≡ Menu

InvestEngine LifePlan portfolio review

InvestEngine LifePlan portfolio review post image

Disclosure: Links to platforms may be affiliate links, where we may earn a small commission. Your capital is at risk when you invest. This article is not personal financial advice. Please do more research before deciding whether an InvestEngine LifePlan portfolio is right for you.

Do you fancy the idea of buying an entire portfolio at the click of a button? Do you like the pre-packaged, multi-asset convenience of Vanguard’s LifeStrategy funds? Do you wish someone would do that for ETFs, only without the UK equity bias?

Well, they have!

Enter the LifePlan portfolios from UK investment platform InvestEngine.

InvestEngine is known for its zero-fee broker services for DIY investors.

The LifePlan portfolios are not zero-fee but they are nicely-priced for small investors. They also feature several noteworthy points-of-difference versus their LifeStrategy rivals.

The headline: there’s much to like about the LifePlans.

With that said, there is a lurking cost issue for large investors that must be aired. We’ll deal with that in the costs section below.

What are the LifePlan portfolios?

LifePlan portfolios are like InvestEngine-managed ETF meal deals.

They’re readymade ETF portfolios you can buy off-the-shelf, one and done. As opposed to agonising about how much to allocate to Emerging Markets, or spending your nights sweating over your precise percentage of inflation-linked bonds. (Who even does that? Not me. Definitely not. Oh no.)

This type of multi-asset, ‘life is too short’ strategy is incredibly popular among those investors who are happy to exchange a measure of control for convenience.

Choice cuts

Instead of filtering through hundreds or thousands of funds, your choice with LifePlan immediately narrows down to picking one of six portfolios.

Each portfolio contains anywhere from 11 to 15 ETFs – with trading and rebalancing handled for you.

You only need to pick your strategic equity/bond allocation:

Portfolio name Equity allocation Bond allocation
LifePlan 20 20% 80%
LifePlan 40 40% 60%
LifePlan 60 60% 40%
LifePlan 80 80% 20%
LifePlan 100 100% 0%

LifePlan 100 is so-named because it’s 100% invested in equities. That’s ideal for young bucks with little to lose and the nerves of a mountain goat.

At the other end of the spectrum is LifePlan 20. No prizes for guessing it’s 20% equities while the other 80% is in Dogecoin low-risk bonds.

Stability is the watchword of the LifePlan 20 portfolio. Its owners want all the excitement of a Sudoku book. That’s because they’re either risk-averse or wealth-preservers who’ve already won the game.

Sitting in the middle is the 60/40 portfolio – the default choice for passive investors the world over.

Are multi-asset investments a good idea?

Absolutely. Multi-asset investments are an excellent idea for anyone who wants to put their money to work, but doesn’t want to be hands-on.

Contrary to popular opinion and the messages we’re assailed by online, investing success does not depend on micromanaging ‘secret’ stocks, cryptocurrencies, or currency trading techniques.1

Rather than such punting, you’re far better off doing a few very basic and boring things:

  • Invest in a low-cost, globally diversified array of equity ETFs, supported by high-quality bonds
  • Automate your investing habits
  • Press the snooze button and leave your investment alone while you get on with your life
  • Check in periodically (every few years, not days) to make sure everything’s on track
  • Look back with astonishment years later at how much your wealth has grown

That’s the basic operating manual of passive investing – a strategy that balances results with simplicity and best investing practice.

And happily, these principles underpin the creation and management of the LifePlan portfolios.

Sticking to the knitting

Fundamentally there’s nothing new here. And I mean that as a compliment, not a slight.

There are few points on offer for originality in the retail investing space.

You might be intrigued if you walked into the Tate Modern to see a parade of dead-eyed turkeys dropping votes into a Christmas-themed ballot box. A commentary on contemporary democracy perhaps?

But it’s best to steer clear of novelty when managing your money. Financial innovation and complexity has a history of backfiring upon trusting regular Joes/Josephines.

Hence I’m very happy that InvestEngine has opted for a tried-and-tested approach. Essentially, these are the sort of portfolios we’ve championed for years on Monevator.

Although there are enough twists to keep things spicy if you have strong opinions on currency hedging, bond duration, and factor investing.

But before we go on, we need to talk about costs.

After all, one of the key strengths of passive investing is that its devotees wage Holy War on fees.

Costs crusade

The Ongoing Charge Figure (OCF) of a LifePlan portfolio is 0.11% to 0.15% depending on the version you choose.2

Now add InvestEngine’s 0.25% fee for managing your portfolio.

The total price tag for a LifePlan portfolio is therefore 0.36% to 0.4% of your investment per year.

For LifePlan 60, for instance, it’s 0.37%.

LifePlans are only available at InvestEngine so there’s no account fee or trading charge to pay.

Which is all an excellent deal for small investors.

By way of comparison, a LifeStrategy fund held on Vanguard’s platform costs 0.22% for the fund and 0.15% in platform fees. Again a total of 0.37% – so a dead heat with LifePlan 60. (Probably not a coincidence!)

However, small investors must pay a £48 a year minimum charge at Vanguard, which is quite a drag when you’re starting out.

Advantage InvestEngine.

Size matters

LifePlans are less competitive for large investors though.

That’s because LifePlan’s 0.25% management charge is uncapped. Bad news for big portfolios as there’s no limit to your fees on that portion of the costs.

Contrast that with Vanguard, which caps its 0.15% platform fee at £375 (when your portfolio reaches £250,000 in size).

Beyond that point, you’ll pay progressively more for your LifePlan versus Vanguard LifeStrategy.

Indeed it’s not hard to find an even better deal than that because LifeStrategy funds are not a Vanguard platform exclusive.

For example, Interactive Investor offers a flat-rate platform fee of £156 per year for a SIPP. That’s the charge no matter how big or small your portfolio.

Interactive Investor’s flat-fee is good for large investors and bad for small investors.

What counts as large and small in this scenario?

You can work out the crossover point like this:

£156 (fixed fees) / 0.0015 (differential between LifeStrategy and Lifeplan 60 percentage fees)
= £104,000

If your portfolio is worth more than £104,000, then LifePlan 60 is more expensive than LifeStrategy 60 in Interactive Investor’s SIPP.

Conversely, LifePlan 60 is cheaper than LifeStrategy 60 below that crossover point.

So that’s the threshold to think about if cost is your dealbreaker (and assuming Interactive Investor is your favoured flat or capped-fee broker).

Side-bar: for a fair comparison, include an estimate of your trading costs when you weigh up a fixed fee versus uncapped percentage fee proposition.

In this case, I’ve assumed the investor takes advantage of Interactive Investor’s free regular purchase scheme.

Sells aren’t needed because LifeStrategy rebalances itself.

LifePlan versus LifeStrategy – the detail

But cost is not the only battleground, so let’s consider some other key differences between InvestEngine and Vanguard’s offerings.

Home bias

InvestEngine promises no home bias in LifePlan portfolios. That is, a LifePlan’s UK equity allocation should equal the UK’s presence in the global market cap portfolio.

Right now, UK stocks sum just over 3% of the equity side of LifePlan, as opposed to about 25% in Vanguard LifeStrategy.

Why is home bias an issue? Because financial theory suggests we should accept the market’s view (that is, the wisdom of the crowd) unless we have a very good reason to do otherwise.

And yet home bias persists – with one theory being that investors prefer to invest in what they know.

Long-term studies suggest however that such a preference is not a winning strategy, even if it is a psychological comfort.

Choice of components

Vanguard LifeStrategy portfolios are built exclusively from Vanguard funds while LifePlan portfolios are free to play the field.

InvestEngine can choose from any ETF it stocks on its platform – and it has a solid range these days.

Vanguard funds are good but they’ve long since surrendered their lead in the price wars.

Moreover if InvestEngine spots an ETF with some other advantage then it can swoop on that, too.

Diversity fans should also note that LifePlan 60 currently comprises ETFs from five different providers, including Vanguard.

Bond duration

An interesting selling point for LifePlans is they use a shorter duration bond portfolio than LifeStrategy.

All things being equal, a shorter duration bond allocation implies lower overall portfolio volatility in exchange for a lower expected return.

Your bond portfolio’s duration number helps reveal the difference this choice can make.

The rule of thumb is that the duration number indicates the approximate gain or loss you can expect to see from your bonds for every 1% change in yield.

For example, if your bond portfolio’s average duration is 7 then it:

  • Loses approximately 7% of its market value for every 1% rise in its yield
  • Gains approximately 7% for every 1% fall in its yield

Marvellous. From there, we can see that a long-bond duration of 15 can result in some big movements when yields buckaroo. (With ‘movements’ being the operative word back in the time of Truss.)

More common scenarios to think about include:

  • Yields rise, perhaps because inflation is running hotter than expected – shorter durations are best.
  • Yields fall, and the stock market crashes as the global economy goes into deep recession – longer durations are best.

The right choice for you as an investor may depend on which scenario you fear more: surging inflation or a deflationary recession.

Or you might decide you have no idea what yields will do, but you’ll likely experience many such scenarios in your lifetime. In which case, it’s a balanced approach for you!

So what durations are our multi-asset pair sporting like rival teams’ football scarves?

I calculate average bond durations of approximately:

  • LifePlan 60: 5.2
  • LifeStrategy 60: 7.2

Hence if yields rose 2% from here then you’d roughly expect:

  • 5.2 x 2 x 0.4 (bond % of overall portfolio) = 4.16% in bond losses for LifePlan 60
  • 7.2 x 2 x 0.4 (bond % of overall portfolio) = 5.76% in bond losses for LifeStrategy 60

Conversely if bond yields fell 2% then the same maths would apply, only this time reversed for gains.

It doesn’t seem life-changing to me, either way.

(Neither firm publishes average durations for these portfolios but it looks like the difference could be more significant at the LifePlan/LifeStrategy 20 level.)

Global and corporate bond diversification

One thing many of us discovered in 2022 is that bonds are a complex beast.

A bit like a guard dog sold as a family pet, they made us feel safe right up until we were bitten in the backside.

It’s surprising to me then that neither InvestEngine or Vanguard makes it easy to assess the key splits in their bond portfolios.

For example, geographic diversity, type, credit quality and, as mentioned, duration.

One long-running debate on Monevator is whether it’s best to diversify your government bonds across other developed world countries or to stick to UK gilts.

To that end, here’s each product’s global/GBP fixed income allocation (as a percentage of the bond portfolio):

  • LifePlan 60: 37/63
  • LifeStrategy 60: 66/34

(Note: these percentages include some corporate bonds, and cash-like securities.3 They’re also my approximate calculations based on fund provider and Morningstar data.)

Personally, I’m indifferent to the split. Home bias isn’t a thing if you stick to high-quality government bonds.

But I know many others prefer to diversify, in which case LifeStrategy has the edge. (Although, LifePlan’s overseas bond holding becomes more pronounced at the 40/60 and 20/80 equity/bond levels.)

Finally, both portfolios hedge all overseas bond holdings back to GBP, which is what I want to see.

Moving on, here’s the corporate/government bond allocation (as a percentage of the bond portfolio):

  • LifePlan 60: 13/87
  • LifeStrategy 60: 32/68

I prefer the LifePlan approach here. Fewer corporate bonds means InvestEngine is accepting a smidge less expected return in exchange for lower risk.

That divergence only widens as you head into the meatier bond realms of LifePlan 20 versus LifeStrategy 20.

Inflation-linked bond conundrum

For inflation defence, LifePlan uses the short duration, US inflation-protected bonds in iShares $ TIPS 0-5 ETF (GBP hedged).

LifeStrategy plumps for long duration, UK inflation-protected bonds in Vanguard’s UK Inflation-Linked Gilt Index Fund.

Here’s how those two options have performed since inflation took off in late 2021:

Source: Trustnet Chart tool

Lordy, Vanguard’s fund lost 37% without even adjusting downwards for inflation.

Meanwhile, LifePlan’s pick managed 6.3% growth (or 1.85% per year), although that’s also before adjusting for inflation. In real terms, LifePlan’s TIPs ETF also lost money, just not as much.

So neither put up a great fight against high inflation albeit InvestEngine’s choice was far better.

The reasons are complex but duration is key to the puzzle:

  • Vanguard’s fund is long duration – average duration is 14.5 at the time of writing
  • InvestEngine’s ETF has a very short duration of 2.3

When inflation runs riot, you want a shorter duration inflation-linked fund on your bond side (imperfect though it is), as the chart shows.4

Ultimately, you have to enter LifePlan/LifeStrategy 40 territory before either product starts to offer a significant index-linked bond allocation.

To hedge or not to hedge (equities)

Vanguard does not hedge equity exposure.

However, 50% of a LifePlan’s US equity exposure is hedged to GBP.

InvestEngine says:

While a fully unhedged equity position increases a portfolio’s risk, a fully hedged position increases costs and the temptation to time currency markets.

Based on extensive research, our balanced currency hedging policy is designed to reduce volatility and drawdowns, while keeping costs low and increasing long-term risk-adjusted returns.

That’s a strong claim.

The conventional view is that currency fluctuations are extremely hard to predict and we should expect hedged and unhedged investments to deliver similar returns over the long run.

If so, the decision to hedge depends more upon your personal risk exposure than the evidence base, which presents a truly mixed and timeline dependent picture.

It’s certainly a good idea to hedge your overseas bonds because their primary job is to lower portfolio volatility. Exchange rate gyrations can add excessive volatility on the bond side, hence Vanguard and InvestEngine both eliminate that problem with GBP-hedged choices.

In contrast, currency swings aren’t as problematic for stocks because they’re such a wild ride anyway. Thus the volatility benefit gained by hedging out FX perturbations is much less on the equity side.

So because hedges increase fees – and can work for or against you – most people don’t bother hedging equities unless they’re betting on currency moves.

Hedging my bets

One person who might consider hedging some of their overseas stocks is a retiree or near-retiree.

That’s because if you’re relying on global equities to pay your bills soon, then you don’t want a rapidly appreciating pound devaluing your foreign assets. (Think some kind of reverse Brexit, or the discovery of Saudi-scale oil reserves in Cockermouth.)

On the other hand, if most of our retiree’s wealth is held in gilts or hedged overseas bonds then their bills are probably covered by assets linked to GBP. In which case some currency diversification is probably a good idea, just in case the pound sinks.

Overall, I’m sceptical of the need for hedged equity exposure – though it wouldn’t put me off either, if I liked the rest of the portfolio (which I do).

For what it’s worth the pound remains at a low ebb against the dollar. If it should rise over the next few years then InvestEngine’s decision will provide a boost.

But over the long-term? Nobody knows.

For more on this, see Monevator contributor Finumus’ post on why you may not want to hedge your equities.

Factor investing: thrive or dive?

Factor investing is a strategy that advocates holding particular stock categories which are historically associated with beating the market.

The risk factor categories that LifePlan includes are:

Things to know:

  • The research underpinning the risk factors is convincing
  • But nobody guarantees the risk factors will continue to outperform in the future
  • Indeed, they’ve mostly been down on their luck in recent years
  • Risk factors are only available in a diluted form in ETFs
  • They do diversify the standard market cap portfolio
  • InvestEngine has chosen an excellent blend of factors
  • It invests 30% of the equity portfolio in risk factors, which is a sensible slice if you’re going to do it
  • Some or all of the risk factors can trail the market for long periods

The next chart shows how each risk factor has performed since dedicated factor ETFs came on stream:

Source: JustETF

Only momentum has really fulfilled its promise over the past 11 years. Quality scored a draw. The rest of the factors would have weighed a portfolio down.

But the purpose of the chart isn’t to illustrate that risk factor investing is a bad idea per se. Risk factors could come roaring back and start trouncing the market tomorrow. Again, nobody knows.

What the chart does reveal is that good investment ideas can fail to deliver – and for long periods – even when backed by research, theory, and common sense.

I invest in risk factors myself. But I also think it’s worth knowing the pros and cons to avoid disappointment later.

Like the equities-hedging decision, this one may prove to be a tailwind or headwind, but we’ll only know in retrospect.

Summing up

I think the LifePlans are an excellent option for people who want to invest but don’t care about investing.

That’s a lot of people!

I’ve recommended LifeStrategy funds to friends and family and I’ll happily do the same with LifePlans.

Personally, I think the LifePlan-InvestEngine fee structure is a great deal for small investors.

But InvestEngine needs to cap its fees before I could recommend LifePlans to anyone with much over £100,000 in their portfolio.

For current LifeStrategy investors, LifePlan offers a rational alternative, especially if you’re looking for a portfolio without home bias or long-duration inflation-linked bonds – or if you want to diversify your exposure to fund management companies.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

Bonus appendix

InvestEngine shared with us the current allocation for each ETF in the LifePlan portfolios. It’s very useful information if you’re interested in how the portfolios are constructed.

LifePlan 100% equity portfolio

Weights may not sum to 100 due to rounding errors.

80% equity portfolio

60% equity portfolio

40% equity portfolio

20% equity portfolio

You can only invest in LifePlan portfolios through InvestEngine. See our review of the platform.

InvestEngine offers LifePlans in ISAs, SIPPs, and GIA accounts.

InvestEngine is FCA-authorised and is covered by the UK’s FSCS investor compensation scheme.

LifePlans are managed portfolios of ETFs, not fund-of-funds. Thus the underlying ETFs determine whether dividends are accumulation or income. Happily, InvestEngine automatically reinvests all dividends for you, if you enable the AutoInvest feature.

LifePlan’s asset allocations are rebalanced when they stray too far from their initial moorings. InvestEngine checks daily to see if the rebalancing thresholds have been passed.

Check out our best multi-asset funds list for a snapshot of other products available in this category.

If you’re wondering how to select the right LifePlan portfolio then check out our articles on:

Thanks for reading! Monevator is a spiffing blog about making, saving, and investing money. Please do sign-up to get our latest posts by email for free. Find us on Twitter and Facebook. Or peruse a few of our best articles.

  1. Y’know, the one recommended by that nice guy off the Internet? Promising he’ll teach you everything for free / after you’ve spent hundreds of pounds ascending through his multi-level marketing scheme. [↩]
  2. That charge covers the individual OCFs of the underlying ETFs. You don’t pay those on top. [↩]
  3. InvestEngine includes a money market ETF on the bond side of the portfolio. [↩]
  4. Of course, you also want an index tracker that holds inflation-linked bonds that correlate with UK prices. A short-duration index-linked gilt fund is a good choice. Global/US index-linked trackers (GBP hedged) also work. [↩]
{ 14 comments }

Weekend reading: Are rich people miserable?

Weekend reading logo

What caught my eye this week.

I enjoyed Life After The Daily Grind’s article asking whether money and miserableness go together. It was sharply written and thought-provoking.

But I didn’t really agree with the main premise.

Over the last decade or so several of my friends have ‘made it’. From wealthy enough to eschew the commute forever, all the way up to properly rich.

And honestly, besides a bit of a psychic dislocation for the first year or so, they don’t change very much.

Rich pickings

You wouldn’t be able to tell the most understated and modest of my financially very successful friends from how he was 20 years ago, unless you were lucky enough to visit his gorgeous house in the country.

Meanwhile the one who took many of his best friends with him on his entrepreneurial adventure would have done much the same I think if he’d convinced them to eschew the rat race to decamp to Thailand.

As for the banker, yes it was hard to pin him down when he was working 100-plus hours a week in his 20s. But even nowadays when he mostly points underlings to the treadmill or works from home – or on the slopes – a few days a week, he’s still just as hard to get hold of. (It’s not just me…is it, N.?)

True, the friend I’m closest to remains restless and unsatisfied despite his eight figures. He still worries about money, and frets over whether he’s investing it right.

And he just can’t quit the game.

I guess this is the bit where I’m supposed to say I feel sorry for him.

But I don’t.

You see, he was restless and hungry when I met him – and it was part of what attracted me to him. His energy and drive is infectious.

I feel a bit guilty saying this, but if he now spent his days drinking sundowners and spending an hour meditating on the beach before an afternoon nap, I wonder if I’d be disappointed?

In contrast, if my co-blogger The Accumulator was living a materially richer life that was still abundant with quiet moments, I’d be thrilled for him.

That’s his lane, rich or poor.

The bottom line: money doesn’t seem to transform anyone very much – or at least not once you’re off the bottom rung. Mostly just the scenery and props.

Money, money, money

However I am largely with L.A.T.D.G. when they make this observation:

All the high achievers I’ve worked with over the years are disciplined, organised, and highly driven by material gain. While the people I know who strike me as the happiest don’t have these attributes and although not successful in the monetary sense — they are happy and find enjoyment in simple things, like a sunny day, a walk in the park, or the smell of freshly ground coffee first thing in the morning.

Substitute ‘material gain’ in that first sentence for ‘winning’ – or add it as a second or alternative motivation – and I’d agree 100%.

None of my friends stumbled into being rich. They went for it. They didn’t have much of a work-life balance. Or rather they did because work and life was one and the same, so there wasn’t much to topple over anyway.

Many of you will probably find this a bit dispiriting, and are likelier to agree with the bits in the article about how there’s more to life than money.

Of course there is! Much more.

I’m just saying the people I know who got a lot of it first wanted to get a lot of it. Right or wrong, and whatever else they were after in life.

They weren’t necessarily happy or miserable before – nor more so afterwards.

Shiny and/or happy people

All that said, this thought experiment is perceptive:

If the health trackers we wear on our wrists that track our activity and sleep could somehow accurately tell us a happiness score out of 100, and in addition, we could compare that score with friends and celebrities then we would obsess over that number. It would be used to elevate our status as money is today. We’d all want to improve our score and make it into the top 1% of the population’s happy people.

We’re fixated on wealth because it’s measurable whereas happiness is hidden, but if that curtain was unveiled and our happiness became public knowledge then it would have a seismic effect on how we live our lives.

Food for thought.

Go read the rest of the article. And have a great weekend!

[continue reading…]

{ 27 comments }

Wanted: dead not alive [Members]

Monevator Moguls logo

UK investment trusts are under the cosh, as discussed on Monevator and elsewhere. Despite a strong recovery in global markets since 2022, many trusts remain on big discounts to net asset values (NAVs).

In theory, buying these shares is like getting £1 for 90p, 80p – or even 60p with Augmentum Fintech.

This article can be read by selected Monevator members. Please see our membership plans and consider joining! Already a member? Sign in here.
{ 13 comments }

Asset allocation quilt – the winners and losers of the last 10 years

Duvet day here at Monevator as we update our asset allocation quilt with another year’s worth of returns.

The resulting patchwork reveals the fluctuating fortunes of the major asset classes across a decade, and invites a question…

Could you predict the winners and losers from one year to the next?

Asset allocation quilt 2024

The asset allocation quilt is a table that shows the annual returns of the main asset classes over the last 10 years.

The asset allocation quilt ranks the main equity, bond, and commodity sub-asset classes for each year from 2015 to 2024 from the perspective of a UK investor who puts Great British Pounds (GBP) to work.

We’ve also squeezed in money market funds this year. These can be thought of as cash-like, if not quite as safe as money in the bank.

Here’s what you need to know to read the chart:

  • We’ve sourced annual returns from publicly available ETFs that represent each sub-asset class.
  • The data is courtesy of justETF – an excellent ETF portfolio building service.
  • Returns are nominal1. To obtain real annualised returns, subtract the average UK inflation rate of approximately 3% from the nominal figures quoted in the final column of the chart.
  • Returns take into account the Ongoing Charge Figure (OCF), dividends or interest earned, and are reported in pounds.
  • Again, these are GBP results. If our numbers differ from yours, check that you’re not looking at USD returns. (It’s either that or our minds have been obliterated from staring too long at the crazy pixel explosion above.) 

Shady business

While our chart may look like the worst pullover pattern ever, it does offer some useful narrative threads.

For starters we can see investing success is not as simple as piling into last year’s winner. The number one asset in one year typically plunges down the rankings the next. A reigning asset class has only once held onto its crown for two consecutive years – broad commodities achieving the feat across 2021 and 2022. 

Long periods of dominance are possible – see US equities. S&P 500 returns have only dropped into the bottom half of the table once in the past decade (in 2022), and stand head and shoulders above the rest in the ten-year return column. If you started investing after the Global Financial Crisis then you have US stocks to thank for the bulk of your growth. 

The danger is such patterns gull us into thinking it will always be thus. Whereas in reality, the asset allocation quilt for, say, 1999 to 2008 would have looked very different. US stocks lost 4% per annum over that ten-year stretch.

I suspect S&P 500 tracker funds were a touch less popular back then!

Indeed, US stocks have fallen behind the rest of the world many times over the last century. 

And credible voices warn we can’t expect US large caps to rule forever. Albeit such commentators simultaneously acknowledge that they cannot predict when regime change may come.

(We’ve written more about this problem and what you might do about it.)

The golden thread

Gold looks attractive as the leading non-equity diversifier in our chart. Its ten-year return of 10.2% is incredible for an asset class that theorists claim has no intrinsic value. 

It’s volatile stuff though. When we first created this asset allocation quilt in 2021, gold’s ten-year return stood at zero after inflation 

I remain personally ambivalent about gold.

If you’re a young accumulator you don’t really need it. However aging wealth-preservers may be grateful for gold’s ability to improve risk-adjusted portfolio returns.

And the yellow metal may mitigate sequence of return risk as part of a portfolio designed to cushion the downside. 

A chequered past

It’s notable how a truly awful few years can completely contaminate our perceptions about an asset class. 

Bond’s ten-year returns were perfectly satisfactory back in 2021. But they have taken a drubbing since.

Now UK government bonds (gilts) look like a liability by the light of the last ten years.

Yet higher bond yields are almost certain to deliver better returns from bonds over the next decade, provided inflation is tamed and the global political outlook doesn’t go from bad to worse. 

Over the long run, ditching a key diversifier like bonds is likely to prove a mistake. Splitting your defensive measures between nominal bonds, index-linked bonds, cash, commodities, and gold does make sense though. 

Getting defensive

A major Monevator theme over the past couple of years has been to improve our coverage of the defensive asset classes – delving deeper into how they work, when they work, and what the risks are. 

Take a look at:

I appreciate that’s a lot of links. But the more you know, the less the disco dance floor of asset returns in our chart above will cause you a headache. 

The colour of money 

The bond crash has caused many investors to simply replace bonds with cash.

We think of cash as an asset class like any other and so we’ve introduced it to the table, using a money market ETF as a proxy. 

More than any other asset class, cash (here our money market ETF) lurks in the lower half of the table. 

That’s no surprise. The job of cash is to be liquid and stable, not to make lurching advances and retreats like the more temperamental asset classes.  

On the ten-year measure, cash looks okay. But over the long-term it’s delivered only about half the return of longer bonds.

Material matters

Commodities have crept up the ten-year rankings every year since we began the asset allocation quilt. Now they’re up to fourth place and stand in line with their expected real return of about 3%. 

Commodities present a fascinating dilemma.

They’re the one asset class that positively thrives when inflation melts bonds and equities. Commodities are also a tremendous diversifier due to their lack of correlation with equities, bonds, and cash.

 But you’ll need testicular fortitude to live with the volatility of raw materials.

Commodities have inflicted losses for five out of the last ten years, but redeemed themselves with spectacular 30%+ gains on three occasions – most critically when inflation lifted off in 2021 and 2022. 

Commodities had a surprisingly quiet year in 2024, delivering a decent 7% return thanks to a late comeback in the final quarter.

Our asset allocation quilt suggests they’re rarely so moderate. Most years you’ll love or loathe them. 

The missing link 

Inflation-linked bonds still make sense despite their desperate showing in 2022.

We’d been warning for years before that mid to long duration UK linker funds were badly flawed. But even our preferred short-duration inflation-linked funds haven’t kept pace with inflation, due to the massive hike in yields that accompanied the 2022 bond rout

One solution is to hedge rising prices with individual index-linked gilts which – if bought on today’s positive real yields and held to maturity – will protect your purchasing power against headline inflation. 

We’ve recently written about how to do that: 

  • See the Using a rolling linker ladder to hedge unexpected inflation section in our post about deciding whether or not you need such a ladder. 
  • How to buy index-linked gilts demystifies how to purchase individual linkers. 
  • See our step-by-step guide to constructing your own index-linked gilt ladder if you do want to do it yourself. 

Note that to get ten years worth of returns, our asset allocation quilt currently tracks Xtracker’s Global Inflation-Linked Bond ETF GBP hedged. This is a problematic mid to long duration fund, as discussed!

Stitch in time 

However you weave your response to the challenges of investing, the asset allocation quilt makes it plain that the best way to anticipate the future is to be ready for anything. 

Buy your asset classes on the cheap after they’ve taken a kicking, grit your teeth while they’re down, then reap the reward when their day – or year – comes around again. 

Finally, as uncertainty abounds, let’s be thankful that if you banked on the default position of global equities then you did just fine.

In fact, more than fine over the last decade. That 11.5% annualised return – 8.5% in real terms – is excellent.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

  1. That is to say they are not adjusted for inflation. [↩]
{ 84 comments }