They don't need all the money in one go for year one of college for the eldest.I am not so sure about this at all. Over ten years equities will probably outperform anything else. But if the OP is regularly saving the same amount every year for ten years for a big drawdown at the end then the average investment horizon is five years.
I agree. But many people misunderstand their needs and the risk involved in different investment options. Many think that deposit products, including State Savings, are somehow less risky than other options.It depends on OP's overall wealth, risk tolerance, future income, etc.
Equities is just one option. They're are others such as unit linked funds with a lower risk/reward profile. I really don't think that something like State Savings is a good option here.If I was on a fixed income with a big outgoing like kids' education coming up I'd probably just use state savings products due to mature around college time, certainly this approach by the kids are in late teens.
I don't understand that you mean here. Neither of the kids is 16.Continuing to put savings into an equity-type product to cover a a 17YO's college fees in a year's time seems pretty risky to me.
State savings very much are the lowest-risk option for a retail investor. No government will default on hundreds of thousands of voters! The flipside is that of course the expected return is much lower than other products.Many think that deposit products, including State Savings, are somehow less risky than other options.
And the return will almost certainly be negative in real terms. So, not risk free.State savings very much are the lowest-risk option for a retail investor. No government will default on hundreds of thousands of voters! The flipside is that of course the expected return is much lower than other products.
That's moving the goalposts! I said lowest risk, not risk free.So, not risk free.
You constantly drop this line despite it being completely incorrect. Inflation is not a risk, it just is what it is.And the return will almost certainly be negative in real terms. So, not risk free
Inflation is a risk (and indeed the only risk) for a state savings product. If the consumer price level doubles in ten years then your €100 in a state savings bond is worth €50 at the end.Inflation is not a risk, it just is what it is.
What's incorrect about pointing out that nominal returns below inflation mean that capital falls in real value?You constantly drop this line despite it being completely incorrect.
Why are you just making up figures?Or you can accept the risk choosing equities and it will be worth €70-130.
It can work the other way. You could have bought a one-year state savings product in October 2008 for 2.1%. HICP fell 2.9% over that period giving you a real return of ≈5%. I remember as I bought a few at the time!What's incorrect about pointing out that nominal returns below inflation mean that capital falls in real value?
No jumping the gun. I have suggested one possible avenue for the OP to explore based on s/he's query.That's jumping the gun hugely.
Without knowing the OP's full financial circumstances putting wealth into this type of product for a decade-long investment horizon may not be wise.
Because it is meaningless. Why does it matter? Subtracting 2% off the nominal return of a fixed term deposit and 2% off the "expected" equity return makes no difference to your decision making.What's incorrect about pointing out that nominal returns below inflation mean that capital falls in real value?
They are examples. The point being you can take a higher risk strategy and your investment can drop in nominal value below your investment. That value will still suffer from inflation. So why specifically call it out on low risk deposits?Why are you just making up figures?
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?