A friend of mine who was a very successful asset manager and was able to retire in his forties, has been buying short-dated GILTs (out to 2-3 years). Unless you think things are really dire and the UK will go bust, you can make a very precise calculation of what you will get back from the gross redemption yield and make a decision on that versus inflation.
Another good day to be invested, btw.
Wouldn’t disagree with the sentiment but would be more inclined, provided you can lock up the cash for the period and get the FSCS protection, to stick it on deposit at 4.77% and 4.90% respectively for 2 and 3 years, so your yield pick up over gilts is fairly good.
That makes sense, and personally I can see even better deposit rates being offered next month after another BoE rate rise.
But I may misunderstand what “gross redemption yield” comprises ? Does it include some capital appreciation?
And its all very well having another good day to be invested, the problem is that in between the last one and this one, there was a bad one!😢
Agree with you both. I won't be outstaying my welcome!
Hey this is “my” thread ( in that I started it, to some derision) and your welcome is unlimited! Actually I just took a peek and my portfolio has held up better than I thought on a one month perspective, so I withdraw my previous comment.
Also looking at the sorry state of Vanguard LifeStrategy 20% I think I wouldnt be the only one who could benefit from hearing a lot more from you about gilts and bonds. Looking at its main constituents, what do you make of that fund’s near- term prospects, for example?
I checked on the status of my supposedly safest fund, Vanguard Life Strategy 20%.
15% down on the last 12 months.
Got the hump about that.
Well it is 80% invested into Fixed Interest, which is probably the worst asset class this year. Gilts are down 45% since January.
Saying all that, it might be the time to start going back into Fixed Interest. There has been a big sell off & with interest rates looking to stabilise over the next year or so growth maybe back on the cards.
I'm a trustee for a defined benefit scheme and last week we did make a decision to switch some equity into bonds. However we had been ignoring most professional advice and the PPF and had been overweight in equities v bonds. We are in a much better position than if we had fully followed the PPF pressure. I am seriously thinking of doing the same with my personal pension where I had to fight my advisor 5 years ago to go overweight in equities v bonds and gilts.
A friend of mine who was a very successful asset manager and was able to retire in his forties, has been buying short-dated GILTs (out to 2-3 years). Unless you think things are really dire and the UK will go bust, you can make a very precise calculation of what you will get back from the gross redemption yield and make a decision on that versus inflation.
Another good day to be invested, btw.
Wouldn’t disagree with the sentiment but would be more inclined, provided you can lock up the cash for the period and get the FSCS protection, to stick it on deposit at 4.77% and 4.90% respectively for 2 and 3 years, so your yield pick up over gilts is fairly good.
That makes sense, and personally I can see even better deposit rates being offered next month after another BoE rate rise.
But I may misunderstand what “gross redemption yield” comprises ? Does it include some capital appreciation?
And its all very well having another good day to be invested, the problem is that in between the last one and this one, there was a bad one!😢
Agree with you both. I won't be outstaying my welcome!
Hey this is “my” thread ( in that I started it, to some derision) and your welcome is unlimited! Actually I just took a peek and my portfolio has held up better than I thought on a one month perspective, so I withdraw my previous comment.
Also looking at the sorry state of Vanguard LifeStrategy 20% I think I wouldnt be the only one who could benefit from hearing a lot more from you about gilts and bonds. Looking at its main constituents, what do you make of that fund’s near- term prospects, for example?
At the risk of a 'whoosh' - I've always felt welcome :-) - I just meant that I won't be out-staying my welcome in this market. Can't see it staying elevated much beyond first week of November. Look at the reaction to some pretty decent results from MSFT.
Btw, forgot to answer your question, yes, Gross Redemption Yield combines all outstanding coupons AND the capital appreciation and works out an average yield. As long as there's no default, that's what you'll get. Note that bonds accrue coupon payments, unlike dividends. In other words, if you sell a bond half way between one coupon and the next, the seller takes half of that coupon that has accrued. That's achieved by charging a slightly higher price for the bond, and that price is known as the 'dirty price'.
Saw an interesting chart yesterday that showed the average seasonality of bull versus bear markets. Former tend to dip in October and then rise through to the end of the year. Bear markets tend to boost in Oct/Nov and then dip down to the end of the year. Humans love patterns!
It certainly doesn't help that Putin is waving his dirty bombs about in public ...
I watched a 3rd quarter review of risk-led portfolios by Quilter this morning.
Their Equity based portfolios did better over the 3rd quarter than their Bond based ones, ie the funds sitting in the 40-85% mixed asset sector did marginally better (down approx 1.5% - 2% compared to 3%) than funds in the 20%-60% sector.
The fund manager said they had recently moved a bit more money from Cash to Fixed Interest, and were looking primarily at Global Government bonds. Their feeling is that the market had now priced in all the interest rate increases and even thinking that maybe the market has overpriced where BofE rates might be by mid 2023.
Another forecast I saw last week said that rates are expected to peak at around 4%-4.5% and then fall back to around 3% by 2025/26.
From what I've seen from mortgage lenders is that the panic is over & some have started cutting their 2 & 5 year fixed rates. Yestrrday I saw one 5 year fixed fall by 0.5% to 5.34% and a few others fall by 0.25% to around 5.7%. Still very high versus the base rate (and trackers, where many are sitting around 3%) and I feel once the BofE announces the new rate next Thursday then lenders might start to sensibly re-price.
A friend of mine who was a very successful asset manager and was able to retire in his forties, has been buying short-dated GILTs (out to 2-3 years). Unless you think things are really dire and the UK will go bust, you can make a very precise calculation of what you will get back from the gross redemption yield and make a decision on that versus inflation.
Another good day to be invested, btw.
Wouldn’t disagree with the sentiment but would be more inclined, provided you can lock up the cash for the period and get the FSCS protection, to stick it on deposit at 4.77% and 4.90% respectively for 2 and 3 years, so your yield pick up over gilts is fairly good.
That makes sense, and personally I can see even better deposit rates being offered next month after another BoE rate rise.
But I may misunderstand what “gross redemption yield” comprises ? Does it include some capital appreciation?
And its all very well having another good day to be invested, the problem is that in between the last one and this one, there was a bad one!😢
Agree with you both. I won't be outstaying my welcome!
Hey this is “my” thread ( in that I started it, to some derision) and your welcome is unlimited! Actually I just took a peek and my portfolio has held up better than I thought on a one month perspective, so I withdraw my previous comment.
Also looking at the sorry state of Vanguard LifeStrategy 20% I think I wouldnt be the only one who could benefit from hearing a lot more from you about gilts and bonds. Looking at its main constituents, what do you make of that fund’s near- term prospects, for example?
The 80%/20% split equities/bonds is a conventional split, but if you have an 80% conviction in equities it should be long term conviction, in which case why not 100%?
Outside of a parallel universe, investing wealth in business for the production of goods and services for a profit should always produce a better long term return than lending it at a fixed rate of return to those businesses and governments.
So personally I advocate a 100% Global Equity allocation for a long term investment, the only reason for diluting a conviction in equities is the fear that for short term isolated periods, the pricing of equities falls on a market adjustment. Why should that fear exists unless it's a very short term investment, in which case 80/20 is an excessively high risk position.
The problem is, investors are directed towards investments that reflect their attitude to short term market fluctuations and recommend investments without ascertaining whether it is a long our short term investment. There is no logic in being averse to a fall in equities if they are to be held long term, yet if you are a long term investor but say you would be concerned if your investments suffer a material fall in value, you will be guided towards reducing a risk that you should not be prioritising. Unfortunately, investment business moves on annual performance figures so that's what investment firms focus on covering off, even for long term strategies.
A friend of mine who was a very successful asset manager and was able to retire in his forties, has been buying short-dated GILTs (out to 2-3 years). Unless you think things are really dire and the UK will go bust, you can make a very precise calculation of what you will get back from the gross redemption yield and make a decision on that versus inflation.
Another good day to be invested, btw.
Wouldn’t disagree with the sentiment but would be more inclined, provided you can lock up the cash for the period and get the FSCS protection, to stick it on deposit at 4.77% and 4.90% respectively for 2 and 3 years, so your yield pick up over gilts is fairly good.
That makes sense, and personally I can see even better deposit rates being offered next month after another BoE rate rise.
But I may misunderstand what “gross redemption yield” comprises ? Does it include some capital appreciation?
And its all very well having another good day to be invested, the problem is that in between the last one and this one, there was a bad one!😢
Agree with you both. I won't be outstaying my welcome!
Hey this is “my” thread ( in that I started it, to some derision) and your welcome is unlimited! Actually I just took a peek and my portfolio has held up better than I thought on a one month perspective, so I withdraw my previous comment.
Also looking at the sorry state of Vanguard LifeStrategy 20% I think I wouldnt be the only one who could benefit from hearing a lot more from you about gilts and bonds. Looking at its main constituents, what do you make of that fund’s near- term prospects, for example?
The 80%/20% split equities/bonds is a conventional split, but if you have an 80% conviction in equities it should be long term conviction, in which case why not 100%?
Outside of a parallel universe, investing wealth in business for the production of goods and services for a profit should always produce a better long term return than lending it at a fixed rate of return to those businesses and governments.
So personally I advocate a 100% Global Equity allocation for a long term investment, the only reason for diluting a conviction in equities is the fear that for short term isolated periods, the pricing of equities falls on a market adjustment. Why should that fear exists unless it's a very short term investment, in which case 80/20 is an excessively high risk position.
The problem is, investors are directed towards investments that reflect their attitude to short term market fluctuations and recommend investments without ascertaining whether it is a long our short term investment. There is no logic in being averse to a fall in equities if they are to be held long term, yet if you are a long term investor but say you would be concerned if your investments suffer a material fall in value, you will be guided towards reducing a risk that you should not be prioritising. Unfortunately, investment business moves on annual performance figures so that's what investment firms focus on covering off, even for long term strategies.
The problem is with the FCA. If investors truly invested according to the various different "risk profilers" that are out there then everybody would be in Cash 😄.
A friend of mine who was a very successful asset manager and was able to retire in his forties, has been buying short-dated GILTs (out to 2-3 years). Unless you think things are really dire and the UK will go bust, you can make a very precise calculation of what you will get back from the gross redemption yield and make a decision on that versus inflation.
Another good day to be invested, btw.
Wouldn’t disagree with the sentiment but would be more inclined, provided you can lock up the cash for the period and get the FSCS protection, to stick it on deposit at 4.77% and 4.90% respectively for 2 and 3 years, so your yield pick up over gilts is fairly good.
That makes sense, and personally I can see even better deposit rates being offered next month after another BoE rate rise.
But I may misunderstand what “gross redemption yield” comprises ? Does it include some capital appreciation?
And its all very well having another good day to be invested, the problem is that in between the last one and this one, there was a bad one!😢
Agree with you both. I won't be outstaying my welcome!
Hey this is “my” thread ( in that I started it, to some derision) and your welcome is unlimited! Actually I just took a peek and my portfolio has held up better than I thought on a one month perspective, so I withdraw my previous comment.
Also looking at the sorry state of Vanguard LifeStrategy 20% I think I wouldnt be the only one who could benefit from hearing a lot more from you about gilts and bonds. Looking at its main constituents, what do you make of that fund’s near- term prospects, for example?
The 80%/20% split equities/bonds is a conventional split, but if you have an 80% conviction in equities it should be long term conviction, in which case why not 100%?
Outside of a parallel universe, investing wealth in business for the production of goods and services for a profit should always produce a better long term return than lending it at a fixed rate of return to those businesses and governments.
So personally I advocate a 100% Global Equity allocation for a long term investment, the only reason for diluting a conviction in equities is the fear that for short term isolated periods, the pricing of equities falls on a market adjustment. Why should that fear exists unless it's a very short term investment, in which case 80/20 is an excessively high risk position.
The problem is, investors are directed towards investments that reflect their attitude to short term market fluctuations and recommend investments without ascertaining whether it is a long our short term investment. There is no logic in being averse to a fall in equities if they are to be held long term, yet if you are a long term investor but say you would be concerned if your investments suffer a material fall in value, you will be guided towards reducing a risk that you should not be prioritising. Unfortunately, investment business moves on annual performance figures so that's what investment firms focus on covering off, even for long term strategies.
The problem is with the FCA. If investors truly invested according to the various different "risk profilers" that are out there then everybody would be in Cash 😄.
The regulators don't understand or want to understand that risk is multi faceted. Worse still they treat risk as if it is one dimensional capable of being eliminated, rather than acknowledged, understood and managed.
The Pension Regulator has a "Trustee Toolkit" that confers certification of basic knowledge. The answer to one multi-answer question requires trustees to take on board that Bonds are lower "risk" than Equities without any attempt to identify who is taking on the "risk" (e.g employees, trustees, employer) or what sort of risk is being faced (e.g inflation, markets, funding etc).
I understand zuckerberg’s determination to stick with the metaverse - Facebook is dead and the company needs to pivot and innovate to survive. It’s go broke or go home for the company imo.
Got rid of my Zynex shares when I sold half my USD holdings a few weeks ago. They have spikes like this every so often, as do many smaller companies, but they usually revert to where they were quite quickly.
SAGA put their Easy Access up to 2.25% today with the account bonus 2.5% . Still behind Gatehouse Bank at 2.8% although they have currently withdrawn that account as under Review.
Bank Of England rate Meeting on Thursday, expect 0.75% uplift to 3%. That should see 1 year bonds break 5%. I will move my Easy Access if that’s available.
SAGA put their Easy Access up to 2.25% today with the account bonus 2.5% . Still behind Gatehouse Bank at 2.8% although they have currently withdrawn that account as under Review.
Bank Of England rate Meeting on Thursday, expect 0.75% uplift to 3%. That should see 1 year bonds break 5%. I will move my Easy Access if that’s available.
And Marcus too - up to 2.25% today or 2.5% with ther .25% bonus.
Fellow mug punters!! I may have hit upon an idea. It may however not survive the scrutiny of those more ITK which is why I am posting it before looking further into it.
This applies to mug punters like me who are aghast at the destruction of their “safe” ballast funds such as Vanguard Life Strategy 20 and with some relish and relief you turn to the rapidly rising number of savings accounts which actually pay interest..whereupon you run into a new problem, when to take advantage of the fixed term offers with the best rates. You can end up with a turkey there too…like this mug stuck untíl March with one paying 2.1%, while my new Santander instant account pays 2.72%…
So. If you already invested in funds in the early 90s, you may recall the cash funds. I had one with Fidelity on their platform which sometimes was showing 5% gains, because at that time bank rates were pretty high. As we entered the long low inflation period, these funds became pointless.
Now, I suppose their time has come again. But here’s my question: can they, would they invest in fixed term high interest instruments? If so, that is a way to access those instruments without committing to a timespan- you can buy and sell the fund when you please, like any other.
Premium Bond Quandary: I've bought premium bonds regularly over the past 3 years up to the maximum now. I've looked back at my monthly winning and they've never been more than £25 per win and never more than £75 in total. Indeed, 12 of my 27 wins came from £12k of bonds bought back in 2020. So.....................................someone said to me that I should cash in my bonds and buy a single block of £50,000 as their experience is of someone who did this and wins significantly more with a block than the scattered PSBs. Theoretically, it should make no difference as every ticket has a much chance of being drawn as any other and, of course, you lose 1 month of potential wins by cashing in and re-buying.
Premium Bond Quandary: I've bought premium bonds regularly over the past 3 years up to the maximum now. I've looked back at my monthly winning and they've never been more than £25 per win and never more than £75 in total. Indeed, 12 of my 27 wins came from £12k of bonds bought back in 2020. So.....................................someone said to me that I should cash in my bonds and buy a single block of £50,000 as their experience is of someone who did this and wins significantly more with a block than the scattered PSBs. Theoretically, it should make no difference as every ticket has a much chance of being drawn as any other and, of course, you lose 1 month of potential wins by cashing in and re-buying.
Thoughts or experiences??
NSI will tell you that each bond has an equal chance of winning. And I am sure that is right.
But I have read a number of articles saying what you say above - namely that you have a greater chance of winning if you hold your bonds consecutively. So, for example, you have more chance of winning if you hold the maximum holding of £50k in one block rather than 5 blocks of £10k.
Sorry but I haven't got a clue if there is any truth in it!
Premium Bond Quandary: I've bought premium bonds regularly over the past 3 years up to the maximum now. I've looked back at my monthly winning and they've never been more than £25 per win and never more than £75 in total. Indeed, 12 of my 27 wins came from £12k of bonds bought back in 2020. So.....................................someone said to me that I should cash in my bonds and buy a single block of £50,000 as their experience is of someone who did this and wins significantly more with a block than the scattered PSBs. Theoretically, it should make no difference as every ticket has a much chance of being drawn as any other and, of course, you lose 1 month of potential wins by cashing in and re-buying.
Thoughts or experiences??
NSI will tell you that each bond has an equal chance of winning. And I am sure that is right.
But I have read a number of articles saying what you say above - namely that you have a greater chance of winning if you hold your bonds consecutively. So, for example, you have more chance of winning if you hold the maximum holding of £50k in one block rather than 5 blocks of £10k.
Sorry but I haven't got a clue if there is any truth in it!
If there is any truth in this I would NSI have set themselves up for everybody suing them for misrepresentation.
Getting more depressed about prospects for the market. I see the BoE has now starting reversing quantitive easing. Coupled with rising interest rates and big tax rises promised it seems to me as though a deep recession is being manufactured and everytbody seems happy about it!
It was...but their poor systems mean results aren't available until tomorrow...personally think they should run the draw process on last day of the previous month so thay can publsih results actually on the 1st of the month!
And I'm not in it although I invested the full amount back on the 5th October. I believe you need to be in a full month before you are "counted". I suppose I could have put my money elsewhere for 3 weeks & then invested yesterday, but what would I have gained on an instant access account for 3 weeks ?
Fellow mug punters!! I may have hit upon an idea. It may however not survive the scrutiny of those more ITK which is why I am posting it before looking further into it.
This applies to mug punters like me who are aghast at the destruction of their “safe” ballast funds such as Vanguard Life Strategy 20 and with some relish and relief you turn to the rapidly rising number of savings accounts which actually pay interest..whereupon you run into a new problem, when to take advantage of the fixed term offers with the best rates. You can end up with a turkey there too…like this mug stuck untíl March with one paying 2.1%, while my new Santander instant account pays 2.72%…
So. If you already invested in funds in the early 90s, you may recall the cash funds. I had one with Fidelity on their platform which sometimes was showing 5% gains, because at that time bank rates were pretty high. As we entered the long low inflation period, these funds became pointless.
Now, I suppose their time has come again. But here’s my question: can they, would they invest in fixed term high interest instruments? If so, that is a way to access those instruments without committing to a timespan- you can buy and sell the fund when you please, like any other.
whaddya’ reckon?
Royal London had 2 "cash" funds in their Personal Pension range. Both changed their investment mandate earlier this year & changed their name from Deposit and Deposit Plus to Short Term Fixed Rate and now invests in short dated Gilts.
Comments
I am seriously thinking of doing the same with my personal pension where I had to fight my advisor 5 years ago to go overweight in equities v bonds and gilts.
Btw, forgot to answer your question, yes, Gross Redemption Yield combines all outstanding coupons AND the capital appreciation and works out an average yield. As long as there's no default, that's what you'll get. Note that bonds accrue coupon payments, unlike dividends. In other words, if you sell a bond half way between one coupon and the next, the seller takes half of that coupon that has accrued. That's achieved by charging a slightly higher price for the bond, and that price is known as the 'dirty price'.
Saw an interesting chart yesterday that showed the average seasonality of bull versus bear markets. Former tend to dip in October and then rise through to the end of the year. Bear markets tend to boost in Oct/Nov and then dip down to the end of the year. Humans love patterns!
It certainly doesn't help that Putin is waving his dirty bombs about in public ...
Their Equity based portfolios did better over the 3rd quarter than their Bond based ones, ie the funds sitting in the 40-85% mixed asset sector did marginally better (down approx 1.5% - 2% compared to 3%) than funds in the 20%-60% sector.
The fund manager said they had recently moved a bit more money from Cash to Fixed Interest, and were looking primarily at Global Government bonds. Their feeling is that the market had now priced in all the interest rate increases and even thinking that maybe the market has overpriced where BofE rates might be by mid 2023.
Another forecast I saw last week said that rates are expected to peak at around 4%-4.5% and then fall back to around 3% by 2025/26.
From what I've seen from mortgage lenders is that the panic is over & some have started cutting their 2 & 5 year fixed rates. Yestrrday I saw one 5 year fixed fall by 0.5% to 5.34% and a few others fall by 0.25% to around 5.7%. Still very high versus the base rate (and trackers, where many are sitting around 3%) and I feel once the BofE announces the new rate next Thursday then lenders might start to sensibly re-price.
Outside of a parallel universe, investing wealth in business for the production of goods and services for a profit should always produce a better long term return than lending it at a fixed rate of return to those businesses and governments.
So personally I advocate a 100% Global Equity allocation for a long term investment, the only reason for diluting a conviction in equities is the fear that for short term isolated periods, the pricing of equities falls on a market adjustment. Why should that fear exists unless it's a very short term investment, in which case 80/20 is an excessively high risk position.
The problem is, investors are directed towards investments that reflect their attitude to short term market fluctuations and recommend investments without ascertaining whether it is a long our short term investment. There is no logic in being averse to a fall in equities if they are to be held long term, yet if you are a long term investor but say you would be concerned if your investments suffer a material fall in value, you will be guided towards reducing a risk that you should not be prioritising. Unfortunately, investment business moves on annual performance figures so that's what investment firms focus on covering off, even for long term strategies.
The Pension Regulator has a "Trustee Toolkit" that confers certification of basic knowledge. The answer to one multi-answer question requires trustees to take on board that Bonds are lower "risk" than Equities without any attempt to identify who is taking on the "risk" (e.g employees, trustees, employer) or what sort of risk is being faced (e.g inflation, markets, funding etc).
Can see no reason other than broker price target upgrade
I think TS owns about 16.1m shares, so up $1.30 makes his gain today about $21m. Defnitely a loan player then.
This applies to mug punters like me who are aghast at the destruction of their “safe” ballast funds such as Vanguard Life Strategy 20 and with some relish and relief you turn to the rapidly rising number of savings accounts which actually pay interest..whereupon you run into a new problem, when to take advantage of the fixed term offers with the best rates. You can end up with a turkey there too…like this mug stuck untíl March with one paying 2.1%, while my new Santander instant account pays 2.72%…
So. If you already invested in funds in the early 90s, you may recall the cash funds. I had one with Fidelity on their platform which sometimes was showing 5% gains, because at that time bank rates were pretty high. As we entered the long low inflation period, these funds became pointless.
whaddya’ reckon?
Thoughts or experiences??
But I have read a number of articles saying what you say above - namely that you have a greater chance of winning if you hold your bonds consecutively. So, for example, you have more chance of winning if you hold the maximum holding of £50k in one block rather than 5 blocks of £10k.
Sorry but I haven't got a clue if there is any truth in it!
Not sure cash funds are "in vogue" thesedays