galway_blow_in
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,020
Yes, but that’s why most retirees wouldn’t be 100% invested in equities. And we should be wary of phrases like “complete meltdown”; what does that even mean? Was the Global Financial Crisis “a complete meltdown”? Because, give or take, markets have almost doubled since they reached the top in 2008. That’s right; the unluckiest punter in the world who invested in a diversified equity portfolio at the height of the 06/07/08 mania has virtually doubled his or her money since then. Provided they ignored the noise (Exhibit A, these threads) and simply hung tough with their time horizon as their friend.
Yes, but that’s why most retirees wouldn’t be 100% invested in equities.
Have a look at 'total return' rather than just price index.Only if they've exclusively invested in the U. S market
European markets are below 2007 levels
Yes, but that’s why most retirees wouldn’t be 100% invested in equities. And we should be wary of phrases like “complete meltdown”; what does that even mean? Was the Global Financial Crisis “a complete meltdown”? Because, give or take, markets have almost doubled since they reached the top in 2008. That’s right; the unluckiest punter in the world who invested in a diversified equity portfolio at the height of the 06/07/08 mania has virtually doubled his or her money since then. Provided they ignored the noise (Exhibit A, these threads) and simply hung tough with their time horizon as their friend.
Have a look at 'total return' rather than just price index.
And being invested exclusively in European shares wouldn't even start to be diversified.
If one anticipates further drops they should sell. How can anyone argue with this?
And being invested exclusively in European shares wouldn't even start to be diversified.
If one anticipates further increases they should buy. How can anyone argue against this?
so you needed to be diversified by investing in the "overvalued" US market, even though on many posts here today people are saying it was obviously over valued and was the "longest bull market in history". So if you deliberately chose to reduce your exposure to the US markets and increase exposure to the rest of the world, that was still wrong , right.
So the only correct strategy then was not invest in the US, not invest in Europe, not invest in UK, not invest in emerging markets but stay in cash for the last 5 years, but what cash, euros, pounds or dollars, and this is the very cash that the worlds central banks have been printing trillions of since the financial crash.
Yes, but even if you invested exclusively in European stocks, you're still up. Significantly.i know that and i didnt imply anyone should be exclusively in the european market ,i mean that only someone who avoided everything bar the U..S market is up 100% since 2007
I could never have put it so eloquently.Hi Duke
I have amended the first post to include your Camp. Am I summarising it ok?
Camp 3 - The Duke's Camp
Camp 3 is similar to Camp 1 in that it does not claim to know what will happen in the future. However, the past is no longer a useful guide as we are in uncharted territory. The Coronavirus is a new phenomenon as is the extent of Quantitative Easing.
History might not repeat itself under these circumstances.
So while Camp 3 does not attempt to forecast the market, the level of risk outweighs the potential gain.
Presumably, you are aware of the on-going debate whereby certain posters recommend all-in equity for ARFs? Such folk would triumphantly make comments like the following...…."I don't want 30% in defensive assets which pay nothing - as 6% of 30% is an annual loss of 1.8% and I ain't paying that brother for a better night's sleep!"
On many occasions, I warned against such silliness - often a pretty lonesome voice. There were a few notable and to be commended exceptions. I do not recall you being one. Indeed, I seem to recall you being an all-in equity in retirement man. Is that fair? Anyway and also, the advocates of such silliness seemed completely deaf to any risk warnings.
Whatever the case, so long as folk realise that all-in equity in retirement is a very, very dodgy play, I'm relaxed!
Only if they've exclusively invested in the U. S market
European markets are below 2007 levels
If you were happy riding the wave of the bull market but these big drops are causing you to reevaluate then you should really reevaluate two things: 1) your asset allocation strategy and 2) your risk tolerance - you've likely exceeded it
I will always be invested 100% in equities because we’ll have a material level of DB already. Clearly that’s not for everyone.
The salient point is that if the current volatility is causing you to think about abandoning your investment plan, the investment plan wasn’t appropriate in the first place.
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?