Your objective needs to be general, maximising and protecting wealth. At 35, it's pretty meaningless to have an objective of "40k income in retirement". So don't bother with any calculations which purport to show how you might achieve this.
Interesting. This is contrary to several sources of info I've read so far, but it does have merit, and I am a bit of a generalist by nature.
Be really conscious of costs. You can keep them to an absolute minimum by buying shares directly rather than investing through ETFs. While the costs of ETFs are low, they do still eat into your returns.
The author advocates a balanced portfolio of low-fee, highly diversified ETFs and adheres to the precepts of The Intelligent Investor. The book really cleared the fog of ignorance from my mind about investing and for that, I consider it one of my best ever purchases. I does not, however, discuss property and concentrates exclusively on bonds and ETFs, and controlled consumer spending.
While I do appreciate Brendan's caution about cost, I will definitely be going the ETF route because of diversification, simplicity, and cost effectiveness.
As mentioned, I'll be looking at broad-based ETFs like S&P 500 and Developed Europe. I was looking at investing in some sector-specific ETFs like aerospace and consumer discretionary, but in general over a long period I have faith in the returns of the index rather than any one sector or company.
I had been geared towards Vanguard, but I would prefer one that reinvests dividends automatically. For this reason, I am now considering iShare's SACC rather than Vanguard's VUSA. The expense ratio of SACC is 0.08% whereas Vanguard's is 0.15%.
What are people's feelings on ETFs that automatically reinvest dividends versus those that don't from a tax point of view?
only advantage is you dont need to make a trade , you still have to pay tax on the value of the dividend which is re-invested
i always choose the cash option as i use stocks for income to a degree
Yes, as you must track the buy prices of the shares and pay tax on the dividend.Gosh --then the reinvestment option serves only to complicate matters and perhaps save a little on trades.
I have to ask.............who owns all the property in Germany and Switzerland that all the people rent?
Gosh --then the reinvestment option serves only to complicate matters and perhaps save a little on trades.
Do you generally use Vanguard or iShares?
In many countries you do not need to pay taxes on the accumulating dividends, in fact it is one of the reason why ETFs come in both varieties. So check out what the tax situation is in your country before you get too excited.
[Other than yourself, it seems I'm the only one commenting who lives in a country where the gains from investing are tax free...]
who owns all the property in Germany and Switzerland that all the people rent?
I keep hearing property is not an investment, but what is an investment if it is not for income and/or capital gain?However it is not held as part of an investment portfolio, but as an income source to match pension payments.
So, what is the consensus on the current situation here where people are taking money out of low interest accounts (very low net interest after tax & PRSI) and purchasing property to rent as an investment.
Karl Deeter of Irish Mortgage Brokers on Newstalk was very much in favour of it while Jean Kirby on same programme was wary but not against it (warning on tax, costs, property taxes, vacant time, etc) but not saying don't.
Gosh --then the reinvestment option serves only to complicate matters and perhaps save a little on trades.
Do you generally use Vanguard or iShares?
I had wondered that myself. I presume institutional investors?
We have very few institutions investing in residential property in Ireland. Irish Life used to own the Mespil Flats complex but it just was not profitable to run residential investment in Ireland. If people don't bother paying their rent, there isn't too much you can do about it. I suspect, that there is more respect for and enforcement of the law in Switzerland and Germany.
Brendan
I keep hearing property is not an investment, but what is an investment if it is not for income and/or capital gain?
Property and/or mortgage, I agree is a concentration of risk with issues such as asset class, currency, borrowing to invest thus increasing the "bet" up or down which as we have seen is dangerous.
So, what is the consensus on the current situation here where people are taking money out of low interest accounts (very low net interest after tax & PRSI) and purchasing property to rent as an investment.
Karl Deeter on Newstalk was very much in favour of it while Jean Kirby on same programme was wary but not against it (warning on tax, costs, property taxes, vacant time, etc) but not saying don't.
You are ignoring the reduced risk through a diversified equity portfolio. While you are technically correct so that that a company can become worthless (e.g. Anglo or AIB), a well diversified portfolio that spreads investment across many geographic regions and many industries minimises this risk to an insignificant level.property is not a particulary high risk investment compared to other assets , its much less risky than commodities or trading currency to give just two examples , a house or land cannot disapear , it will always have some value and is tangible , a publically listed company can become worthless eventually and the health of the company is usually unknown to most share holders until something big happens , thats why its better for most people to simply buy the market instead of individual shares , on the other side of the coin , gains are also on average lower on property , it also requires a lot more hands on managment , over the long term , equities trump every other asset class
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?