≡ Menu

Become your money hero

Money hero

I have plenty of friends who are bad with money.

Despite decent salaries and barely-there responsibilities, they’ve little to show for 20 years of work but memories and wrinkles.

Some have allowed hundreds of thousands of pounds to trickle through their fingers.

Others bought their first property long ago thanks to parental urging (and in part with parental cash) and it is the London house price boom alone that has salvaged their net worth – at the cost of retarding their financial education.

Incidentally, if you’re thinking that having me as a friend has clearly made little impression on my friends’ finances…you’re right!

It’s not that I haven’t tried.

But I’ve learned it’s a bad idea to bring up money with people who’ve been careless with it, especially if it’s one of your favourite topics.

They get defensive or alienated or worse.

And I’m sure I’ve been unbearably preachy at times, especially in my 20s.

A lot to learn about money

In the past few years though, it’s been a slightly different story.

Friends who’ve noticed my obscure passion for investing will sometimes ask off-hand about ISAs, or pensions, or their daughter’s university fund.

And while I’m not the world’s most empathetic person, I’ve discovered this is their cue for a chat.

They finally feel ready to “be sensible” with their money, as they put it, and they want to know what to do next.

Of course, what they should do is a big subject – it’s the subject of an entire blog about managing money!

When it comes to investing, I usually suggest they start simple with a cash and tracker split across ISAs or perhaps a Vanguard LifeStrategy fund, although there are lots of variables, such as whether they have a workplace pension or big obligations.

That’s even more true with personal finance, where different approaches work better for different people.

I’m a simple Micawber man myself, but others such as my co-blogger swear by tracking and budgeting to the last penny.

Finally, I stress to them that I am not their financial adviser, and that these are just ideas for further research.

This isn’t just because it’s true – I’m not their adviser, I don’t have all the information required to be their adviser, and I’m not qualified to be, anyway – but also because the whole point is they need to learn the basics for themselves.

People ask me “What is a hot stock to put my money into?” or “Should I put this £10,000 redundancy into a wine fund?” or similar.

(Really, they do).

They have a lot to learn about investing, and more to learn about themselves.

You are what you bleat

For my part, I get to hear them justify what took them so long:

  • “I don’t have the time to win big on the stock market.”
  • “There’s no money at the end of the month for saving.”
  • “I’ll think about investing when I’m not in debt.”
  • “When I’ve got more money, I’ll start to get serious about it.”

This is all terrible thinking, if also terribly common.

Many people wonder why lottery winners often end up broke.

Not me. Time and time again, I’ve seen people believe that thinking follows facts:

“When I’ve got out of debt and I have more money, THEN I’ll start taking all this seriously.”

In reality, the facts follow the thinking:

“When I start taking all this seriously, THEN I’ll get out of debt and have more money.”

If you want to make money your tool – an asset, rather than a liability – start behaving now like the rich person you’re going to be:

  • You don’t have non-mortgage debts as a rich person, so get out of debt.
  • You save money, time, and energy by investing with index funds.

Start today

Here’s some advice I once heard 1 on being the person you want to be.

It’s not about money, and it’s all the more powerful for that:

I finally reached a decision a few years ago when I was deeply into an ‘I’m ugly and I always will be’ phase.

I sat down and made a list of all the things I would do if I were ‘beautiful’.

For example: I’d feel confident in a room full of beautiful people, I’d wear great, well-fitted clothes, I’d walk with my head up, wear make up and do my hair properly, buy and wear high heels, and so on.

Then I decided to do it anyway. I only have one life, and not enough money for the surgery required to meet my mental image of perfection.

I’m damned if I’m going to let that stop me from having the life that I want.

Amen to that.

From now on, you’re good with money.

  1. Tweaked for privacy.[]
{ 19 comments }

Weekend reading: Death to inheritances

Weekend reading

Good reads from around the Web.

I was pleased to see another financial blogger making the case that there’s more to life than dying and leaving it all to your children.

Says Jim at SexHealthMoneyDeath:

Let’s talk about Death for a minute.

Most of we middle classes have absolutely no intention of dying before we’ve clocked up at least four score years and ten (technically 87 years, by the way).

Which means our own kids will be well into their fifties before they sniff any cash from us.

Another middle class dream for many of us today is to retire financially independent in our fifties, or even sooner – why would we want any different for our children? We should be educating them to do exactly the same as ourselves and we should lead by example.

If they succeed in this – and let’s hope they do – they won’t need to rely on any cash from us when we die. Especially if they’ve already received quite a lot of it over the years before we snuff it.

So fair enough, Jim’s not coming at it from the revolutionary Citizen Smith style angle that makes me believe inheritance tax is one of the fairest taxes in a world of increasing income inequality.

To wit: We have a State and the money for it has to come from somewhere. I believe it’s better to tax unearned windfalls from the dead more heavily and the earnings of the living and productive less heavily.

(I know you – statistically – probably don’t agree with me. That’s fine. We can still do blog together.)

Even if he’s not quite a fellow traveler, at least Jim fingers the subtle misdirection of the argument that dead parents want to do better for “their kids”, when those “kids” are more likely to be financially secure 50-somethings than impoverished tykes desperate for an extra bowl of gruel.

[continue reading…]

{ 26 comments }

The Slow and Steady passive portfolio update: Q3 2015

The portfolio is down 2.33% year to date.

How are you feeling? A bit roughed up? A little battle weary? Or have you barely noticed your portfolio sinking like a submarine with a leak?

Our passive Slow & Steady portfolio has certainly followed the markets downwards. We’ve lost 3.3% in the last three months and 7.82% in the last six.

But then again, if you zoom out a little bit we’re only down 2.33% in 2015. And we’re up 2.52% in the last year and up on average 6.22% a year since the portfolio was founded.

Crisis is a matter of perspective.

Here’s how we’re looking right now:

N.B. Glb Prop, Dev World, Small Cap and Inflation Linked bonds show year-to-date returns as holdings are less than one year old

N.B. Global Prop, Dev World, Small Cap and Inflation Linked bonds show year-to-date returns as holdings are less than one year old. (Click to enlarge).

The Slow & Steady portfolio is Monevator’s model passive investing portfolio. It was set up at the start of 2011 with £3,000 and an extra £870 is invested every quarter into a diversified set of index funds, heavily tilted towards equities. You can read the origin story and catch up on all the previous passive portfolio posts here.

The recent turbulence is a good test of your mettle because this is normal investing weather. UK data is hard to come by, but plenty of US writers have been fishing out interesting stats…

For example Ryan Detrick tells us that the S&P 500 has pulled back at least 5% in 94% of all years since 1960.

It’s tumbled at least 10% in 53% of all years – that is one-in-two.

So this choppiness we’re going through now? It’s commonplace – it’s the last four years of uninterrupted gains that were the exception.

More optimistically, Larry Swedroe quoted a report from Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA) on the market’s bouncebackability (Hells bells! I typed that in for a laugh and the spell-checker didn’t even blink. It’s a real word now).

DFA found that after drops of 10%, the S&P 500 between January 1926 and June 2015 returned on average:

  • 23.6% over the next year
  • 8.9% a year over the next three years
  • 13.3% a year over the next five years

Developed markets tend to behave similarly, for the most part. And lo, DFA found between January 2001 and June 2015 that – after 10% falls – developed international markets return on average:

  • 24.7% in the next year
  • 12.7% a year over the next three years
  • 12.9% a year over the next five

Same analysis for emerging markets, this time between January 1999 and June 2015:

  • 42.2% in the next year
  • 13.4% a year over the next three years
  • 11.2% a year over the next five years

So stay cool. Things will almost certainly get better. Regardless of the crisis de jour, a little blood-letting is normal. Even healthy, because it’s the volatility that forces the weak to sell, enabling resilient investors to buy more at better prices.

The beauty of bonds

If the last six months have been too much for you then consider increasing your allocation of bonds.

Ours have risen to the occasion yet again – slowing the downdraft over the last three months.

Also, despite these quarterly Slow & Steady updates, I can’t recommend enough not looking at your portfolio when things get ugly.

I’ve peeked at my personal portfolio only once in the last six months, and out of sight is certainly out of mind.

I’ve found plenty to worry about during that time, but China’s slowdown and US interest rates haven’t even touched the sides.

New transactions

Every quarter we bowl another £870 down the market’s alley. Our cash is divided between our seven funds according to our asset allocation. We use Larry Swedroe’s 5/25 rule to trigger rebalancing moves, but no boundaries have been breached so we’re just topping up with new money as follows:

UK equity

Vanguard FTSE UK All-Share Index Trust – OCF 1 0.08%

Fund identifier: GB00B3X7QG63

New purchase: £87

Buy 0.578 units @ £150.51

Target allocation: 10%

Developed world ex-UK equities

Vanguard FTSE Developed World ex-UK Equity Index Fund – OCF 0.15%

Fund identifier: GB00B59G4Q73

New purchase: £330.60

Buy 1.57 units @ £210.09

Target allocation: 38%

Global small cap equities

Vanguard Global Small-Cap Index Fund – OCF 0.38%

Fund identifier: IE00B3X1NT05

New purchase: £60.90

Buy 0.346 units @ £175.86

Target allocation: 7%

Dividends last quarter: £6.23 (Money, money, money!)

Emerging market equities

BlackRock Emerging Markets Equity Tracker Fund D – OCF 0.24%

Fund identifier: GB00B84DY642

New purchase: £87

Buy 88.703 units @ £0.98

Target allocation: 10%

Global property

BlackRock Global Property Securities Equity Tracker Fund D – OCF 0.22%

Fund identifier: GB00B5BFJG71

New purchase: £60.90

Buy 41.344 units @ £1.47

Target allocation: 7%

OCF down from 0.23% to 0.22%

UK gilts

Vanguard UK Government Bond Index – OCF 0.15%

Fund identifier: IE00B1S75374

New purchase: £121.80

Buy 0.83 units @ £146.82

Target allocation: 14%

Interest last quarter: £12.58

UK index-linked gilts

Vanguard UK Inflation-Linked Gilt Index Fund – OCF 0.15%

Fund identifier: GB00B45Q9038

New purchase: £121.80

Buy 0.785 units @ £155.16

Target allocation: 14%

New investment = £870

Trading cost = £0

Platform fee = 0.25% per annum.

This model portfolio is notionally held with Charles Stanley Direct. You can use that company’s monthly investment option to invest from £50 per fund. Just cancel the option after you’ve traded if you don’t want to make the same investment next month.

Take a look at our online broker table for other good platform options. Look at flat fee brokers if your portfolio is worth substantially more than £20,000.

Average portfolio OCF = 0.17%

If all this seems too much like hard work then you can buy a diversified portfolio using an all-in-one fund such as Vanguard’s LifeStrategy series.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

  1. Ongoing Charge Figure[]
{ 36 comments }

Weekend reading: Ignorance is bliss

Weekend reading

Good reads from around the Web.

Like many truths in investing, the idea that your portfolio will do better if pay less attention to it seems to defy common sense.

After all, it’s not true of many other things in life.

Lawns, relationships, your teeth, and your guinea pig will all suffer under a regime of benign neglect.

However there is solid reasoning from the field of behavioural finance to explain why we usually do badly when we frantically look at our portfolios between every email refresh – or even just every week or month.

In short: It’s because we’re monkeys operating supercomputers.

When we see something happen in our portfolios we want to do something.

And that something is usually for the worst.

The dangers of stock market rubbernecking

But there’s another reason for to keep your online broker password under lock and key, which is that equities are scarier in practice than in theory.

Most people are fine with shares falling when they look at graphs of long-term returns.

“Pfft!,” they say, looking at a wobble on some historical graph. “Call that a crash? I remember the dire headlines in 2008, and if I had my time again I’d be in like Flynn. I’d even sell my neglected guinea pig to put more money into shares!”

But they’re rarely so brave in practice.

If they were then fund flows into equities would increase in bear markets and decline in bull markets. But we know the exact opposite is what actually occurs.

Volatility leads to upset stomachs, as The Value Perspective noted this week:

[The academics] ran a second experiment where they showed the results of an investment simulation to different groups of subjects.

One group were shown the results of the simulation as if they were checking their portfolio eight times a year.

A second group as if they were checking it once a year.

And a third as if they were only doing so once every five years.

Once again, the people who were shown the numbers at lengthier intervals – and so saw less volatility in the results – allocated much more aggressively to equities than those who saw them more frequently.

In other words, those who didn’t see how volatile equities were didn’t really care how volatile equities were.

The takeaway?

If you know you should have a big slug of equities to meet your long-term savings goals but the thought of a stock market crash makes you run for the nearest 1%-a-year Savings Bond, then automate your savings into your diversified portfolio, rebalance every year (or maybe even every two or three years)… and the rest of the time forget you’re an investor at all.

[continue reading…]

{ 13 comments }