3 Ways To Retire Early

Published in Investing on 10 August 2010

Amid the pensions gloom, three pieces of good news.

One way or another, there hasn't been a lot of good news on the retirement front in recent years.

Lower investment returns, tighter contribution limits, a higher retirement age, the scrapping of employers' generous 'defined benefit' pension schemes -- the list is long, and troubling.

The result has been something of a sea change in people's expectations. A few years back, a lot of people were hoping to retire early, with every expectation of enjoying a reasonable standard of living in retirement.

Now, they're thinking that they'll be lucky if they get to retire at 65 -- and are reconciling themselves to years of relative penury.

Silver linings

Yet all that gloomy news overlooks three very positive developments that have taken place. Developments that in fact serve to make it easier for a person of even modest means to still plan for early retirement.

Better still, they don't require any 'new money'. Articles about early retirement are usually investment-led: put aside just £5 per day and build your pension pot faster -- you know the sort of thing.

And that's true. A basic rate tax payer saving an extra £5 per day will be able to set aside £150 per month, worth £187.50 after tax relief. Assuming a 7% return, over 20 years that will accumulate to an extra pension pot of £98,243. You can certainly retire earlier on that.

Yet as I'm about to explain, you don't need to contribute any more money at all in order to be able to retire earlier -- just be willing, and able, to organise your existing pension planning arrangements differently.

Let's take a look.

SIPPs

The last few years have seen a big rise in the number of people making use of Self-Invested Personal Pensions (SIPPs). Yet, as is often the case, many people still either don't know about SIPPs, or haven't been bothered to do anything to take advantage of them.

Which is a mistake. Because instead of the low-performing, high-cost 'with profits' funds in which many investors still have their pension pots invested, SIPPs allow considerable freedom as to where pension savers can put their money.

Index trackers, ETFS, investment funds, shares -- even cash. You take the decisions, and make the choices. 25% BRIC emerging markets, 25% US S&P 500, 25% natural resource funds and 25% UK blue chip companies? Or 100% UK blue chips? Whatever: if that's what floats your boat, with a SIPP there's nothing to stop you.

It's coming... Don't miss out on your chance to join our exclusive share-tipping service. Guarantee your place on the next Champion Shares PRO enrolment! Click to join our priority waiting list.

And the good news? There are more SIPPs than ever on the market, including providers offering ultra-low cost SIPPs. Invest in any of 2,300 funds that pay a trailing commission, and at least one SIPP provider won't charge you a penny. Others rebate some or all of the trailing commission in exchange for a modest annual sum.

Low-cost trackers

What to put in your SIPP? (Or, for that matter, ISA?) Here on The Fool, we're big fans of low-cost index trackers, and -- more recently -- low-cost ETFs. The reasons aren't difficult to see.

Index trackers offer diversification, and low charges mean that more of the returns go in to your pocket, and not the provider's.

Today, there are index trackers on the market still charging investors 1-1.25% or even more for a bog-standard tracker fund -- while other providers charge 0.27% or even 0.15% for exactly the same product. That's quite a difference.

And over the years, that difference in costs adds up, as figures from low-cost tracker provider Vanguard illustrate.

Take a new graduate aged 21, who might reasonably expect a state retirement age of 70. Saving £1,200 per year, increasing at 3% each year, he or she would be able to start drawing a pension of £30,000 from age 70, if their contributions were invested in an average UK fund growing at 6% a year and charging a TER of 1.66%.

However, by using low cost investments, this saver could see a dramatic difference in his options. For example, using Vanguard's average TER for its UK equity index funds of 0.27%, the same graduate could draw the same £30,000 pension from age 65 -- that's five years earlier.

And a pure tracker charging just 0.15% would enable them to retire even earlier still.

The good news? The number of providers offering ultra-low cost trackers and ETFs is increasing. As I've written before, in the last year or so, for instance, both Vanguard and HSBC (LSE: HSBA) have entered the UK market with just such low-cost offerings.

An end to compulsory annuitisation

As I wrote less than a month ago, the government has fulfilled a campaign promise and announced a consultation process intended to bring an end to the system whereby pension savers have to buy annuities when they retire.

Instead, subject to a limit on how fast they can deplete their pension pot, savers will be able to draw it down at will. They'll also be able to pass the unused part of their pension wealth to their heirs, when they die -- subject, again, to a tax intended to deter people from using pensions as a form of tax-free inheritance provision.

The rules aren't yet in place, of course. But the process of consultation ends shortly, and my guess is that by Christmas we'll all know the shape of the new pension regime.

But the ending of compulsory annuitisation is undoubted good news, and gives people the ability to be far more flexible in terms of when and how they take their retirement income.

My own guess is that we'll see many more people take a phased approach to retirement, working part-time and drawing down a little of their pots, while leaving the bulk of their pension savings to carry on growing and generating future income. But they'll also be able to retire earlier if they want to.

Make the move

So there we have it: three pieces of good news, that spell 'early retirement' whether taken individually or collectively.

That said, you have to take the first steps, or you'll still be locked into your existing retirement date. So look at a SIPP, think about switching to lower-cost investments, and keep an eye on those forthcoming changes to the annuity rules and regulations. And all without investing any 'new money'.

But of course, invest that extra £5 per day, and you'll be retiring even earlier.

> Malcolm has a portion of his retirement funds invested in low-cost trackers from Vanguard and HSBC.

 

Stop press: guarantee your place 

For two weeks in September we will be opening the doors of our Champion Shares PRO newsletter service. In order to keep our exclusivity, only a select number of our readership will be able to join us. This is your chance to guarantee your place! Click here to join the priority waiting list.

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

ProfessorMarcus 10 Aug 2010 , 4:37pm

My retirement planning is to marry someone rich.

Re: A basic rate tax payer saving an extra £5 per day will be able to set aside £150 per month, worth £187.50.

I think I'd rather overpay the mortgage by £150 a month for 20 years.

MDW1954 10 Aug 2010 , 5:01pm

ProfessorMarcus: If you pay £150 into a pension, the government adds £37.50, making an investment of £187.50. Paying £150 off the mortgage doesn't attract the additional £37.50 tax relief.

Malcolm Wheatley (author)

ProfessorMarcus 10 Aug 2010 , 5:19pm

Hello Malcolm, thanks for the information and I apologise if my comment appeared to be flippant.

I just think it's taking a risk if you expect 6 or 7% growth over each of the 20 years, and with a pension your money is tied up for that period of time. I'm aware that on the TMF discussion boards some people suggest investing in an ISA as an alternative to a pension. The taxation benefits would be similar, i.e. an ISA taxes on the way in but not the way out, a pension would be the opposite?

Good point re: younger people starting to invest early, I'm very lucky (at the moment) as I have a final salary pension but in hindsight I'd have liked to diversify my options and assets when I was younger.

Regards.

rogerthebodger 10 Aug 2010 , 10:34pm

A draw down pension option has been a feature of the South African retirement scene for many years now. They call it a living annuity and maximum annual drawdown is currently limited to 17.5% of capital. This might sound high, but the Jse has produced a total return that has averaged around 19% each year for the past 20 odd years.

jhon99 10 Aug 2010 , 11:06pm

live below your means, don't waste your money, invest as much of your money in good solid companies.


Be patient, educate yourself financially, don't trust anyone with your retirement money. Unless they are successful themselves.

The older you are the less risks you should be taking.

And once retired, move to a country with low living costs, to enjoy a better standard of living.

And DON'T BUY PROPERTY ABROAD (without consulting a range of experts & understanding the full risks) rent instead. Look what happened in Spain.

oh and do enjoy your retirement, after all you cant take it with you!

SanMiguel101 11 Aug 2010 , 12:10pm

Does having a SIPP attract enough tax relief to warrant the use of it (ie does the effect of the extra money compound up the interest over the lifetime of the pension).
We did a post on this a while back showing how using an ISA post tax made no difference to using a SIPP and paying tax later.

p3t3r100 11 Aug 2010 , 12:22pm

Completely agree with jhon99.
I retired at 60 on a final salary pension plus my wife's state pension.
We are living comfortably on this at present dipping into savings for any large items.
I will also recieve a state pension in four years time provided the Coalition don't move the goalposts.
As for the "you can't take it with you" comment, my concern is knowing how long our savings capital will have to last.
I don't think anyone can answer that one.

Yousanem 11 Aug 2010 , 12:49pm

You talk about low cost trackers, but although there are plenty of those for routine investors, it is extremely difficult to find one of those for pensions. With regard to Vanguard, as an individual, you have to invest £100,000 up front, and there is no pension wrapper. Their preferred approach is via an IFA which naturally incurs extra charges. Also, if you invest in ETFs in a SIPP, you get stung for the initial purchase by the SIPP provider, and get a double lot of annual charges - one from the SIPP provider and the other from the ETF. Financial service companies appear to look on pension savers as a soft touch.

MDW1954 11 Aug 2010 , 1:03pm

Hello Yousanem,

My Vanguard trackers are with Alliance Trust. There's no minimum holding, and the annual fee SIPP fee is around £85. I don't dispute your observation about ETFs, which is why I don't hold any within a SIPP.

Cheers,

Malcolm (author)

SanMiguel101 11 Aug 2010 , 1:04pm

Yousanem
There are SIPPs that don;t charge initial fees or annual charges. They will charge a dealing fee but that's just like buying any share. Keep the overall costs to 1% per year including ETF fee and should be ok.

MDW1954 11 Aug 2010 , 1:07pm

By the way, I should just add that the Alliance Trust £85 fee is significantly less than the charges on a personal pension that I closed and transferred to Alliance. And that I also hold Vanguard trackers in an ISA with Alliance, similarly transferred from elsewhere.

Malcolm

rouge14 11 Aug 2010 , 1:33pm

Biggest sea change for me was "A day" when the government allowed individuals to hold an occupational scheme AND a private scheme. With such an obvious giveaway it seemed inevitable there were negative changes on the way. I took advantage of it and started a SIPP to top up my employers scheme.
Another bit of "good news" was the chance to purchase extra years in my final salary scheme which I also took advanrage of. Low and behold within 12 months it was closed to new contributions but any extra purchased years are still going into my final salary accrued pot. If anyone else is offered such a sweetener Id recommend they consider it seriously as its often the prelude to bad news.....

Yousanem 11 Aug 2010 , 1:59pm

Thanks for the tip, Malcolm!

supersol42 11 Aug 2010 , 2:15pm

As I recall, it all started with Maxwell and the Mirror Pension Fund. That led to the first raft of regulations. Then there was that nurse who got sold a Personal Pension, and we were all told that personal pensions were poison, and there were some more regulations, and we were all told that company pensions were safe. But shortly after that, people who'd been in company schemes for decades found that their pensions had vanished, and we got some more regulations and a Compensation Scheme, funded by those final salary schemes which had not vanished.

On 2 July 1997 Gordon Brown set up a system to steal £6 billion p.a. from pension schemes, which nobody has repealed or plans to repeal.

By that time people had stopped smoking, had started jogging, and ate lentils, so we all take much longer to die. This, combined with all the merry regulations, had the effect of closing down just about all the final salary schemes (with the exception, of course, of the ponzi scheme for public sector employees).

As investment returns sank, with interest rates, to zero, both investment funds and annuities became non-starters. The Government twigged that we all need to carry on working till we drop dead with exhaustion.

Best bet; work until state retirement age, and spend spend spend!

That way you get Pension Credit....

Or, start saving when you're born, and start smoking when you retire.

JGH03 11 Aug 2010 , 4:10pm

I started investigating SIPPs earlier this year. The SIPP proveder's annual fee and the charge for purchasing an ETF or shares were not a concern - but, as I understand it, you have to pay some other organisation an additional annual fee to ... er, well, I'm not quite sure what benefit they add.

The rules don't require that I have someone oversee my stocks and shares ISA, so I don't see why someone needs to oversee essentially the same account when it is named a SIPP.

MDW1954 11 Aug 2010 , 4:22pm

Hello JGH03,

I have two SIPPs, and the only payments I make are to the SIPP providers.

I'm afraid I don't recognise this other charge at all. Can anyone else help?

Malcolm (author)

JGH03 11 Aug 2010 , 4:37pm

Hi Malcolm,

Thanks for the prompt response. My S&S ISA account is with SelfTrade, so I would be inclined to use them for a SIPP, since the annual fee I already pay for my ISA would also cover a SIPP account.

The web page at http://www.selftrade.co.uk/services/personal-dealing/sipp.php has a panel headed "Our SIPP Dealing Account - At a glance", which explains that you need a trustee/administrator. I followed the link to one such party, which charges £170 annual fee.

I realise that you aren't answerable for SelfTrade, but I would be interested to understand how you avoid this fee.

Thanks
John

rouge14 11 Aug 2010 , 4:53pm

MDW1954


"One popular platform...charges 0.5% to hold an ETF within an ISA or SIPP, for example"


Source.
Moneyweek, page 28. 6th August 2010.

hiriskpaul 11 Aug 2010 , 6:09pm

Alliance Trust charge £75 per year (may have to add VAT, cannot remember) and that is it. No extra admin charge. What Malcolm has not mentioned is that Alliance refund ALL commission on unit trusts, including the trail commission. This is often around 0.5% per annum. Alliance do charge you to buy/sell unit trusts though, at the same rates as investing in shares. e.g. £11.50 per online deal. Discounts of up to 50% of this dealing commission are available to investors in Alliance Trust Investment Trust.

Alliance do not offer the same range of investments as other providers at present (e.g. no derivatives such as warrants and not every unit trust provider), but this is improving all of the time. Alliance publish lists of the shares and unit trusts they deal in, but in reality they also deal in securities not on these lists, such as LLPC which I have been loading up with recently. I do not think that the quality of service is as good as some of the more expensive SIPP providers such as Hargreaves Lansdown, but the costs are simply unbeatable.

I have SIPPs and ISAs with both Alliance and HL.

MDW1954 11 Aug 2010 , 6:42pm

Hello rouge14,

I've covered the ETF fee in an earlier comment. As I said, it's why I don't hold ETFs in a SIPP. However, my observation still stands -- that the "popular platform" in question makes no charge if you invest in any of its 2,300 funds! I suspect there are cheaper places to hold an ETF, for sure.

Malcolm

MDW1954 11 Aug 2010 , 6:45pm

Hello hiriskpaul,

I agree with every word you've written.

Malcolm

MDW1954 11 Aug 2010 , 6:55pm

Hello JGH03,

You ask how I avoid paying this fee, and the answer is this: I don't pay it because neither Alliance or HL levy it. Nor do several other providers, to my knowledge. Take a look at the Fool's own SIPP, for example: http://g.fool.co.uk/Art/sharedealing/pdfs/SIPP/key_features.pdf

If I were you I'd ask some questions on SIPP discussion board and the Selftrade discussion board -- you may get a clearer response there.

You're probably already on the Selftrade board, but here's the SIPP board: http://boards.fool.co.uk/pensions-self-invested-sipps-51267.aspx?mid=11976007 (It covers *all* SIPPs, of course, not just the Fool's SIPP.)

Cheers,

Malcolm

ChrisNolanFan 11 Aug 2010 , 8:12pm

“Take a new graduate aged 21.... their contributions were invested in an average UK fund growing at 6% a year and charging a TER of 1.66%.
However, by using Vanguard's average TER for its UK equity index funds of 0.27%, the same graduate could draw the same £30,000 pension from age 65 -- that's five years earlier.”

OK, so in the first example we have NET growth of 4.34%

In the second example we have NET growth of 5.73%

This difference in NET growth equals being able to retire 5 years earlier.

However in the example we are talking about a 49 or 44 year investment period. To aim for 6% growth given such a massive timeline is terrible!

So many personal finance websites focus on getting the teeniest, tiniest, stingiest TER on trackers and ETFs, and completely miss the point - looking at the fundamentals – the NET growth ( I will continue to use capitals to drill this fact in)

A top decile managed fund in a market risk fund will get much, much better growth than 6%.

But “Good Lord” I hear you say, this managed fund has a TER of 2%!!! I can get 0.00002% on tracker!

To this I say, “Well if a top decile fund, regularly reviewed gives gross growth is 11% per annum, this gives NET growth of 9%!”

Remember what a difference 4.34 versus 5.73% made in the author’s example?

What kind of difference would NET growth of 5.73% versus 9% make? An enormous one.

OK am I talking about using funds with a higher attitude to risk? Perhaps yes – that depends on the investor, perhaps they would choose a Balanced investment, perhaps a more aggressive Adventurous investment for a period.

My point here is unless someone is very well educated in financial matters, simply choosing a tracker is in itself taking great risk, because that person does not truly know why and what they are buying, if that aligns with their objectives, how it compares to top decile funds which outperform the IMA benchmark, and many other risk factors.

Secondly is not the use of SIPPs for those greatly experienced in financial matters? To choose one’s own funds with no great financial services experience is taking enormous risk.

I see people in similar articles asking simple pension questions on the one hand, yet prepared to invest for 30+ years in something that they don’t understand, and where all other options are not known, on the other. Madness.

Why do personal finance websites keep writing these same articles on scrimping out the lowest TER, while ignoring EVERY OTHER aspect of the financial picture?

I believe - because it allows them to write lots of new and easy articles, based on very simply listing the latest low charge available, in a commodity fashion, similar to listing the best interest rates on a current account.



jplmot 12 Aug 2010 , 6:54am

jhon99

You are a person of rare insight. Your advice is a blueprint for a sound retirement.

Anyone who entrusts their hard earned money to 'advisers' and 'schemes' will always be disappointed and will have paid for expertise they could have gained without undue effort.

Common sense allied to a realistic expectation is necessary, everything else is gambling.

JGH03 12 Aug 2010 , 11:52am

Malcolm

Thanks for those pointers - I shall follow them up.

Cheers
John

ajooba 12 Aug 2010 , 1:23pm

Clearly there are many knowledgeable folks here. I wonder if TMF provides retirement consulting so we can plan a portfolio, set it and balance it once or twice a year. I am needing help seting up a portfolio using Vanguard funds and Barclays ishares ETF (for asset classes which Vanguard does not offer). I want to do this for my ISAs, SIPPs and taxable accounts. I prefer passive investing (indexing) rather than managed funds or picking my own shares. Cost is also important to me, so I want to know about all the extra charges that these various platforms impose.

I havent found any good independent finacial advisor yet. Either they have no clue (and havent heard of passive investing, John Bogle etc), or they are very knowledgeable indeed but do not offer hourly advice but instead want you to marry them (i.e lifelong commitment and they charge a percentage of your assets, not a fixed fee).

If you know any good advisors who charge on hourly basis, please send me a personal message. Hopefully with 2 or 3 hours consulting, I believe I will be able to set up the portfolio.

yes, I know about unbiased.co.uk but could not find anyone knowledgeable thru that.

Thanks

MDW1954 12 Aug 2010 , 1:55pm

Hello ajooba,

I don't know of any suitable IFAs, I'm afraid. Many people here on The Fool prefer their own counsel to those of advisers. Why not break your questions into manageable chunks, and ask on the appropriate discussion boards? I'd start with the Retirement Investing board and ETF board, for instance. For Vanguard, try the Alliance Trust board -- there isn't, as yet, a Vanguard specific board.

Malcolm

ajooba 12 Aug 2010 , 4:35pm

Thanks Malcolm. The problem with the free advice is that people will (naturally) not have the time to answer all my questions. Also, they may just point me to some links. And then I get confused easily and get lost in details. I am also extremely indecisive by nature, and I keep procrastinating and putting off my investing plans. I have poor time management skills. I bought Tim Hale's Smarter Investing last year but still havent read a page of it. I also get very busy at work from time to time and all I want to do on the weekend is crash. Thats why, just to kickstart and jumpstart the portfolio, I wanted some professional advice initially. Once the portfolio is set up, I am pretty sure I wont need to pay someone a percentage of my assets on a yearly basis (which is how most wealth managers seem to work) . [I do not panic and sell when the stock market is tanking. I have experienced 2 severe bear markets in my lifetime (2000, 2008) and I did not panic and sell. So at least I dont have that problem, so I dont need constant psychological counselling] But I am having a hard time coming up with a plan initially.

I will try to provide a glimpse of my problems : I have money in UK (taxable, ISA, old emplpoyer pension which can be rolled over into a SIPP, and current employer pension). I need a decent portfolio for this. I know my asset allocation (60% stocks, 40% bonds) I suppose this is doable, using mostly Vanguard, but I am confused about bond funds. Should I go for cash ISAs or bond funds ? Cash ISAs seem to offer slightly higher return. But if you go for cas ISA, it is difficult to rebalance your portfolio and juggle around with "laddered CDs". Similarly should I go for NSANDI or index-linked gilt funds (IGLT) ?

I also have money in US (taxable and non taxable) and moving that money here into UK will trigger some UK HMRC tax liabilities which I want to avoid right now. I also have some money in India. The smart folks in Boglehead advised me to think of the whole global portfolio together instead of US, UK etc. I need someone who can look at all this together and advise me how to set up a portfolio. Unforutnately there are regulations so UK advisors wil stay tight-lipped on US funds and vice-versa. If I had more than a million pounds in total assets, then I would simply go to an advisor and pay the 1% yearly fee plus 0.5 wrap platform charges (likes of Transact etc). But I am well short of that figure.

I also have worries about how much to keep for emergency fund. Normal advice is 1 year's worth of expenses in a bank account, and invest the rest. But I get worried about medical emergencies. Right now I have private health insurance in UK, but you never know. One might get some strange disease for which there is no way out except to go to USA for treatment. My mother in India got terribly sick early this year and I had to spend quite a bit of money. (Medical costs are going up in India and they have no health insurance). If I transfer all my money into UK, that might make settiing up a portfolio a bit easy I suppose. I have say $100K taxable in US. If I move this money to UK, I have to immediately pay $10,000 in tax to HMRC. [This has something to do with non-dom, remittance basis etc]. Legally I can avoid this by not remitting right now. But then the global portfolio becomes terribly complex.

My life is one big confused mess. I have lots of questions. I cannot believe no one offers hourly professional advice.

I found a good advisor who has a partner in the US and they can work together to manage my US and UK portfolio. But it will cost me 1.5% in annual charges. It is expensive, but definitely beats sitting around and doing nothing other than posting on message boards.

MDW1954 12 Aug 2010 , 6:11pm

Ajooba,

You're right: that *is* complicated. I'm sure you could get *some* advice on the boards, but your needs *are* complex.

Instead, have you thought about using HL for paid IFA advice? I have no personal experience of using their advisory service, but try looking here:

http://www.h-l.co.uk/advice

They are used to dealing with large sums of money and complex situations. I can't recall the fee structure, but doubtless you'll find it soon enough. Hope that helps!

Malcolm

ajooba 12 Aug 2010 , 10:43pm

That link is interesting. I'll talk to them or something.

Thanks Malcolm

fdonovan6 13 Aug 2010 , 9:35am
rogerthebodger 17 Aug 2010 , 10:36am

Hi ajooba. May i suggest that if you choose not manage your own money and you already know of a good manager, then surely a 1.5% admin fee is small price to pay for peace of mind. May i also suggest that placing too much money into tax incentivised schemes such as Sipps can, over the annuitants lifetime, see fund managers taking more in costs than the pensioner receives in income. There is a similar anomaly with Equity Isas, but this time it applies to capital gains, whereby Isa costs can exceed CG Tax on disposal.

TomJefs 17 Aug 2010 , 7:34pm

@rogerthebodger

"Hi ajooba. May i suggest that if you choose not manage your own money and you already know of a good manager, then surely a 1.5% admin fee is small price to pay for peace of mind."

Although that sounds intuitive and good advice it is probably unsound. Good managers are very hard to come by. Performance changes year-to-year. As Buttomwood in The Economist notes, "It is much easier to beat the market through the rear-view mirror."

Index trackers and plain vanilla ETFs instead, on the whole, seem a better way to gain peace on mind. The costs are clear and cheaper, the investments are clear, the performance is clear (tracks the market). Just leave them be and don't worry if your fickle star fund manager is doing well or not against the market.

rogerthebodger 17 Aug 2010 , 10:30pm

Hi TomJefs
But who will determine the asset allocation - the where and when of what portion of our portfolio is invested in which asset class and at what time of the market cycle.
Now while ETFs seem the way to go, my experience, with the one we chose proves they are not. For example even an average cautious managed UT has beaten the performance of the ETF in question, the Ftse Div plus. And they have done so in both capital growth and income value.

TomJefs 18 Aug 2010 , 5:51pm

Hi Roger,

As for asset allocation there are a plethora of resources on the Internet to choose an approach one feels comfortable with, from the "Lazy" portfolio to Stanford. They all cover the same aspects: diversification and discipline. A buy and hold approach may not be fashionable but the long term in any aspect of life rarely is.

TomJefs 18 Aug 2010 , 6:00pm

Roger,

As for your point on the cautious managed sector I question over what period, bearing in mind performance of sectors changes according to cycles. I don't know the sector as cautious is not my long term objective. Growth and reduced risk via diversification are. I maintain that trackers and ETFs are a sound personal approach for a core portfolio. Even I invest with Woodford for income, but that is an exception and UK only.

rogerthebodger 19 Aug 2010 , 5:10pm

TomJefs,
ETFs can only be purchased and held through and by an intermediary. The investor doesn't actually hold full right and title to the investment in the same way that applies to investments into individual shares or UTs. ETFs on the whole tend to be more sector specific than UTs, so there is a higher probability of regular rebalancing of the ETF portfolio which could realise capital gains and the resultant tax. For almost 2.5 years now, the Performance of the Ftse Div Plus, in both income and capital growth has been trashed by my portfolio of Cautious Managed and Equity Income UTs. I am not denigrating your theory/practice, just highlighting a couple of the negatives associated with a boots and all ETF strategy.
Regards Roger

minidriver2007 27 Sep 2010 , 8:18am

Will the changes coming in "the shape of the new pension regime" apply to existing private pension plans?

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.