Vanguard Life Strategy performance

dean350

These investments are for the long term and the price to pay for long term performance is short term volatility. Over the last 9 years my returns have ranged from -15% to plus 37%. Thats for a portfolio thats been about 80% diversified global equities and 20% cash. We have gone into a period of high rates which are not good for neither shares nor bonds. All things pass though and I expect that towards the end of this decade we will have seen some years with good gains.

16.00
0.00
22.00
4.00
8.00
-15.00
37.00
2.20
-4.00

jicms

El_Torro said:

I’m not a fan of VLS, mainly because of the high UK weighting in the equities. I do use VLS, but also use HSBC Global Strategy and Fidelity Multi Asset Alllocator to dilute the UK equities. 

If you are happy with VLS’s composition then don’t make changes, if you’re not happy with it then do. I wouldn’t base your decision on the performance of the last 2 years though, especially since you don’t seem to have compared the performance with other similar multi asset funds.

Thanks. I already hold HSBC GS and a Nutmeg fund and although they've fallen substantially are still in credit which is why I was concerned about VLS which I thought would be the safer bet.

I was aware and a bit concerned about the UK weighting but as the reviews were good regardless I went for it. 

jicms

Albermarle said:

jicms said:

I have held Vanguard LS 60% and 80% equity acc ISAs for over two years. They are still down around 1.2% and have never performed well.  Can't seem to find any recent information on them. They were always considered one of the safer options. Any advice on whether I should just cut my losses and move elsewhere. 

Investing is a long term game, two years is not long term .
Not sure where you have been looking for info on them. If you search google you will get loads of direct hits.

I couldn't find any up-to-date info. 

masonic

jicms said:

Albermarle said:

jicms said:

I have held Vanguard LS 60% and 80% equity acc ISAs for over two years. They are still down around 1.2% and have never performed well.  Can't seem to find any recent information on them. They were always considered one of the safer options. Any advice on whether I should just cut my losses and move elsewhere. 

Investing is a long term game, two years is not long term .
Not sure where you have been looking for info on them. If you search google you will get loads of direct hits.

I couldn't find any up-to-date info. 

You can use Trustnet to get up to date info and compare performance with other funds. For example https://www2.trustnet.com/Tools/Charting.aspx?typeCode=FACDT,FACDQ,FACDV,FACDO

GazzaBloom

Or Morningstar:

Vanguard LifeStrategy 80% Equity Fund A Acc|GB00B4PQW151 (morningstar.co.uk)

Performance tab shows positive returns for 3 months, 6 months, YTD, 1 year, 3 year, 5 year, 10 year.

Keep_pedalling

GazzaBloom said:

Or Morningstar:

Vanguard LifeStrategy 80% Equity Fund A Acc|GB00B4PQW151 (morningstar.co.uk)

Performance tab shows positive returns for 3 months, 6 months, YTD, 1 year, 3 year, 5 year, 10 year.

And if you look at that chart buying 2 years ago you had the misfortune to buy at very top. Had you purchased 3 or one year ago you would not be asking this question. 

dunstonh

jicms said:

El_Torro said:

I’m not a fan of VLS, mainly because of the high UK weighting in the equities. I do use VLS, but also use HSBC Global Strategy and Fidelity Multi Asset Alllocator to dilute the UK equities. 

If you are happy with VLS’s composition then don’t make changes, if you’re not happy with it then do. I wouldn’t base your decision on the performance of the last 2 years though, especially since you don’t seem to have compared the performance with other similar multi asset funds.

Thanks. I already hold HSBC GS and a Nutmeg fund and although they've fallen substantially are still in credit which is why I was concerned about VLS which I thought would be the safer bet.

I was aware and a bit concerned about the UK weighting but as the reviews were good regardless I went for it. 

Where did you see such reviews?

The internet is full of biased articles.  It is also full of out-of-date articles.  Vanguard do have some very good funds and once upon a time, the VLS range was the market leader in terms of quality.   But they are also one of those brands that has a cult following who believe that Vanguard is the only option.   So, you see some websites or youtube videos where they wax lyrical about Vanguard and everything else is bad.

However, your problem isn't whether you should have VLS or HSBC GS (Nutmeg seems a bit pointless but again its not your root problem). Your problem is looking at short term info when you need to be looking medium to long term.

older_and_no_wiser

jicms said:

Thanks. I already hold HSBC GS and a Nutmeg fund and although they've fallen substantially are still in credit which is why I was concerned about VLS which I thought would be the safer bet.

Which HSBC GS fund do you hold? There are a number of options (similar to Vanguard LS) covering different risk/volatility levels. I prefer the HSBC GS funds as they are less UK focussed and more globally diversified. 

handful

I've got some of my SIPP invested in VLS 100. Since March last year when I bought it's up 5.5% but if I had bought 2 years ago it would probably still be showing a loss. It's really important to compare windows using the exact same dates for that reason.

JohnWinder

your problem isn't whether you should have VLS or HSBC GS (Nutmeg seems a bit pointless but again its not your root problem). Your problem is looking at short term info when you need to be looking medium to long term.’

I’ll offer another perspective on this. If you saw the same disappointing performance of VLS vs HSBC GS over 10 or 12 years (is that ‘medium’ or ‘long’ enough?) you’d still be wrong to be making portfolio changes on that basis, if the ‘cycle’ is 15 years. And there are longer cycles too, such as value stocks outperforming growth stocks, or small vs large. The crux of your problem was suggested earlier:

not the funds that are the problem.  Its your knowledge.    So, what you should do is read and learn about investing.’

Except I’d say learn ‘more’ about investing.
Unless you have a deep enough knowledge and understanding of personal investing, and not hard to achieve, you don’t have the basis to make suitable choices or the conviction to stand by them when doubt arises. ‘Good reviews’ aren’t enough to base choices on, unless they’re systematically undertaken, explicit in their method and accord with your understanding. They’re rare birds, and it still requires you to know enough to appraise the review. And a bunch of us telling you to hold or swap won’t cut it either.
Penultimately, be comforted that no one has the perfect portfolio. Some of the time you’ll regret having so much in stocks, and the rest of the time regret having so much in bonds. But you have to stick by a plan to give it the best chance of delivering its results.
Finally, I’m indifferent to your choice of VLS or HSBC; but it’s not only a lot of UK stocks that’s the difference. HSBC actively alter their asset mix to suit their predictions (‘Employs active asset allocation; designed to tilt portfolios… into areas of expected outperformance’). I think it’s called ‘tactical asset allocation’, and it’s very hard to pull off profitably (for the investors, not the fund managers) https://www.pm-research.com/content/iijindinv/12/2/47
Vanguard doesn’t for the VLS series. They used to, couldn’t make it work, and went to fixed allocations. Make of that what you will.
But you’re really up against it if one doesn’t have the best understanding that’s it’s practical to get.