What caught my eye this week.

A flood of articles this week highlighted how people are abandoning Hargreaves Lansdown in favour of other – presumably cheaper – platforms.

I wasn’t surprised to hear it, going by comments from readers on our latest broker update and the broker comparison table.

Hargreaves’ fee rejig – effective from 1 March – was the firm’s first for donkey’s years. The headline platform charge was cut, and there are lower trading costs for ETFs, shares, investment trusts, and gilts. But total fee caps will rise, along with trading costs for funds.

Whether this leaves Hargreaves cheaper or dearer for you depends on how you invest.

Yes, I said it: cheaper! Potentially.

Virtually all Monevator readers who’ve commented have said they’ll see their costs rise. But calculations show Hargreaves Lansdown will be cheaper for me if I continue to trade as I have in the past.

That’s because I invest (too) actively, of course.

Most Monevator readers are much more passively invested – and they were cannily taking advantage of quirks in Hargreaves’ old fee structure to keep their costs low.

See how they run

The big articles covering the alleged exodus – from The Financial Times, The Telegraph, and The Daily Mail – are paywalled.

But this extract from the FT gives the gist:

Investment site AJ Bell said it had seen “a big spike in applications from HL customers” following the adjustment. In a typical month, AJ Bell receives inbound transfers in the high hundreds of millions of pounds from other platforms and on a normal day 10-15 per cent of this would be from HL. However, on the day after HL’s announcement this jumped to 50 per cent.

Another platform, IG, said that as of Wednesday last week, inbound transfer requests from HL had reached 94 per cent of 2025’s total volume. The mean transfer value rose from £95,000 last year to £280,000 in the same period since the fee changes, it added.

Freetrade said its average daily transfer in requests had increased threefold since January 22, compared with the average total in all of December 2025, with Hargreaves one of the leading sources.

For its part, Hargreaves said its new fees would either be the same or lower for eight out of ten customers.

The company also told the FT that almost half the transfer requests it’s seen since it revealed the new fees were from the 400,000 or so customers set to pay more from March.

Flights of fancy

I imagine all these stories were driven by data being doled out by Hargreaves Lansdown’s rivals.

Nothing like kicking a competitor when they’re down!

However I wonder if these other platforms will regret their schadenfreude someday?

I’m not here to bat for Hargreaves Lansdown – or its new-ish private equity owners. At the last count Hargreaves was host to over £150bn in assets under administration. The Bristol-based behemoth can take care of itself.

But it is interesting – and to a great extent heartening – to see how footloose at least some of its millions of customers can be.

Go back 20 years and you would have assumed the bulk of its vast pool of client money was effectively locked up. Not through any de facto gating, but through inertia, the hassle factor, and very little regulatory drive to make it easier for customers to transfer elsewhere.

For a significant cohort of customers today, though, that’s clearly not the case.

We’re ready and able to move our money in order to keep more of it for ourselves. So platforms cannot get too greedy.

Hence I wonder whether the platforms now so happy to be chosen by Hargreaves Lansdown’s fleeing customers will just be the evacuation zones of tomorrow.

No enshittification, Sherlock

Either way, our willingness to move our money should be a good defence against what’s now called enshittification – essentially when a dominant supplier first crushes the competition with a superior offering, but once secure jacks up fees and degrades its service to boost its profits.

There are just too many competing investing platforms around to allow this currently. And more are being launched each year.

Indeed if the AI-fear-driven sell-off in wealth management firms this week is any guide, the competitive pressures will only grow.

Bad news if you’re a private equity firm that bought a giant platform for cashflow, maybe…

…but good news for small and nimble private investors like us!

Wondering whether you should switch?

• Our recent platform update post highlighted the better offerings
• See our broker table for a summary of all the contenders

Have a great weekend.

[continue reading…]

Kids are a pain. One minute you’re funding their entire lifestyle. The next minute they’re off to university or buying their first flat – and you’re still funding their entire lifestyle.

But perhaps you want to do even more for the young people in your life?

Maybe you want to help give your little ones (another) leg up?

Maybe your genes are forcing your hand!

You’re not alone. Almost £10bn has been socked away in Junior ISAs (JISAs) for the benefit of children, for example, according to AJ Bell.

That’s equivalent to 1.25 million JISA accounts – or roughly one for every ten kids in Britain. Although in reality some lucky children will have multiple accounts, like mine.

Do my kids appreciate this foresight and generosity? Well one thinks everything costs £20 and the other prefers eating coins to using them. So we aren’t quite there yet.

And this hints at the crux of the issue – children are, well, children. They don’t think in the same way as hardbitten Monevator-reading adults.

Which is charming enough when you’re on a trip to Disneyland and they still think Mickey Mouse is real.

But it could be somewhat less heartwarming if they blow half the money you saved for them on a bender in Ibiza the day they turn 18.

We’re spoilt for choice when investing for kids

The first thing to say is that parents have many options when saving for their children.

Easy does it: standard cash and investing accounts

Obviously you can put cash straight into a child’s bank account. Depending on their age and the bank in question, you can then control withdrawals. ¹

Children can also hold shares and funds via designated or bare trust accounts.

In all these cases, by the time the child turns 18 they typically gain control and with it the ability to withdraw all of the cash and shares.

But just shoving money into a standard account like this isn’t ideal, because once a child earns over £100 in interest from parental gifts, their interest is taxed as if it was earned by the parent. The same thing applies if you buy shares for them, too.

Not surprising really, given what an easy tax-dodge little Junior would otherwise be.

If it’s not your child, though – perhaps a grandchild – crack on!

I’m sure some of you have spotted some potential loopholes in these rules. But the spicy boundary between tax avoidance, mitigation, and evasion isn’t on my agenda today.

The tax-efficient route: JISAs, JSIPPs, and Premium Bonds

Want your kids to invest more tax efficiently without the risk of only seeing a parent during whatever visiting hours His Majesty’s Prison Service finds convenient?

Fortunately you have several options.

Junior ISAs

The aforementioned Junior ISA (JISA) is the most common way to save for kids. JISAs enable a child to save or invest up to £9,000 per year shielded from income tax and capital gains tax – so just like an adult’s ISA, only with lower contribution limits.

Junior SIPPs

Alternatively, an option that seems to be growing in popularity are Junior SIPPs (JSIPPs).

A JSIPP lets you get a child’s pension rolling, decades before most of their peers will ever hear the word. A child is allowed contributions of up to £3,600 gross (£2,880 net) per year. A 20-year head start on a pension will certainly turbocharge the compounding process.

Premium Bonds

Finally, you could buy them some Premium Bonds like everyone’s granny used to do. Winnings are tax-free, and so Premium Bonds are one of the easiest ways to put aside tens of thousands in cash for your children in a tax-efficient manner.

Also, unlike with a JISA or JSIPP, if your family wants to use some of the child’s money before they turn 18, Premium Bonds give you that option.

The complicated route: trusts

To retain a degree of control you could consider a discretionary trust.

Trusts enable you to define how the assets should be used, even after the children turn 18. They are often used for large legal settlements, or where relatives pass away leaving six-figure amounts that need careful management.

Beware though that trusts come in various shapes and sizes. The tax rules are complicated, and you will need expert advice to get the most out of them. If you’re a typical saver who just wants to save a few thousand pounds for a child – or even a few tens of thousands – then the complexity and cost will probably outweigh the benefits.

• See our Mogul member’s article on discretionary trusts.

The hold-it-yourself route

Keeping hold of the cash or assets yourself – rather than giving it to the kids – is the simplest option.

But I know it possibly sounds like the stupidest option, too.

Why waste the £9,000 per year tax-free allowance of a JISA? Or spurn the £3,600 per year JSIPP allowance – which could compound for 70 or 80 years to deliver a healthy pension? (Assuming the government in the 22nd Century allows your kids to retire before they’re 100.)

Why indeed?

Well, I think there are some advantages that I’ll get on to in a minute. But first a recap.

Investing for future generations: your options at-a-glance

Strategy	Age child gains control	Tax benefits	Cost of administration
Put cash into a child’s bank account	18, though many banks will give partial control earlier	If cash didn’t come from a parent, child can use standard £12,570 Income Tax allowance	None
Buy shares in a child’s name via a bare trust	18 (16 in Scotland)	If cash didn’t come from a parent, child can use standard Income Tax and CGT allowances	Low, though few brokers advertise this option. See AJ Bell or Hargreaves Lansdown
Open a Junior ISA (JISA)	16, but can’t withdraw until 18	Shielded from capital gains and income tax, transforms into an ISA	Low, see our broker table
Open a Junior SIPP (JSIPP)	18, but can’t withdraw until 57	Shielded from Capital Gains, Income Tax payable on withdrawal, transforms into a SIPP	Low, see our broker table
Buy Premium Bonds for a child	16	Untaxed	None
Set up a discretionary trust	Trust retains control	Trusts are taxable, rules are complicated	Set-up can exceed £1,000. Expect to pay annual management fees
Hold assets in your own name	Adult retains control	None, unless you use your own ISA allowance	Negligible, assuming you have existing accounts

It’s about psychology, not money

The real issue isn’t tax efficiency though – it’s psychology.

I was fortunate to start university with a few thousand pounds which my grandparents had invested into a cautious investment trust.

I’d also worked part-time since turning 17 and I’d saved some of my earnings there, too.

Moreover even at that age I was enamoured with compounding my money. (Perhaps excessively, but that’s a story for another day.)

So you can imagine the shock I had on seeing my fellow students gleefully burning through the free £500 overdrafts being doled out by the High Street banks.

This difference in our mindsets was driven home when I found myself lending £100 to one friend – a recent graduate from a particularly posh boarding school – who was unable to afford a train ticket home for Christmas. He’d squandered his allowance!

I can only imagine the carnage if everyone had hit Uni with six-figures in savings to burn.

More recently, I was consoling a somewhat glum colleague about his son’s JISA.

Oh, the investments he’d made were doing well. The snag was that his son had recently observed that the JISA balance could buy a brand new BMW i8…

The Ins but not the Outs of JISAs

You can manage a JISA for a child and make any number of astute decisions on their behalf. But the only way the money can leave the JISA is after the child turns 18.

And at that point, in an instant, the child (now adult) has full control.

True, you might have a mature and financially-astute child who continues to manage the pot carefully and industriously.

But then again, you might not.

What if you twig when they’re 16 that getting access to all this money is going to be a disaster? Well, you’re out of luck. It’s going to them whether you like it or not.

If I pointed out that a young person might blow the lot on alcohol and a sports car and find themselves wrapped around a tree at 3am, I might be over-egging the case.

But you cannot expect the average 18-year-old to spend in the way you’d like them to. 

Nor can you tell when they are three, eight or eleven-years-old whether your have a child that’s out of the ordinary in this respect.

Is a pension the answer?

I’m equally sceptical of JSIPPs – although for a different reason.

If we consider the big challenges facing young people today, student loans and high house prices loom large.

Scraping together the deposit on my first home was a goal I’d worked at from the age of 17. It took a lot of hard work and, ahem, frugalism.

And I’m not sure as I was striving away how much I’d have appreciated knowing my grandparents had put money away for me… to access in the year 2065.

I don’t think that I’d have been ungracious!

But given that the start of someone’s financial life is typically when things are toughest, you might be doing a child a disservice by ring-fencing money for some far-off future when they’ll be grey-haired, or maybe not even alive anymore to spend it.

Why I would choose the suboptimal option

Personally, if either parent has space in their own ISA allowances, I would encourage hiving off a segment of that for your children before you open a JISA.

You can pay them lump sums from this allocated money as needed in their future.

By retaining the money in your own accounts, you have full control of it. And you don’t burden your kids with needing to make good decisions when they’ve only just become old enough to legally drink.

Now, you may be gnashing your teeth here. And I too usually prefer financial arguments to psychological ones.

If investing typically results in a higher return than paying down a mortgage, say, then investing is what I’ll prioritise.

But when you’re making money decisions for other people, you need to think broadly.

It’s like how some debt specialists advise people to pay off small quantity debts before high-interest ones. They know that psychologically the person with debt may be more motivated by seeing small debt balances disappear completely – even if financially it’s nonsensical to pay down anything but the debts with the highest interest rates first.

Getting people in debt to keep getting out of it will always beat the strategy they give up on.

Taxes might sting

If you do feel able to allocate some of your ISA allowance to your children, all good.

However what if both parents are already making full use of their ISA allowances?

Well, investing outside of tax wrappers brings with it the potential for dividend tax at up to 39.35% and capital gains tax at up to 24%.

And that’s clearly the main disadvantage of foregoing the JISA or JSIPP route.

There are a few ways you can try to minimise the tax drag:

• Use your ISAs for your equity holdings and hold your tax-advantaged gilts outside
• Harvest capital gains in your taxable accounts each year
• Encouraging relatives to keep money in their own name rather than handing it over to you immediately. (Though this comes with obvious issues, too. And don’t forget inheritance tax!)

There’s no way around it for some parents though – they will inevitably have to choose between going with JISAs and JSIPPs or else paying taxes.

As I say, I’m sceptical JISAs and JSIPPs are the no-brainer many people seem to think. So I’d be prepared to pay some tax to keep control.

But if you specialise in risk quantification and you want to have a stab at telling me whether my kids will be a decent bet by the time they turn 18, let me know in the comments.

Am I a hypocrite?

The observant of you may have noted in the introduction that I mentioned holding multiple JISAs for my children.

And that’s true. You see, I’ve decided it’s reasonable for my children to access modest four-figure sums when they turn 18.

If they choose to blow that money when they get access that’s their prerogative – and potentially a clue as to how I should disburse their remaining money.

I’ve only invested a small amount upfront in these JISAs, and have made some rough projections based on historical data. I’ll top-up the accounts in the future if necessary. 

For example I’ll want to roughly equalise what each child gets, after sequence of returns boosts or depresses their final totals. (This may seem tantamount to communism, but it feels fair to me…)

The rest of the money earmarked for them will sit with us as parents and grandparents. Then when the time is right – perhaps for a house or a car – we’ll be able to support them.

But until then they need never know that this money is even there.

I should stress the kids’ assets will be clearly delineated in my accounting from my own investments and retirement funds. And as I said, I’m an addict for saving for the long-term.

However if this approach would present too tempting a pot for either adult to dip into from time to time, then clearly JISAs or JSIPPs might be a better option.

There will always be risks

Who knows what world our children will inherit as adults?

Should we consider the risk that they start adulthood with a period of unemployment? Or suffering from health issues that prevent them from working?

Under the current rules, having just £16,000 of savings would make them ineligible for means-tested benefits like Universal Credit.

We can debate the politics of that endlessly. My point is even a well-managed portfolio could be soon burned through for very little benefit.

Similarly, what if your child meets a malicious lover who systematically extracts their cash before moving on? You might regret having put a six-figure target on their backs.

I once spoke to a guy at a firm who specialised in inter-generational wealth for ultra high-net-worth families. I asked him what his customers valued that might surprise me?

“Teaching their little [bleeps] how not to piss away the family fortune,” he replied.

Maybe that’s too cynical. The whole point of saving money this way for the future is to help our children – or other young people we dote on – to achieve their dreams.

We can’t protect them from everything. But we can make their path a little easier.

Are you putting money aside for your kids or grandkids? Did your elders do the same for you? Let us know how and why in the comments below!

1. The rules here can be very complicated. For example Santander’s 123 Mini can be managed by a trustee until the child is 18, but not if the child is 13 or older when the account is opened.[↩]

A global tracker fund takes care of all your equity diversification needs in a single investment product.

In this post, we’ll explain how to choose the best global tracker fund for you. We’ll also list our top picks from the choices on offer. 

What is a tracker fund?

A tracker fund is an investment fund that tracks an index like the S&P 500 for the US or, in the case of a global tracker, an index such as the FTSE All World. 

Your money is pooled alongside the global tracker’s many other participants. Together this capital is invested by the fund’s management team into every major stock market on the planet. 

As an investor in an index fund, you get a slice of ownership in thousands of world-class firms. As a result you buy into the prospects of entire industries, countries, and continents at a stroke. 

An index followed by a global tracker fund is essentially an international league table of the world’s leading companies, from Apple to Nvidia to Taiwanese semiconductor giant TSMC. 

Global tracker funds hold stocks ¹ to replicate their chosen index as faithfully as possible. The index meanwhile is driven by the fortunes of its constituent firms. Over the long-term, company valuations rise and fall consonant with their performance, investor sentiment, and global capital’s best estimate of their future earnings. 

Investing this way is known as index investing or passive investing. We believe it’s the best strategy for most people to choose to maximise their chances of meeting their financial goals. 

Investing giants like Warren Buffet recommend index funds. Even some ex-hedge fund managers have switched sides and urge everyday investors to pick global index trackers!

Global tracker funds – what really matters?

All-World – Most products labelled world index funds only encompass developed world countries. They skip the emerging markets, including the likes of China and India.

Such ‘world index trackers’ are less representative of the global economy. Instead look for ‘All-World’ or ‘Global’ index funds that include emerging markets.

Alternatively, if you do choose a developed world solution, you can add an emerging market index fund to your portfolio to make up the difference.

Diversification – Following on from the above, compare how many stocks your shortlist of global tracker funds includes. The more the better, because your index fund will then do a better job of representing the global stock markets that it follows.

Cost – This is the most important factor that will impact your returns and that you can control. There’s often little performance differential between global index trackers. If in doubt, pick the cheapest by Ongoing Charge Figure (OCF) / Total Expense Ratio (TER). 

Reassuringly-expensive price tags will not secure you a better global equity tracker fund. Go for cheap, vanilla flavour trackers. Don’t worry about bells and whistles. 

Don’t fret about small changes in cost, either. An OCF differential of 0.1% on £10,000 is just £10.

For example, if you had £50,000 in a fund with an OCF of 0.25% that would cost you: 

£50,000 x 0.0025 = £125 annually. 

Whereas a similar fund rocking an OCF of 0.15% would set you back £75 per year in charges.

Of course, only you can know your personal hassle threshold. Try to work out whether the impact of costs over your investing lifetime is worth switching.

Investor compensation – You’re covered for up to £85,000 if your global index fund is based in the UK. ETFs are not included. Note, investor compensation schemes only kick in if fund manager goes bust and your money disappears. Stock market losses are not covered! (Your broker is also covered by the same FSCS scheme. If the broker goes pop then ETFs and offshore index trackers are protected, so as long as your platform qualifies for the scheme. 

The index – You should look up the tracker’s index to make sure it’s truly global. If it isn’t, find out what’s missing. Check your product’s factsheet, too.

Global index fund or global ETF?

^{Disclosure: Links to platforms may be affiliate links, where we may earn a commission. This article is not personal financial advice. When investing, your capital is at risk and you may get back less than invested. With commission-free brokers other fees may apply. See terms and fees. Past performance doesn’t guarantee future results.}

ETFs and index funds are both types of index tracker. They’re both excellent ways of diversifying your investments across the globe for an amazingly low cost. 

We’re equally happy using ETFs or index funds. We include both in our best global tracker fund table below. 

The only time the fund type is a deal breaker is if:

• You want your tracker to be covered by the FSCS compensation scheme. If so, then check this list of UK-domiciled index funds, including global options. 
• Your stockbroker charges an ETF dealing fee that costs more than 1% of your typical transaction value.
• The same broker enables you to trade index funds for free. 

In the latter case, we’d invest in a global index fund in preference to the global ETF. That’s because the impact of a high dealing fee is surprisingly damaging over the long-term. 

See our cheap broker comparison table for more. Percentage-fee brokers often allow you to trade global index funds for nothing. 

Quite a few brokers also enable you to trade global equity ETFs for £0, too. Check out InvestEngine, Freetrade, Vanguard, Dodl, Prosper, and Lightyear for that option. 

Best global tracker funds – compared 

Tracker	Cost = OCF (%)	Index	Emerging Markets (%)	No of holdings	Domicile
SPDR MSCI ACWI ETF	0.12	MSCI All Country World (ACWI)	7.4	2,295	Ireland
HSBC FTSE All-World Index Fund C	0.13	FTSE All-World	8.2	3,480	UK
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	0.2	MSCI All Country World (ACWI)	7.5	1,725	Ireland
Vanguard FTSE All-World ETF	0.19	FTSE All-World	8.5	3,761	Ireland
Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap Index Fund	0.23	FTSE Global All Cap Index	8	7,153	UK

Source: Morningstar and fund provider’s data

There is very little to choose between these five global equity trackers:

• SPDR’s All Country World Index tracker is the cheapest. Hence it tops the table.
• The SPDR and iShares ETF follow MSCI indexes whereas the others follow a FTSE index. The indexes vary somewhat in country composition but have performed identically over the past decade.
• Vanguard’s Global All Cap index fund has about 6% small cap exposure. It’s therefore more diversified than the rest.  

The reality is these shades of grey haven’t made much difference to results over the longer term. More on that in a moment.

Ch-ch-changes…

There are two relatively new entrants into the global tracker fund market to keep an eye on. They’re low cost but they haven’t had time to build a track record yet:

• Amundi Prime All Country World ETF – OCF 0.07% (The cheapest global tracker fund available.)
• Invesco FTSE All World ETF – OCF 0.15%

I’ll also throw two other choices into the pot because they do something a little different:

• Fidelity Allocator World Fund W – OCF 0.2%
• Vanguard LifeStrategy 100 fund – OCF 0.2%

Vanguard’s LifeStrategy funds include a UK equity bias of around 20%. That compares to a 3% UK allocation for the true global index trackers in the table. You could choose LifeStrategy 100 if home bias suits your situation. Go for LifeStrategy 20-80 if you want an all-in-one fund that includes government bonds. 

(Vanguard has also recently launched a ‘LifeStrategy Global’ range. These funds are the same deal as the regular LifeStrategy range, minus the home bias.)

The Fidelity fund is actively managed. It features a REIT exposure and small cap allocation of about 10%. 

Both are funds-of-funds. They manage their asset allocation by holding other index trackers instead of trading the shares of listed firms. 

Here’s a useful piece on how to compare index trackers.

Best global tracker funds – results check 

Source: Trustnet’s Multi-plot Charting tool

I’m most interested in the 10-year annualised (nominal) returns for the global tracker selection above because that’s the longest comparison period we have for most of the funds in the mix.

I’ve underlined the 10-year returns of the MSCI ACWI and FTSE All-World indices in magenta. A well-functioning passive fund should perform in line with its benchmark – which this selection does.

In fact, most trackers should lag their index because the fund pays fees whereas the index doesn’t bear that cost.

The iShares and SPDR MSCI ACWI ETFs perform this way. But intriguingly, the HSBC FTSE All-World fund leads its index – suggesting management have got a trick or two up their sleeves.

The FTSE Global All Cap fund follows a different index (not graphed) and has been dragged down by its small-cap shares relative to its rivals.

Over ten years, the HSBC has marginally outperformed the rest. But it hasn’t always. The Vanguard All-World ETF edged it by a nose four years ago.

It could be that HSBC’s significant fee advantage is starting to tell. Or perhaps some other minor variation in their respective holdings means advantage HSBC.

But it’s best not to put too much weight on short-term return results, anyway. They can easily be reversed by market moves.

Stress-free investing

If you’re starting from scratch then by all means choose the HSBC FTSE All-World Index fund.

But there’s no need to switch out of the other top five funds because of the result in the table.

Index trackers are typically cookie-cutter products. Mostly the results just demonstrate our top five all work just fine. They are practically interchangeable.

The fact is we’re not checking performance to crown the one, true, best global tracker fund.

With me-too products, you don’t have to over-optimise. Any candidate from a field of well-matched rivals will probably be good enough.

Our performance check simply ensures that nothing on our shortlist is broken, or isn’t what we think it is.

A world of difference

Here’s a few other things to note.

Fund sizes – All five index trackers in our top table have hundreds of millions in assets under management (AUM). Efficiencies of scale typically kick in above £100 million. Beyond that threshold, size is not a big deal. The iShares ETF is three times the size of the SPDR ETF, but its performance is neck-and-neck over ten years.

Fixed income – The trackers in our table are purely equity funds. Owning additional high-quality government bonds is crucial to help you not to freak out during a stock market crash.

Check out our best bond fund choices to find your fixed-income Venus for your equity Mars.

Understanding how to build your asset allocation will help you work out how much you need to put into such diversifying defensive assets.

Income versus accumulation – All of our best global index tracker picks come in both Inc and Acc flavours, except the iShares and SPDR ETFs. They are only available as accumulating funds.

World and World ex-UK – I excluded these trackers, because it makes no sense to only include the Developed World, or to skip the UK when you’re trying to diversify across the whole world.

K.I.S.S.

The beauty of the single global equity tracker strategy is its simplicity.

Yes, you could shave away a little cost by building a similar portfolio from separate regional trackers.

But is it worth the aggro in time and dealing fees? And can you trust yourself to stick to the global market’s verdict? Or will you justify trimming back on Japan or the US or wherever because you can apparently spot a bubble that everyone else has missed?

Fill your boots if you psychologically need the control. But know that you don’t have to.

Nobody can predict which strategy will win over your investment lifetime. But putting a global tracker fund at the core of your asset allocation is a rational choice in an increasingly insane world.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

1. Or an equivalent financial product.[↩]