The other question which I think is important and worth discussing is the value we place (or don't) on capital preservation.
I always have in mind a base level of capital where I know that - even with very low interest rates - if I convert completely to cash, I can still generate more than enough to live on.
Doing this eliminates that ghastly fear that markets will keep on dropping, more even than the recent 50%..
The problem with total security is ...... BOREDOM. My main investment is in property. It is reliable and profitable but it is almost as boring as bank deposits. The stock market keeps my mind active well past the state of my body. It is a challenge and that is worth as much to me as any profit. I do agree that one should not invest, with risk, more than you are prepared to lose. That is why I trade/invest on fundamentals.
Stick with property and splash out of tattslotto tickets, thats sort of excitng and cheaper.
Capital preservation ?
Just hope the kids move out and get jobs.
My grand kids have moved out from my kids home and have jobs. My investment plan does preserve capital. It actually is preserving other peoples capital too.
Hi
A personal review:
Long term holds do not necessarily equal forever. For me I hope it means at least reduced time spent in monitoring my portfolio.
Since this thread began I have sold nothing but bought a little. I am working towards my top holds being:
BHP
WOW
QBE
LEI [new]
TOL [new]
------------------
I "may", or not, add one or more of WOR, IPL, IVC, BBI.
I may also reduce my bank holdings -- not sure.
Thought I'd update as to where I am. Comments always welcome. I have found previous comments in this thread useful. Thanks.
Mine has changed a lot too. Apart from a portfolio of hybrids and capital notes I now mostly invest in ETF's in my Super fund.
All are high dividend Australian ETF's and I have them returning me gross 7 to 8% distributions. They cover all of my minimum drawdown of 4% (pension phase) and then some. I have bought ETF's to limit any losses in individual companies and I do not have to manage the funds, the ETF providers do that for a very small fee of between .25 and .35%
My top 5 holdings now are:
1. RDV (ETF)
2. VHY (ETF)
3. SYI (ETF)
4. AYF (LIC)
5. NAB
I have VAS which is down at present
Apart from that WES and TLS are the main ones for me
BEN has been disappointing ...
A few people I know are picking up BHP but I'm not so sure about that one.
Mine has changed a lot too. Apart from a portfolio of hybrids and capital notes I now mostly invest in ETF's in my Super fund.
All are high dividend Australian ETF's and I have them returning me gross 7 to 8% distributions. They cover all of my minimum drawdown of 4% (pension phase) and then some. I have bought ETF's to limit any losses in individual companies and I do not have to manage the funds, the ETF providers do that for a very small fee of between .25 and .35%
My top 5 holdings now are:
1. RDV (ETF)
2. VHY (ETF)
3. SYI (ETF)
4. AYF (LIC)
5. NAB
Bill where can I find info on the distributions please? I gather these are not ordinary dividends and they don't show as such on the Commsec website.
You have to go directly to the ETF's website and they quote the distributions there. Here is the one for VHY: https://www.vanguardinvestments.com.au/retail/ret/investments/etfs.jsp#distributionstab, cheers.
Thanks Bill.
I have never really had a look at ETFs.... I gather most return about 7% in distributions but also there is no franking consideration?
Do you consider them a better investment than LICs such as AFI and ARG? These pay about 4% in dividends and are also fully franked.
I know most younger investors would consider all of these pretty boring but at my age I "boring" can leave me more time for other pursuits....
Rick
I am a newb but I have actually look extensively at some of the etfs listed and I am wondering based on the comments I am reading here whether you guys have too.
I am reading here that high div etfs like vhy, ihd, syi and rdv are more safer, are more diversified for a small fee.
But the underlying are all ASX stocks - and as we know the ASX is very top heavy and dominated by a few blue chips mainly in mining and financials. So for all of these etfs, 10 stocks or so (4 banks, BHP/RIO, WOW, TLS and WES etc) make up around 50-75% of your holdings depending on the etf. If you hold 20 stocks, you can pretty much account for 75 to 90% of these indexes.
This is not the best diversification and owning the different etfs like vhy and IHD will not fix this as the underlying are all the same anyway. You are also paying 0.25% to 0.4% to buy and hold a portfolio of 15 to 20 stock that will not change often. You might as well buy and hold these names yourself.
Also regarding LICs and active management - some of these LICs buy and hold the same blue chips for long periods. Also, if you look at the LIC costs, some have costs which are actually lower then these div etfs (afi is 0.18% to vanguard's VHY of 0.25%).
Keep in mind that much of the passive index movement (i.e. Bogleheads) literature is written for the US market which has proper cheap indexes that do proper diversification (i.e. look at SnP500 sector breakdown vs ASX300 sector breakdown) at much lower prices (0.3% is regarded as on the expensive end for passive investing for Bogleheads in the US, in fact the vanguard US Total Stock Market is like 0.05%).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?