in these times.

I think it is probably more accurate to say ' 40/60 & 20/80 have not been the best options in recent months, but in future nobody knows' If the stock markets were to crash badly and not recover quickly, they would probably be better options.

25_Years_On

Albermarle said:

I think it is probably more accurate to say ' 40/60 & 20/80 have not been the best options in recent months, but in future nobody knows' If the stock markets were to crash badly and not recover quickly, they would probably be better options.

True but I'm guessing that if interest rates continue to rise as expected bonds will be less attractive for a while longer.

dunstonh

25_Years_On said:

Albermarle said:

I think it is probably more accurate to say ' 40/60 & 20/80 have not been the best options in recent months, but in future nobody knows' If the stock markets were to crash badly and not recover quickly, they would probably be better options.

True but I'm guessing that if interest rates continue to rise as expected bonds will be less attractive for a while longer.

No.

Expected rises are already priced in.  it is unexpected rises (~or falls) that will cause further movements.

Milkmaid1

Albermarle said:

25_Years_On said:

masonic said:

However, using such an argument to suggest that opting for 100% equities is the best option would be misguided. As would be an assertion that bonds are just as risky as equities just because both had fallen to the same extent over the short term. Unusual times admittedly, but "past performance is no guide to the future" has perhaps never been so prescient.

Yes I agree. It's more about the right balance. I'm in with VLS 60/40 and 80/20 but if I was recommending I'd go for 80/20 and I'm not sure that the 40/60 or 20/80 are good options in these times.

I think it is probably more accurate to say ' 40/60 & 20/80 have not been the best options in recent months, but in future nobody knows' If the stock markets were to crash badly and not recover quickly, they would probably be better options.

Thanks again to everyone for their comments. Given that I am comfortable with risk level of the LS 60 that I already have in the ISA,  is there anything to stop me opening another LS60 in the SIPP too? Thinking just keeping things simple. Thank you

masonic

Milkmaid1 said:

Albermarle said:

25_Years_On said:

masonic said:

However, using such an argument to suggest that opting for 100% equities is the best option would be misguided. As would be an assertion that bonds are just as risky as equities just because both had fallen to the same extent over the short term. Unusual times admittedly, but "past performance is no guide to the future" has perhaps never been so prescient.

Yes I agree. It's more about the right balance. I'm in with VLS 60/40 and 80/20 but if I was recommending I'd go for 80/20 and I'm not sure that the 40/60 or 20/80 are good options in these times.

I think it is probably more accurate to say ' 40/60 & 20/80 have not been the best options in recent months, but in future nobody knows' If the stock markets were to crash badly and not recover quickly, they would probably be better options.

Thanks again to everyone for their comments. Given that I am comfortable with risk level of the LS 60 that I already have in the ISA,  is there anything to stop me opening another LS60 in the SIPP too? Thinking just keeping things simple. Thank you

There's no harm in doing that. It's a fund that is designed to be held on its own.

Milkmaid1

masonic said:

Milkmaid1 said:

Albermarle said:

25_Years_On said:

masonic said:

However, using such an argument to suggest that opting for 100% equities is the best option would be misguided. As would be an assertion that bonds are just as risky as equities just because both had fallen to the same extent over the short term. Unusual times admittedly, but "past performance is no guide to the future" has perhaps never been so prescient.

Yes I agree. It's more about the right balance. I'm in with VLS 60/40 and 80/20 but if I was recommending I'd go for 80/20 and I'm not sure that the 40/60 or 20/80 are good options in these times.

I think it is probably more accurate to say ' 40/60 & 20/80 have not been the best options in recent months, but in future nobody knows' If the stock markets were to crash badly and not recover quickly, they would probably be better options.

Thanks again to everyone for their comments. Given that I am comfortable with risk level of the LS 60 that I already have in the ISA,  is there anything to stop me opening another LS60 in the SIPP too? Thinking just keeping things simple. Thank you

There's no harm in doing that. It's a fund that is designed to be held on its own.

Thanks Masonic, that’s what I’ll do. 

I’ve found all the replies on this thread most helpful to help me clarify what I want to do. Gratefully appreciated.