≡ Menu
Image of a roaring wood fire

Today we’re kicking off our monthly interviews with Monevator readers who’ve achieved financial independence and/or early retirement (aka FIRE). In this debut episode, Mark Greene explains how a pretty conventional work-life and a lot of saving and investing unlocked an early and unusual retirement for himself and his wife. We hope it inspires you.

Also, I want to give a quick shout out to ESI Money, whose interviews with US millionaires inspired this series. Do check them out!

Okay, let’s get this show on the road – appropriately enough, as you’ll see…

A place by the FIRE

Hello Mark, thanks for sharing your life story with Monevator. To start with the basics, how old are you and yours?

I’m 51 and my wife is 57. We’ve been married for 28 years.

Do you have any dependents?

We never had children, and each have one surviving parent – mid-70s and mid-90s. Both are living independently at present and are not hugely reliant on us. Long may that last!

Whereabouts do you live and what’s it like there?

Since early 2020 we’ve been traveling. Most of the time we have been in our own motorhome. At present I am near the beach in the south of France, and it is very pleasant!

Did you have any second thoughts about FIRE – or traveling – given a global pandemic kicked off right at the same time?

If we had known the pandemic – and particularly the travel restrictions – were coming, it’s probable we would have delayed stopping work. That said, it suited both of us to have missed the ‘pivot the way you work’ that everyone else went through in the spring of 2020.

I’ve never had second thoughts about not working, but retiring early to travel was the main motivator for stopping work for my wife. She found the first few months under lockdown hard.

Now though, no regrets on either side!

When do you consider you achieved Financial Independence?

We retired in early 2020. I was 48 and my wife was 55. So I guess that was when we consider we reached financial independence. Whether our pot could have been considered ‘enough’ before there could be a point for discussion, but we worked to a particular date, rather than a particular amount – which we hope is more than enough.

My wife has done some very limited freelance work since, mainly to stimulate the brain than for the money.

I haven’t worked since. We have been filling our time with traveling, when allowed to do so through the pandemic.

Assets: only a little bit racy

What is your net worth?

We currently have about £1.1 million in investments, plus our house which is valued at about £600,000.

What are the assets that make up your net worth? Any mortgages or other debts?

In general terms, our main assets are:

  • One SIPP (invested in a range of stock and bond funds) £330,000
  • Three ISAs (invested in funds and many individual stocks) £635,000
  • Peer-to-peer lending (Funding Circle, Crowdstacker) £30,000
  • Property Investment Vehicle (Propertypartner) £55,000
  • Premium Bonds/cash £40,000
  • House £600,000
  • Total £1,690,000

One of us also has a small government pension due at 60. It’s worth a few thousand a year.

We have no mortgage or debts, other than current month credit card bills. These are paid off every month.

What was thinking behind the peer-to-peer investing?

Peer-to-peer was a way to diversify my asset allocation, chase a bit of a higher return, and to experiment with something new.

Tell me more…

Initially it was Funding Circle, which I was a big fan of until about three or four years ago. They diversified the loans automatically to spread risk, it was automated, and it provided good returns.

Funding Circle has switched off retail investors though, and now I’m just running down the balances as loans get repaid.

Crowdstacker was less liquid and very hard to diversify. A couple of loans defaulted and whilst supposedly asset-backed, the platform has had some real struggles realising value from the assets. Credit to Crowdstacker, I think they have managed it brilliantly, but I don’t expect to see much of those loans back.

My other loans with Crowdstacker have performed perfectly well though. I achieved rates of about 7% when the banks’ rates were under 1%.

Property Partner is another innovative finance platform. My investments are made into numerous companies that hold property and take capital gains and rental income, distributing dividends along the way. I really like the platform, and it affords me exposure to property (other than our former home) in a diversified way.

The property market has suffered through the pandemic. But again I’m very happy with how the management of the platform have handled it.

So much for digital property holdings – what about your main bricks-and-mortar residence?

Our former home is an Edwardian three-bed semi in a somewhat rural location in the Home Counties, near a commuter rail station. We own it and it is currently rented to a tenant while we travel.

Do you consider your home an asset, an investment, or something else?

While we are not living in it, we consider it an asset as the rent provides some of our income. Once we return to living in it, I would consider it part asset – as it has value – and part liability – because it costs money to live in.

Earning: doing it the traditional way

Tell us more about your old job…

I was in business consultancy and my wife was in training – of adults for professional exams.

Before this we both worked in local government jobs for a few years. That said, we had both done our last jobs for around 20 years when we retired.

…and your annual income?

Mine varied according to the success of my consultancy – I was self-employed – but probably averaged to about £60,000 of annual salary if it were a normal job. My wife was on a salary, which was about £80,000 at the end.

We have no formal income now. We live off our assets!

How did your career and salary progress over the years – and to what extent was pursuing financial independence (FI) part of your career plans?

We both switched careers and then progressed in earnings terms, though neither of our jobs had a traditional career ladder involving promotions and so on. For a few years my wife reduced her working hours slightly – and sacrificed salary – for a better work-life balance.

Other than seeking to maximise earnings in order to grow our assets, pursuing financial independence didn’t directly influence our plans.

Did you learn anything about building your career and growing income that you wished you’d known earlier?

We realised part way along the journey that it was better to work and earn less but stay sane, rather than go all out for a big income and suffer stress and other effects.

We delayed our FI date by a few years so that we could temper our workload – and spend a bit more on holidays – on the way.

Did you have any sources of income besides your main job?

No, we didn’t. We’ve had no significant sources of money other than our work – no side hustles and no inheritances.

Did pursuing FIRE get in the way of your career?

No, never. In fact the mental discipline required to plan for financial independence, and then execute on the plan every month, proved beneficial when applied to our professional careers too.

Saving: starting with an awesome budget

What is your annual spending? How has this changed over time?

Our baseline budget is just under £40,000. This goes up if we are on a major travel trip, but it’s all planned for in our mother-of-all-spreadsheets.

Do you stick to a budget or otherwise structure your spending?

Since we met 34 years ago, my wife has operated an awe-inspiring level of structure in our spending, so we have always budgeted and have always stuck to it. We allocate so much a month to various buckets of spending – food, drink, going out, bills, and so on – which smooth out big bills over the years and has allowed us to ensure we don’t spend on things we don’t really need, whilst still enjoying life.

What percentage of your gross income did you save over the years?

I have to say, I don’t know. It was lower when we started out as we earnt less and had a mortgage, but we never recorded what it was.

This was way before the days of the FIRE movement and an understanding of such numbers. We just saved as much as possible after we had funded the basic budget mentioned earlier. This meant any bonus, pay rise or a bumper year for my consultancy went into the FI pot – not on vanity purchases.

What’s the secret to saving more money?

My first ever financial advisor told us to find a level of life we were comfortable at, and then stick to that budget even if we earnt more, and to save the rest. That was arguably the best advice I have ever been given. In life and business we strove to spend less than we earned and to use the rest to grow an asset base.

I have also tracked our net worth for well over 20 years. Seeing it gradually increase as we paid down the mortgage and grew our investments was a good motivator to keep going.

Do you have any hints about spending less?

The game changed for us when we decoupled from the materialistic societal norms we are all surrounded by. The less we watched TV, read weekend newspapers or monthly magazines, the less we were exposed to ads telling us we would be happier if we only spent on X, Y, or Z.

Whilst all our peers were buying bigger houses, more cars or funding expensive hobbies, we were focusing on what we valued, which didn’t cost money – time together, simple hobbies, and so on.

Oh, and don’t have kids! That turned out to be a significant factor in our story.

Do you have any passions, hobbies, or vices that eat up your income?

Illustrative image of a motorhome: Retiring early to travel was a big motivation for this couple.
Retiring early to travel in a motorhome like this was a big motivation.

Our one guilty pleasure has been travel, which we have spent a lot on over the years. That said, we tend to travel cheaply – not backpacking, but definitely not five-star hotels and big meals out – so we can have a lot of experiences for what we spend.

We have banked some unbelievable memories from that spending.

Investing: starting outside a pension for early access later

What kind of investor are you?

My financial education started with the original Motley Fool in the mid-1990s, and then was influenced by Warren Buffet. So I have been primarily a buy-and-hold investor.

I started with managed funds, then moved into trackers as they became available and online trading became a thing.

For many years I did choose my own stocks. I’d buy in chunks of about £2,000 and try to build a diverse portfolio – although all were in the UK. Some were stars, and many were dogs…

Over the last ten years, as I learnt more and as the products developed, I have sought to consolidate into passive tracker funds. I’m a big fan now of Vanguard’s LifeStrategy funds.

What was your best investment?

In terms of headline percentage return from specific buys, Games Workshop, Novo Nordisk, and Unite Group have been big winners. But the actual return has hardly been life-changing.

Arguably my best investment decision was made firstly at 22 when I decided not to have a pension and invest in funds instead – so that I could access it early – and then a few years later deciding to manage it myself rather than through an adviser. That has made a huge difference in terms of that compounded percentage return over two decades of investing.

Can you tell us more about that decision not to invest in a pension?

When my decision not to have a pension was made in the mid-90s, SIPPs were never raised – even though they existed – and I’m not sure I knew enough to manage it all then. They were also not accessible at 55 at that time. And I knew I wanted the option to retire early, because of the age difference with my wife.

Once I had embarked on the ISA path, I just stuck with it for me – even when we were putting a lot into my wife’s SIPP.

Did you make any big mistakes on your investing journey?

If I had my time again, I would buy tracker funds from the off, not individual stocks. It was interesting to do, and made it partly a hobby. But for every tenfold grower like Games Workshop, there’s a total wipeout like Carillion or Laura Ashley.

As I mentioned earlier I also made some peer-to-peer loans that were in theory asset-backed, but were not immune to alleged illegal practice by company directors. I’ve mentally written off the loan, but court proceedings are continuing.

That bit where they say “you may not get your capital back” is there for a reason!

What has been your overall return?

My best guess would be an annual return of 4%, though I think it is probably a bit more. This includes keeping a reasonable amount in cash – over 20% of the portfolio – when interest rates were almost negligible, because we were approaching retirement. We wanted the security of knowing we were safe from sequence-of-returns risk in the first few years. It was also kind of handy when Covid broke the month we retired and the markets dropped 20%!

Listening to my own answer it strikes me that 4% doesn’t sound too great… But I have another rough calculation that suggests we more than doubled what we put in, partly through pension tax relief but mostly through compounding, because we’ve been doing this for over 20 years.

How much did you fill of your ISA and pension allowances?

Until we retired we filled our ISA contributions every year for most of the years. That – and compounding – is how we have amassed over £600,000 in ISAs.

I don’t have a pension at all so I never benefited from pension allowances. My wife has a SIPP. In the last few years of her working we maximized the contributions (including backdating) using cash we had accumulated.

That immediate uplift as a higher-rate tax payer is the best return we have ever had!

To what extent did tax incentives and shelters influence your strategy?

The tax rebate on the SIPP definitely influenced our decision to pour money in there in the last few years of working. Although the SIPP is just a wrapper, and the money would have been invested in the same thing in an ISA or in the pension.

How often do you check or tweak your portfolio or other investments?

Overall, I do a full evaluation every month, and have done for 30 years. This enables me to report our position to my wife, and to ensure I have an eye on the performance of individual investments.

In addition, I have a reasonable amount of our portfolio that I use to day trade on the ups and downs of the FTSE 100. This is my non-passive guilty secret!

Because of this part of the strategy, I am prone to checking the FTSE more than once a day. But I only ever do this around what we are already doing for the day.

Sometimes we will be off-grid and I don’t check for a week or more.

Wealth management: making it last

We know how you made your money, but what about keeping it?

The meeting of the two systems used by my wife and I enabled us to keep it.

My long-term spreadsheet and the plan to grow from nothing to our nominal £1 million retirement pot, coupled with her monthly budget and accessing only money available for planned spending meant we overcame the temptation to splurge or to fritter it away.

I was passionate about becoming financially independent and retiring early. That drove our behaviour every month, every week, and every day.

Which is more important, saving or investing?

Well, that depends what you mean by both terms. I see saving as money in the bank, investing as more risky options like funds or stocks. Saving is the essential first discipline, but bank interest rates will not grow enough to retire early. You need to take more risk and therefore invest.

When did you think you’d achieve financial freedom – and was it a goal with a timeline?

I thought it would be in my 50s. But then as the plan developed it became clear that with a fair wind it would be possible before that. The main driver was my wife’s age (she’s older), but I am proud to have got there in my 40s.

For the last ten years or so – once it was a clear goal with a very clear timeline – I told a LOT of people about. We really committed ourselves to it.

Did anything unexpected get in your way?

I’ve invested through three big recessions and crashes, though arguably that was expected – if unwanted – over a 25-year period.

Our life wasn’t without challenges, but from an investing sense nothing really got in the way.

Are you still growing your pot?

As we don’t have kids, our spreadsheet allows us to de-accumulate. But that could stretch out over a 50-year time frame or longer, so I am currently trying to maintain the pot.

With our spending heavily front-loaded so that we can make the most of retiring early – and with the tough market conditions since 2020 – that hasn’t always been easy. But we’re not too far off plan!

Do you have any further financial goals?

Ensuring the pot lasts long enough to pay the funeral bills, and not a moment longer. Who knows how far in the future that will be, so in the meantime I seek to do as well as I can with the assets we have accumulated. The targets are in my spreadsheet!

What would you say to Monevator readers pursuing financial freedom?

I genuinely wish Monevator had existed when I was in my 20s. There is so much more information available now, and it is so much easier to do with online platforms. My investing journey started before the internet.

A danger is though that one can spend too much time reading and learning, and not getting started.

Compounding is our greatest friend so, however small, start straight away and keep learning. Read and absorb and improve your strategy as you go.

Learning: starting young, headed to 100

When did you first start thinking seriously about money and investing?

At 22, when I took my first job and had to decide whether to have the company pension or not.

Did any particular individuals inspire you to become financially free?

My father was terrible with money and I didn’t want to be like him. I wanted the security of knowing I need never work again and I could live. That has always been my driver – because life is too short to waste working, even if you enjoy it.

Can you recommend your favourite resources for anyone chasing the FIRE dream?

Genuinely, Monevator! I think it is excellent and strikes exactly the right tone

If your only source of information – other than detailed personal tax and pension advice – was Monevator, you’d probably do well.

I am also now a massive fan of the Vanguard Life Strategy funds – inexpensive, easy to manage, and they take away the risk of paralysis by analysis. Rather than wasting hours optimizing the perfect asset allocation, trust Vanguard and spend the time earning more, learning more, or just enjoying your family.

Based on my own experience, I would work with a quality business or life coach to understand and plan what you really want from life and how you want to make it happen. The clarity that coaching gave me, on many occasions, changed my life.

What is your attitude towards charity and inheritance?

Being charitable is not just financial. I am intensely aware of our good fortune, and we have a budget (of course!) to make donations that help others.

We also now have the luxury of giving our time – either to support people we know, or to help organisations that have a broader impact. My life plan includes some form of major charitable service after we’ve finished traveling too.

Like everyone should we have also written our wills and they provide for charitable donations and inheritances for people we know who would benefit. We don’t have kids, so I guess we have less societal conditioning about who we leave our wealth to.

What will your finances ideally look like towards the end of your life?

Our plan allows for the money to last past our 100th birthdays. But the one thing I know for sure is that life never perfectly follows your plan.

We intend to enjoy the next 20 or 30 years as much as possible, and then anticipate a slowdown, but with enough funds to still enjoy life. If we go early and our beneficiaries gain, then so be it.

My dislike of the fees charged within the financial sector means we will probably avoid any managed products like annuities – but never say never. I enjoy learning about money and managing our finances, and I hope I have the acuity to do so for a very long time.

I guess the dream remains to have a wonderful life (which we do) without diminishing the pot.

So there you have it readers! FI by 50 and retiring early to travel and enjoy life on the road with his wife while they’re both young enough to make the best of it. Questions and reflections – on the concept of these FIRE-side interviews generally or on Mark’s journey specifically – are welcome below. But please do remember Mark is not a hardened Internet warrior like me and he is just sharing his story to inspire others, not to feed the trolls. Of course you can disagree constructively, but please keep that in mind. Thanks!

{ 49 comments }
Weekend reading: A poll about your portfolio checking habits post image

What caught my eye this week.

How often do you check your portfolio, or even calculate your net worth? And how do you do it? Inquiring minds want to know. By which I mean your fellow Monevator readers!

The topic came up in a recent comment thread about end-of-year reviews. We decided a reader poll might be of interest.

Of course in theory I agree with my blogging buddy Nick Magguilli, who warned this week that most people’s time is better spent working for an income rather than fiddling with their investments:

Assume someone with $10,000 invested spends 10 hours a week doing stock research looking for the best investments. Let’s also assume that their research is good and they are able to beat the market by 10% a year as a result.

While this is impressive, unfortunately, their 520 hours of work (10 hours per week * 52 weeks per year) only netted them an additional $1,000 (10% alpha * $10,000). This means that our star analyst was doing stock research for under $2 an hour ($1,000/520 hours).

If the analyst’s ultimate goal was to build wealth, you can see how they would’ve been far better off by picking up a part-time job instead of analyzing 10-Ks.

Even if we were to increase the analyst’s portfolio size to $100,000, their 10% alpha (i.e. $10,000) is roughly equivalent to what they could have made driving for Uber in the same amount of time.

Guilty as charged Nick, at least for the past nine years.

Also, I suspect ten hours spent on investing matters a week is a big underestimate for active investors. It certainly is in my case.

On the other hand it’s good to have a hobby – even a passion.

For my part, my interest was what made saving and investing as much as 50% of my income more like an exciting prospect than a sacrifice. I was simply buying more firepower to do what I loved – the way somebody else might buy new golf clubs.

On the other hand, I don’t really any career to speak of. And given my passion, it might well have been better to get a job as a junior analyst while I still could and then to work my way into running money. (But… wearing a tie. The horror!)

Anyway, I can see both sides.

The poll tax

Hopefully my musings haven’t queered the pitch too badly. Please answer the polls based on what you do – not what you think you should do!

Below you’ll find two questions. Select the answer that’s closest to your own habits.

Yes, I understand some responses aren’t mutually exclusive, or that the poll does not reflect your unique and special experience.

Mine neither. That’s the nature of broad brush polls! We’re just after a sense of how Monevator readers mind what’s theirs, in aggregate.

For instance, I check my portfolio more-than daily via a real-time spreadsheet, but I also do occasional reviews in a text document. Clearly the first best describes how I keep tabs on my portfolio, right?

Two questions, no wrong answers

Firstly, let’s hear how often you check in on your portfolio.

I don’t mean attending to administrative matters (say an email from the platform) or adding money (automatic or manually) but rather keeping tabs on the (hopefully) growing value of your stash.

Secondly, readers and I were curious how you do it.

Again – there’ll be crossover. For example I run a massive real-time spreadsheet, but of course I sometimes see elements of my portfolio on a platform’s web page. Who doesn’t? So the spreadsheet answer I’d give here.

Thanks in advance! The poll will run until Friday and I’ll either recap the final results next weekend or riff them into a future article.

Have a great weekend.

p.s. The new Netflix documentary Madoff: The Monster of Wall Street is worth getting in the supermarket popcorn for. The first episode in particular offers a potted history of 20th Century Wall Street. As for the story, it’s completely unbelievable. Which is crazy, considering it’s true.

[continue reading…]

{ 56 comments }
Unlocking a cheaper interest rate by tweaking your mortgage loan-to-value ratio post image

Do you have a mortgage? Do you know what your loan-to-value ratio is – and what interest rate band that puts you into with your bank?

Oh, I see… You have other hobbies.

Look, I appreciate there’s nothing more boring than a mortgage deal. Especially when half of you already know what I’m talking about, and will nod off in about 150 words’ time.

But if you don’t, please keep reading. You might save yourself a lot of money.

Just ask Richard, a first-time buyer.

Richard was stretching to buy his first flat. And because I’m the sort of person who has blogged about money for 17 years, I asked him what his loan-to-value was.

Huh?” said he.

Long story short: by releasing an extra £2,000 from an ISA he’d mentally segregated for something else, Richard could reduce his total mortgage repayments over the next five years by over £8,000.

That’s a 300% return on the extra £2,000 he put down!

What is the loan-to-value ratio for a mortgage?

I’ll say upfront: this is a particularly extreme example. Richard is arty, clueless with money, and rarely reads a menu let alone the financial small print.

What’s more Richard was set to borrow at his bank’s steepest rate for first-time buyers, before he found that extra money down the back of the metaphorical sofa. The savings will rarely be so big.

Nevertheless the principle holds for all mortgages.

And personally I’d rather have any extra money, however tiny, if the alternative is it goes to a bank.

So what’s going on here?

Well, it starts with the loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of your mortgage.

The LTV ratio is simply the ratio of what you’re borrowing from the bank – the mortgage – compared to the purchase price of the property.

For instance, say you’re buying a home that costs £400,000 and you’ve got a £100,000 deposit. You’ll need a £300,000 mortgage to complete the purchase.

  • That is a LTV ratio of £300,000/£400,000, which works out at 75%.

Or say you have a mortgage of £270,000 on a £336,000 property.

  • The LTV ratio is £270,000/£336,000 = 80.35%

As we’ll see in a moment, those pedantic two decimal places are the whole point of this article.

But first a quick detour into why banks care about LTV ratios.

Loan-to-value ratio and riskiness

Although it remains hard for those of us who lived through the financial crisis to believe it, banks are in the business of managing risk and return.

And mortgages are the least risky debt – for both banks and borrowers.

That’s because mortgages are secured loans.

The property being bought is put up as collateral by the borrower. If you don’t meet your mortgage payments, then your bank can seize and sell your property to cover the mortgage and recoup what it lent you.

This clearly makes a mortgage a safer form of debt for the bank, because it is asset-backed.

But it’s also safer for you as a borrower. The rate charged on an asset-backed mortgage will be much lower than that on a credit card or a personal loan.

Less risky does not mean risk-free. A mortgage is still a big liability, and you can lose a lot of money if things go against you. All debt has downsides.

Of course, banks aren’t desperate to seize and sell their customers’ assets to get their money back. Partly because it makes for bad publicity, particularly when they’re all at it. But also it’s costly and time-consuming.

And most importantly – bad news tends to cluster.

The very time when a bank’s borrowers are defaulting en masse on their mortgages will invariably be a terrible time for the economy more widely – and probably for house prices, too.

Banks could be seizing and selling properties into a falling market (as they did in the early 1990s).

Which means that in a steep house price crash, the bank could fail to recoup the money it had lent out against the mortgage when it sells. Especially once all the various costs are factored in.

And again, despite how it looked in 2008, banks don’t really want to be losing money on one of their main lines of business.

The loan-to-value ratio and interest rates

Obviously this unhappy loss-making outcome is more likely when the mortgage made up most of the money used to buy the property.

In other words – when the purchase was at a very high loan-to-value ratio.

In that case, the equity in the property – the difference between the house price and the mortgage – is very small. There’s not much safetly buffer, from the bank’s perspective. So little in fact that after a house price crash it could be wiped out and even go negative. (Hence the term ‘negative equity’.)

To reflect this risk of losing money on small deposit house purchases, banks charge greater interest rates on their higher LTV mortgages.

At the very highest LTV levels – where the borrower puts down just a 5% deposit or maybe nothing at all – rates will be far higher than for borrowers with a chunkier deposit who borrow from the same bank.

Banks typically obfuscate all this with their mortgage filters and other tools. But a few do make it admirably plain via downloadable lists of all their products.

Here’s an example of what we’re talking about:

Source: Virgin Money

Here the mortgage rate falls by 0.24% for buyers who put down an extra 20% deposit, meaning their LTV ratio is 65% compared to 85%.

On a £300,000 mortgage, that’d be a difference of £42 a month, or £2,520 over five years. Not enormous, but certainly worth having.

But the LTV bands in this example are very wide. You’ll find them stepping down in 5% increments with some lenders.

In my initial example, for instance, Richard was originally borrowing on a LTV ratio of 95%. His bank was looking to charge him 5.75% over five years.

By putting in a little more cash, Richard dropped to an LTV ratio of 90%. The interest rate in that band was a far cheaper 5.04%. Which was what made for the vast savings we saw over five years.

Mind the cliff edge

You might say this isn’t rocket science – and I agree, it’s not – and that if you had an extra 20% of the purchase price to casually reduce the size of your mortgage, you’d do it already.

Fair enough – but that’s not what I’m talking about.

The point is these LTV bands are arbitrary and typically pretty rigid.

Again, Richard he didn’t have to put down an extra 5% deposit to drop into the much cheaper mortgage bracket.

His deposit was already big enough such that his LTV ratio was only slightly above 90%. Putting in just £2,000 to get the LTV ratio below 90% is what unlocked a cheaper rate and saved a fortune.

The return on those marginal pounds was enormous, as I showed above.

Now, many of the sort of people who read Monevator will find this obvious. Which reminds me of my former housemate, Nat, who I used to compete with while watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?

Nat was never very self-aware about this – even when I pointed it out to her – but there were only two categories of questions in this quiz as far as she was concerned.

“Too easy, everyone knows that!” (when she knew the answer) or “Impossible, that is so obscure!” (when she didn’t).

Similarly, all this may be obvious to some, but others aren’t used to thinking about money this way.

In my experience people often have, say, a pot of cash for the house deposit, and another pot set aside for furnishing the property or for buying a car or simply labeled as nebulous ‘savings’.

Depending on how close to the LTV ‘cliff edge’ they are, it could make much more sense to add that money to the deposit, unlock a cheaper mortgage, and to then use say a 0% credit card to furnish the new home. (Provided they can trust themselves to pay it off, of course!)

Alternatively, they might employ removal boxes as furniture like I did when I bought, and gradually furnish their new home out of the cashflow freed up by the resultant cheaper mortgage!

A few final pointers about loan-to-value ratios

With so much financial business done online nowadays, I suspect a lot of people simply click through a mortgage comparison site with little idea about the loan-to-value ratios driving the rates their offered – let alone how much they might save by putting down a little bit more as a deposit.

So a few concluding thoughts about tweaking mortgage bands via the LTV ratio:

  • Can’t increase your deposit? Maybe you can get into a lower band by driving a slightly harder bargain when you buy your home. Remember it’s the ratio that matters.
  • Your loan-to-value ratio will have changed by the time you remortgage. A repayment mortgage reduces the size of the mortgage balance over time. If house prices rise your loan-to-value will fall further.
  • Also look out for any opportunity to nudge yourself into a more favourable band when you remortgage by making over-payments.

While we’re on the subject, these sort of cliff edges pop-up elsewhere in personal finance. So stay alert.

You’re looking for marginal edge cases, where a small additional amount of money or some other tweak to your financial posture generates outsized returns.

For instance, increasing your pension contributions can enable you to retain your child benefit if it reduces your income below the critical threshold – a win-win.

Paid to play

It’s pretty dopey these arbitrary bands with critical thresholds still exist for mortgages. Not to mention other areas like stamp duty – and arguably even income tax.

Simple bands made sense when everything was worked out with a slide rule. But what’s the justification now? It’s all done by computer.

Ideally each of us would be offered a bespoke mortgage rate. This would reflect every facet of our unique financial situation. Such individualized underwriting would be fairer on borrowers – and perhaps safer for the banks as well.

Maybe lenders worry that bespoke deals – or even just narrower loan-to-value bands, with say 1% increments – could confuse us? Or even lay them open to mis-selling claims?

Whatever the reason, for now it pays to pay attention to the small print.

Got a favourite example where some marginal additional pounds unlock outsized benefits? Please share all in the comments below!

{ 19 comments }

The Slow and Steady passive portfolio update: Q4 2022

Passive investing

This past year has not been pretty for investors. Indeed it’s the worst on record for our Slow and Steady passive portfolio – even after a slight bounce back from last quarter.

We’ve taken a -13% loss during benighted 2022. Our previous all-time bruising was a mere -3% knuckle-scrape from 2018.

In fact we’ve only had three down years since the portfolio began in 2011. Six years ended with double-digit gains!

So while most of us understand that all good runs come to an end, I do worry we could still be mentally unprepared for a sustained spell of negativity.

Mental as anything

How many of us got used to glancing at our portfolio for a quick ego boost during the good times?

Gains dancing before our eyes and seemingly rearranging themselves into the words: “You’re doing brilliantly, old chum. Keep it up!”

How will we now fare when incessantly poor numbers decrypt into the sub-text: “You’re going nowhere, ya loser!”

We know all the powerful mantras to recite to ward off devilry:

  • “Investing is a long-term game.”
  • “Buy low, sell high.”
  • Be greedy when others are fearful.”

And anyone who’s read their financial history appreciates a key test is keeping your head when the markets play rough.

But can we keep the faith?

Down but never out

While we sit on our hands and wait for the good times to return, here’s the latest numbers from the Slow and Steady portfolio in 8K Drama-O-Vision:

The annualised return of the portfolio is 6.27%.

The Slow & Steady portfolio is Monevator’s model passive investing portfolio. It was set up at the start of 2011 with £3,000. An extra £1,200 is invested every quarter into a diversified set of index funds, tilted towards equities. You can read the origin story and find all the previous passive portfolio posts tucked away in the Monevator vaults.

The investing Razzie for 2022 has to go to UK government bonds. Our gilt fund lost 38% after inflation1, comfortably surpassing the previous historic low of -33% in 1916.2

We’re truly on the horns of a dilemma with bonds.

If inflation isn’t suppressed and bond yields climb vertically then even worse could follow. UK gilts suffered real-terms losses of -68.5% from 1915 to 1920.

But before you reach for the ‘bond eject’ button, know that gilt disaster was followed by a spectacular 480% rebound from 1921 to 1934.

Sack off bonds after a bad year and you can miss some big rallies:

  • 1920: -19.7%
  • 1921: 27.4%
  • 1974: -27.2%
  • 1975: 10.9%
  • 1981: -1.6%
  • 1982: 42%
  • 1994: -12.2%
  • 1995: 14.5%
  • 2013: -8.5%
  • 2014: 13.9%

Inflation-adjusted real returns. Data for UK gilt nominal returns from the JST Macrohistory database.3

Bonds spook many investors because they’re esoteric. But the fact is – like equities – bonds have bouncebackability.4

Dump your bonds now for cash and you may crystallise a loss that currently only exists on paper…

…or you may save yourself more pain, if it turns out we’re in for a rerun of the 1970s.

Given the uncertainty, I wouldn’t blame you for reducing bond exposure. But I respectfully suggest you avoid ‘all or nothing’ reactions such as swearing off bonds for life.

The long view

After a year like 2022, it’s probably better to count our blessings over a longer timeframe.

Stepping back we can see the portfolio has made a nominal annualised return of:

  • 1.6% over 3 years. (Miserable!)
  • 3.3% over 5 years. (Pants!)
  • 6.3% over 12 years. (Actually, I’ll take it!)

That’s around 3.3% annualised in real returns. Historically we might expect an average 4% annualised from a 60/40 portfolio.

So while we’re currently sub-average, it’ll have to do for now.

One year ago that same number was a rollicking 9.8%. Things can change quickly.

Building back better?

Our property fund’s -25% real-terms annual loss was peak awful on the equity side of the Passive Portfolio’s scorecard.

Curse you rising interest rates!

And how do corporates deal with bad news? They rebrand it.

Coincidentally, iShares decided it was high time our dilapidated old global property tracker got a new lick of green, eco-conscious paint.

On 24 November, the fund changed its name from this:

iShares Global Property Securities Equity Index Fund

To this:

iShares Environment & Low Carbon Tilt Real Estate Index Fund

Despite some confusion on iShares’ website, it’s also changing the fund’s index from this:

 FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Index

To this:

FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Green Low Carbon Target Index 

The gist is that the vanilla property tracker now has an Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) twist.

The new index apparently screens out companies that deal in weaponry, tobacco, and fossil fuels.

It also excludes – or at least takes a dim view of – anyone into human rights abuses, child labour, slavery, organised crime… that sort of thing.

Finally, it up-weights those constituents whose property holdings are deemed sustainable. That means they have to make an effort to be energy efficient and to obtain ‘green building certification’.

It all sounds excellent in principle – I doubt many of us want to prop up the share prices of slum landlords running slave gangs.

But just how radical a change is this in practice?

I must admit I’m not over familiar with the micro-details of the FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Index.

Still, I’ve found one commentary about the switch from a firm of financial advisors called Old Mill, which says:

An initial look at the proposals suggest there will be little change in the underlying investments of the fund, with 23 of the approximately 340 investable companies being excluded.

And my own eyeballing of the respective index factsheets reveals:

  • A reshuffle of the Top 10 holdings into slightly different percentage weights.
  • Rejigged sub-sectors.
  • Industrial, retail, and healthcare REITs are down 1-2% in the green index.
  • Office and residential REITS are up 1-2%.

Call me Graham Thunberg but this doesn’t smack of saving the planet.

Meanwhile, the five year annualised returns (the longest available) published for the two indices reveal:

  • 0.5% a year for the green index
  • 1.5% a year for the standard index

While I admire people who want to invest in line with their values (assuming they’re not massive fans of cluster bombs and extortion) I’m personally dubious about the ESG label.

The potential for greenwashing is enormous. And I despair about my chances of verifying the ethical claims given:

  1. The finance industry is adept at misdirection
  2. We’ve been gaslighted about climate change for more than 30 years

There’s also a danger of individuals ticking the ESG boxes and then forgetting to take direct action like:

  • Cutting back on planes and meat
  • Trading in a gas-guzzler for an electric car
  • Turning down the thermostat
  • Voting for the political party with the best green policies

Still, as a card-carrying passive investor I’m inclined to keep our holding as is.

What say thee?

The one reason I’d consider switching to a new property fund is because the Slow and Steady portfolio is meant to be demonstrative for our readers.

Hence our property allocation is supposed to test the benefit – or otherwise – of diversifying into global real estate.

All this ESG gilding muddies the picture. I’d rather create an ESG version of the portfolio to illustrate the trials and tribulations of socially responsible investing.

That’s my opinion – but I’d really like to know what you think.

Should passive fund managers switch their index trackers to green indices?

Should I swap this fund for one focused purely on commercial property as an asset class?

Would you like us to come up with an ESG passive portfolio? That way we can contrast the fortunes of saint and sinner stocks alike.

Please let me know in the comments below.

Annual rebalancing time

I’ll run quickly through the annual portfolio maintenance because this post is already loooong.

We previously committed to an asset allocation shift of 2% per year from conventional gilts to index-linked bonds until we have a 50-50 split between them.

That means:

  • The Vanguard UK Government Bond index fund decreases to a 27% target allocation
  • The Royal London Short Duration Global Index Linked (GBP hedged) fund increases to a 13% target allocation

Our overall allocation to equities and bonds remains static at 60/40.

We also annually rebalance our positions back to their preset asset allocations at this point in the year. After 2022 that means selling off a portion of our badly performing equities and buying into battered bonds.

It’s a counterintuitive move (as discussed above). But over the long-term rising bond yields mean gilts are now better value than they were.

Inflation adjustments

To maintain our purchasing power, we must also increase our regular investment contributions every year by inflation.

We use the RPI rate. It has ballooned 14% this year according to the Office for National Statistics. (CPI was 10.7%).

So we’ll invest £1,200 per quarter in 2023. That’s up from £1,055 in 2022 and a titchy £750 back when we started in 2011.

New transactions

Our £1,200 contribution is split between our seven funds according to our predetermined asset allocation. The trades play out like this:

UK equity

Vanguard FTSE UK All-Share Index Trust – OCF 0.06%

Fund identifier: GB00B3X7QG63

Rebalancing sale: £457.14

Sell 1.951 units @ £234.35

Target allocation: 5%

Developed world ex-UK equities

Vanguard FTSE Developed World ex-UK Equity Index Fund – OCF 0.14%

Fund identifier: GB00B59G4Q73

Rebalancing sale: £984.72

Sell 1.958 units @ £502.91

Target allocation: 37%

Global small cap equities

Vanguard Global Small-Cap Index Fund – OCF 0.29%

Fund identifier: IE00B3X1NT05

Rebalancing sale: £124.68

Sell 0.334 units @ £372.79

Target allocation: 5%

Emerging market equities

iShares Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund D – OCF 0.2%

Fund identifier: GB00B84DY642

Rebalancing sale: £280.10

Sell 156.435 units @ £1.79

Target allocation: 8%

Global property

iShares Environment & Low Carbon Tilt Real Estate Index Fund – OCF 0.17%

Fund identifier: GB00B5BFJG71

New purchase: £134.76

Buy 60.596 units @ £2.22

Target allocation: 5%

UK gilts

Vanguard UK Government Bond Index – OCF 0.12%

Fund identifier: IE00B1S75374

New purchase: £1957.69

Buy 14.781 units @ £132.45

Target allocation: 27%

Global inflation-linked bonds

Royal London Short Duration Global Index-Linked Fund – OCF 0.27%

Fund identifier: GB00BD050F05

New purchase: £954.18

Buy 921.911 units @ £1.04

Dividends reinvested: £203.38 (Buy another 196.502 units)

Target allocation: 13%

New investment contribution = £1,200

Trading cost = £0

Take a look at our broker comparison table for your best investment account options. InvestEngine is currently cheapest if you’re happy to invest only in ETFs. Or learn more about choosing the cheapest stocks and shares ISA for your circumstances.

Average portfolio OCF = 0.16%

If it all seems too complicated check out our best multi-asset fund picks. These include all-in-one diversified portfolios such as the Vanguard LifeStrategy funds.

Interested in tracking your own portfolio or using the Slow & Steady investment tracking spreadsheet? Our piece on portfolio tracking shows you how.

Finally, find out why we think most people are better off choosing passive vs active investing.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

  1. -27% in nominal terms with CPI inflation at 10.7%. []
  2. See the JST Macrohistory database, which documents UK gilt returns since 1871. []
  3. Òscar Jordà, Katharina Knoll, Dmitry Kuvshinov, Moritz Schularick, and Alan M. Taylor. 2019. “The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3), 1225-1298. []
  4. The riskier, longer maturities do anyway. Short-term bonds more closely resemble cash. []
{ 29 comments }