Stocks and Shares ISA


(Matt) #41

What would be nice is some sort of way in which you can see your savings, and then that broken down into how much is at risk, how much risk that is (scale of 1 - 10) etc. That way, you can say “Okay, I have £20k in a safe rainy day ISA, and £30k in medium risk ISA”.


#42

For me, I never put money into stocks that I expect to need in less than 5 years.


(Matt) #43

Yep, they massively out performed any tracker:

LINDSELL TRAIN GLOBAL EQUITY CLASS D
20/08/15 to 20/08/16: 23.83%
20/08/16 to 20/08/17: 21.84%
20/08/17 to 20/08/18: 23.95%

HSBC FTSE 250 INDEX CLASS S
20/08/15 to 20/08/16: 5.87%
20/08/16 to 20/08/17: 12.60%
20/08/17 to 20/08/18: 7.54%

If trackers always worked better than private funds…why would private funds exist?


#44

You are comparing a global equity to a FTSE250?

Anyone can pick funds that have done well in the past. But you have no idea which funds are going to outperform in the future

Private funds exist to make their managers rich.

(EDIT that class D has a minimum investment of 200million with 0.54% fees)


(Alex Sherwood) #45

You’re not factoring fees in there. What I was hoping for was an overlay of the fund’s performance vs a relevant index..

And can we focus on funds that consumers can actually invest in please?


(Matt) #46

Meant to link the Class B: http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/funds/snapshot/snapshot.aspx?id=F00000MC3M

Even a global tracker doesn’t match it, so I’m not sure your point. Yes, you can’t guarantee how a fund will perform in the future, but you can surely use the reasoning that the manager will work to ensure the returns are maximised from it, hence why some funds massively outperform any tracker.


(Matt) #47

http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/funds/snapshot/snapshot.aspx?id=F00000MC3M


#48

3 years performance data is noise.

You can cherry pick all you like, but all rigorous studies show you will not pick the winners unless you are exceptionally lucky.

You can believe this or not, you will only find out at the end of your investing career when you realise you would have done better by simply investing in the market.


(Matt) #49

If that’s a given fact, then why do funds exist? :thinking:


#50

I answered that above - to make their owners/managers rich by taking your money.

Do you know which group of investors outperforms all others?

Dead ones. They don’t tinker.


(Shae Scott) #51

Could someone help, I’m interested in opening an account with Vanguard, But I have just started investing in tech using Plum. Plum have said its 24% returns I think, whats the return on the LifeStrategy 80?

I have no idea how this all works


( related to Monzo CEO, Investor in Monzo ) #52

are they bothered :slight_smile:


(Matt) #53

The numbers don’t add up for that logic though because you’re talking about hundreds of billions of dollars. Unless you throw down some numbers, it sounds near enough a conspiracy theory stating that funds are just a scam, especially if you consider that if a fund starts to underperform, you can just move to another one. Also, that fund has been running since 2011, so it’s not just 3 years of noise:
https://www.fidelity.co.uk/factsheets/Lindsell-Train-Global-Equity-Fund-B-Class-Shares/IE00B3NS4D25-GBP/?id=IE00B3NS4D25GBP&idType=isin&marketCode=&idCurrencyId=


#54

If plum can give 24% return year on year, every fund manager in the industry will invest in them!

They can’t - they will be showing you recent returns and we are in a bull market, everyone is doing well.

Lifestrategy have a web page, but from memory, they’ve hit around 11% for many many years.

I’ll take that over a 1 year at 24%


(Alex Sherwood) #55

I’ve already shared sources explaining the situation with you but you haven’t read them :pensive:


#56

How would you have known to pick that fund in 2011?


(Matt) #57

How would you know when to pick it in 2012/13/14? You can’t start moving the goal posts and go from “noise” to “potluck”. Reality is, if you had picked that fund in 2011, you would have outperformed the market, therefore global trackers may not always ensure the best returns in a 5 - 10 year period.


#58

I never claimed they would. I said that for most people they would. And the ones that outperform them were lucky in picking their active fund.

But give it another 10 years and I guarantee that fund will not be outperforming a tracker - so much so that I’ll give £500 to a charity of your choice if in 10 years they have outperformed the Vanguard Global Equity tracker costs included.

And FYI VWRL grew at 29.9% in 2016 compared to your cherry picked fund’s growth of approx 23%.


(Danny) #59

There’s a quicker way to solve this. Same deal, if @DaveTMG and I win @Matt88 donates £500 to a charity of our choice, if he wins we’ll both do the same (so £1,000 in total)

@Matt88 please come back with any number of actively traded funds which have outperformed Vanguard Lifestrategy 100 over a 5 year period, all fees included.

Once you’ve done that I’ll come back with the same number, plus one, of actively managed funds which have under-performed it.


#60

Actually it will be trivially easy to come back with 10 times the number!

His excellency Lord Buffet bet a million against a hedge fund manager that his pick of hedge funds wouldn’t outperform the S&P 500 over, I think, 10 years.

He won. The S&P trounced the hedge fund manager’s picks. And hedge funds are supposed to be the creme de la creme of active investment.