A question about investments and charges

MX5huggy

Millyonare said:

If you'd stuck that £80k in a simple US Nasdaq index tracker in Aug 2017, you'd now have about £200,000 in Mar 2023.

You would have also been told that the NASDAQ is at an all time high and it’s only a matter of time before the bubble bursts and its value halves. 

Keep_pedalling

overcharged123 said:

wmb194 said:

How many more years does it have left to run? I.e. when your children will receive it.

There are four children with ages between 14 and 23.  I will tell each of them about the fund when they are in a position to need it for eg a house purchase.  So the eldest may want it in a few years but the youngest will perhaps not need it for 15 years.   I haven’t told them yet because they will think 20K!!! and perhaps feel they don’t have to work so hard. 

Was this your inheritance that you put in trust or did the testator leave this to be held in a discretionary trust for the children or were the children left a share of this money sbsolutely?

Millyonare

MX5huggy said:

Millyonare said:

If you'd stuck that £80k in a simple US Nasdaq index tracker in Aug 2017, you'd now have about £200,000 in Mar 2023.

You would have also been told that the NASDAQ is at an all time high and it’s only a matter of time before the bubble bursts and its value halves. 

That depends on whether you invest with an optimistic US mindset of confident success... or a doomloop UK mindset of anxious hysteria that always thinks misery and decline is lurking around every corner.

An optimistic US mindset will tell you that US stockmarket highs are usually followed by, err, more stockmarket highs.

The Nasdaq has grown for 82% of every year since the 1980s. It's up +6,300% between 1984 and 2024 (excluding dividends). They are good odds. Returns are (and remain today) remarkable.

masonic

Millyonare said:

MX5huggy said:

Millyonare said:

If you'd stuck that £80k in a simple US Nasdaq index tracker in Aug 2017, you'd now have about £200,000 in Mar 2023.

You would have also been told that the NASDAQ is at an all time high and it’s only a matter of time before the bubble bursts and its value halves. 

That depends on whether you invest with an optimistic US mindset of confident success... or a doomloop UK mindset of anxious hysteria that always thinks misery and decline is lurking around every corner.

An optimistic US mindset will tell you that US stockmarket highs are usually followed by, err, more stockmarket highs.

The Nasdaq has grown for 82% of every year since the 1980s. It's up +6,300% between 1984 and 2024 (excluding dividends). They are good odds. Returns are (and remain today) remarkable.

Most people, I'd venture including the OP, do not have an optimistic US mindset that would enable them to invest in 100% equities, let alone single sector equities. No matter how remarkable long term returns have been in the past, the crashes are too scary a prospect for them to sleep at night.

In any case, nobody knows when the US will cede its outperformance to some other market.

Millyonare

masonic said:

Millyonare said:

MX5huggy said:

Millyonare said:

If you'd stuck that £80k in a simple US Nasdaq index tracker in Aug 2017, you'd now have about £200,000 in Mar 2023.

You would have also been told that the NASDAQ is at an all time high and it’s only a matter of time before the bubble bursts and its value halves. 

That depends on whether you invest with an optimistic US mindset of confident success... or a doomloop UK mindset of anxious hysteria that always thinks misery and decline is lurking around every corner.

An optimistic US mindset will tell you that US stockmarket highs are usually followed by, err, more stockmarket highs.

The Nasdaq has grown for 82% of every year since the 1980s. It's up +6,300% between 1984 and 2024 (excluding dividends). They are good odds. Returns are (and remain today) remarkable.

Most people, I'd venture including the OP, do not have an optimistic US mindset that would enable them to invest in 100% equities, let alone single sector equities. No matter how remarkable long term returns have been in the past, the crashes are too scary a prospect for them to sleep at night.

In any case, nobody knows when the US will cede its outperformance to some other market.

An over-cautious approach has lost out on around £116,000. I, and I'm sure many others, would happily have a few semi-sleepless nights for raking in £116k 👍

masonic

Millyonare said:

masonic said:

Millyonare said:

MX5huggy said:

Millyonare said:

If you'd stuck that £80k in a simple US Nasdaq index tracker in Aug 2017, you'd now have about £200,000 in Mar 2023.

You would have also been told that the NASDAQ is at an all time high and it’s only a matter of time before the bubble bursts and its value halves. 

That depends on whether you invest with an optimistic US mindset of confident success... or a doomloop UK mindset of anxious hysteria that always thinks misery and decline is lurking around every corner.

An optimistic US mindset will tell you that US stockmarket highs are usually followed by, err, more stockmarket highs.

The Nasdaq has grown for 82% of every year since the 1980s. It's up +6,300% between 1984 and 2024 (excluding dividends). They are good odds. Returns are (and remain today) remarkable.

Most people, I'd venture including the OP, do not have an optimistic US mindset that would enable them to invest in 100% equities, let alone single sector equities. No matter how remarkable long term returns have been in the past, the crashes are too scary a prospect for them to sleep at night.

In any case, nobody knows when the US will cede its outperformance to some other market.

An over-cautious approach has lost out on around £116,000. I, and I'm sure many others, would happily have a few semi-sleepless nights for raking in £116k 👍

I dare say that you would have had quite a few sleepless nights in 2000-2001 having watched your portfolio tumble 82%. Those who have not personally invested through a major crash often overestimate their risk tolerance.

Hopefully you'll be around posting motivational optimism when the market next crashes. The forum could do with that. Things often take quite a negative tone in those times.

dunstonh

I dare say that you would have had quite a few sleepless nights in 2000-2001 having watched your portfolio tumble 82%. Those who have not personally invested through a major crash often overestimate their risk tolerance.

And those investing in 2000 still being lower than their initial investment at the end of 2009 a decade later.

MX5huggy

Millyonare said:

MX5huggy said:

Millyonare said:

If you'd stuck that £80k in a simple US Nasdaq index tracker in Aug 2017, you'd now have about £200,000 in Mar 2023.

You would have also been told that the NASDAQ is at an all time high and it’s only a matter of time before the bubble bursts and its value halves. 

That depends on whether you invest with an optimistic US mindset of confident success... or a doomloop UK mindset of anxious hysteria that always thinks misery and decline is lurking around every corner.

An optimistic US mindset will tell you that US stockmarket highs are usually followed by, err, more stockmarket highs.

The Nasdaq has grown for 82% of every year since the 1980s. It's up +6,300% between 1984 and 2024 (excluding dividends). They are good odds. Returns are (and remain today) remarkable.

What mindset should I have had in Japan in 1989? 

JohnWinder

I am kicking myself for being naive but I thought I could trust'

Stop kicking, I know what you can do. Personal investing is a breeze now with good ready-made investment products available to ordinary folk at low prices. You just need to know a bit about asset classes, how they behave and how best to match them to your needs. Read Tim Hale's book Smarter Investing, written for people in UK and all you will need to do as a good a job at choosing investments as most advisors or the like. Read a few pages from the book at google books for a taste, and find a local library where you can borrow it: search.worldcat.org

'but the platform and the financial advisor have each earned about £6k from my investment while its value has only increased by £4k.  The charges seem to be high and the gains quite low.'

Beware bad thinking here. Yes, fees are important. Yes, poor returns are bad. But don't judge the fees based on the returns, in the way that 'I don't mind high fees if the returns are great' or 'I shouldn't pay high fees for low returns' suggests.  Fees and returns need separate considerations.

Choose the lower fee options when you find something suitable, yes. But first find something suitable based on your understanding of personal investing - read Hale. It might be that something suitable for me or you has low returns for a few years, but that doesn't mean the original choice was wrong, because returns aren't guaranteed usually and often have a wide distribution over periods of many years. There's a bit of luck involved, or the play of chance actually as Japanese stock investors found out when their market went backwards for 30 years which can teach us some lessons - read Hale.

'What would you do in my position?'

Now you know. Nothing until you read Hale's book.

And ignore a Nasdaq index tracker if it was a suggestion. Would have been great advice 6 years ago, but it's 6 years too late now, or even 7 years if it's 2024.

jimjames

overcharged123 said:

dunstonh said:

The fund itself has gone off the boil. Its a managed fund of fund and its been off the boil for some time.  

Maybe I would have thought the adviser would have recommended a switch out of that fund if they are doing annual reviews.   Although you say it was taken out in 2017 but the fund was already notably poor compared to other similar.   Also, the chosen offshore bond held may limit the investment options.       I have several old offshore bonds that I have inherited over the years  (i.e. put in place by someone else) and often find the fund range is rubbish and you are having to compromise but you can't bust the trust due to tax). 

The financial advisor’s reviews aren’t annual, but every 2 or 3 years.  He has recently contacted me to arrange another, which is why I decided to look at the situation now, before the trust pays out another £500 for the review plus £500 in August for his annual charge.

What are these 2 charges that appear to be for much the same thing? Is the annual £500 the platform charge? You refer to his annual charge so what is he charging for annually on a multi asset fund and how does the review differ?