If what follows could ever be
described as a 'strategy'....
Financial Advice ?
Note that I'm not a
financial adviser and nor would I recommend that you shell out your hard-earned
readies in seeking so-called 'professional' investment advice. Do your own research.
(There's a proviso to this, however, in that I
wouldn't be averse to asking my accountant for information on how a particular
financial instrument would be treated for tax purposes. Trading
accounts, ISAs and SIPPs etc are simple enough vehicles for most people to readily
understand their tax treatment, but there are many things out there that aren't
– the UK tax code runs to several thousand pages, and like most tax 'rules'
they are not designed to be definitive but are deliberately left open to
interpretation....generally though, if you can't fully understand an
'opportunity' yourself, without taking external advice, then it may be more prudent
not to pursue it at all.)
Having established and
understood what are the particular tax advantages or otherwise of the investment
type or wrapper in which they're held, there's absolutely no-one out there who
is qualified to advise you in which particular industry sectors, shares, funds,
bonds, trackers, commodities etc you should invest.
If such advice was any good
then why would anyone need to provide it for a fee – why aren't they already rich enough themselves
not to have to bother working any more ?
If they really knew something worthwhile then why would they share it
with you ? All this and more has been said many times
before about financial advice, but in this case repetition doesn't make it any
less true.
Just read up all you can on
any particular investment subject that interests you, decide which bits appeal
to your own way of thinking and which you'll choose to ignore, and then go ahead
and do your own thing.
You should also regard
anything you take from this post as being worth exactly what you paid for it, i.e.
nothing.... it's just my own preferences
and prejudices.
The Financial Press
It is the raison d'etre of journalists to write
something to fill otherwise empty pages, and billions of words must therefore
be produced on a very regular basis regardless of whether or not the authors have
anything useful or original to say. This
also applies to some of the bloggers out there, who can derive a sizeable
income from producing regular output in an attempt to drive up the advertising
count from the viewings. I should be so
lucky... ;-)
When was the last time you saw
an empty column in newsprint or on the web with the header '....er, sorry,
nothing new or original to say today...'.
It just doesn't happen. Therefore
there's a huge information overload, with some new but mainly recycled ideas, plus
reactions and over-reactions to current events, and therefore it's easy to feel
overwhelmed and bemused from the reams of contradictory advice and opinions out
there.
The written word also has a
very curious implied authority about it.
People generally wouldn't heed any financial advice given in slurred
tones from the drunken dead-beat at the end of the bar, but it's a different
matter when he types it out later and publishes it....
All I'm saying is, (a) read
it, (b) question the author's motives in talking something up - or down - and
then (c) take it, leave it or adapt it depending on your own preferences and
prejudices.
Remember that financial
institutions, journalists and bloggers have preferences and prejudices of their
own, which may well conflict with yours.
There are no rules....
Despite the huge diversity
in their approach and political outlooks, it's surprising how many business
& personal finance publications, websites, blogs etc all regurgitate exactly
the same things, as though the authors have been pre-programmed at birth. Here's just a few of them :-
- You should always be invested in the markets
- Equity investing is for the long term
- Don't try to time the markets
- Run with your winners
- Don't be afraid to cut your losses
There are many, many other
'rules' of this ilk, some of which even totally contradict each other, but let
me suggest to you just one....
there are no rules... nothing is sacred
I wouldn't advocate taking stupid
risks or over-committing yourself,
but otherwise simply do what feels right for you.
One oft-repeated recommendation
seems to be that you need to be invested all the time, and at any cost. There's blogs out there detailing ways to
switch holdings or even trading accounts whilst minimising the time they're out
of the market. Their argument is that,
historically, very significant market gains have been made on a few single
days, and so therefore you need to always be in the game to avoid losing out. However, very significant losses have been
made on a few single days too, and you're just as likely to be out of the
market at the right moment as the wrong one....
On a personal level, I have
two trading accounts. The SIPP, in which
I bought a broad basket of equities all around the same time and have basically
left them untouched, and the ISA which is much more actively traded. (I also used to have a regular trading
account but over the last year I gradually ran it down to zero holdings,
withdrew the cash as I went and then closed it completely.)
Over the past three years,
the value of the SIPP severely dipped in 2011, rose steadily again in 2012 and at
the time of writing has just about recovered to its 2010 level.
On the other hand, my
current ISA value is 30% higher than the original investment sum in the same
timescale. (In real terms, of course, inflation has eroded the true value of the
sum by 10% or so over the period, so regarding it as a 20% real return is a
more realisitic assessment.)
Why the difference ? Because I actively seek to time the market with
my ISA picks. Unlike the SIPP, I'm not looking for prolonged
high yields or the prospect of long-term growth, I'm simply opportunistic,
although I certainly don't speculate in IPOs of dodgy shell companies or buy penny
shares - most of the stocks I buy are blue-chip within an industry sector I
understand reasonably well and with valuable physical assets and hopefully strong
future cashflows. I strictly avoid the
likes of social media companies and internet content providers etc which
require no fixed assets, have very low barriers to entry by new competitors and
rely solely on subscriptions or advertising for their revenues. Just my own personal preferences and
prejudices again....
Just the simple act of writing
this post had led me to seriously consider a more agressive approach to my SIPP
investments, or at least half of them.
I'm now thinking of leaving half my SIPP holdings in higher-yield
defensive stocks and ETF trackers, and then more actively trading the other
half.
In the ISA, I tend to buy quite
strongly on what I regard as severe market dips and then wait for a recovery point
at which I can bail out again at a profit.
If the market continues to dip or treads water for a long time, then I
might have to wait many months for such a recovery. I also don't particularly like selling at a
loss and, let's face it, no-one should like it.
Therefore unless I've picked an absolute dog (...it happens...) which is
way underperforming its peers or the market, then I'll always give it some time
to bounce back unless there's something else I think I could buy with the sale proceeds
which would be likely to recover any losses more quickly.
I don't day trade, because
I've neither the time nor the inclination to sit in front of screens of market
tickers all day, but I'm not knocking those who can do it successfully, and there
have been occasions when I've been in-and-out of the market with a profit in
the space of a week. It's also sometimes
been up to nine months between trades, depending on the market conditions.
I don't track charts, or
analyse any particular stock movement patterns in detail, other than regularly
looking at what the FTSE100, FTSE350 and my stocks-to-follow are doing. The lower half of the FTSE350 index is
generally more representative of what's actually going on within the UK – the
FTSE100 contains many stocks that derive most of their revenues from trading
internationally.
It's general market
conditions that I regard as important - if your chosen stock pick is lagging
seriously behind its peers then it's an indication that the company may be troubled,
whereas if all the prices in that particular sector are similarly depressed
then it's the market which is not performing.
I'm not looking for
double-baggers here - when either the stock value itself or the general indices
have risen to a level at which I start to feel uncomfortable, then I'll sell immediately
even though it might only net a few hundred pounds each time, or I'll set a
fairly tight trailing stop order and let it run a little.
If the stock continues its
upward run unbroken then I'll keep raising the stop order behind it. If there's a temporary blip before it should
rise further again, and I get stopped-out long before the eventual peak, well
that's just tough shit - I'm still in profit and I'm not greedy.
As a demonstration, there is one particular FTSE100 company in which I've bought and sold shares twelve times in the past four years. Those trades in just this one company, after all dealing costs and stamp duty etc, have netted me around £6,000 in gains in that time. (I also have a holding of this exact same share within my SIPP, and it's currently trading below the price I paid for it more than three years ago...)
I'm also not afraid to have
a lot of cash in the ISA trading account at any time, even though it's not
earning anything at all. In fact at
present, after a month of profit taking in January's rising market, cash now
represents around two-thirds of my total ISA account value and I'm in no
particular hurry to get back into the market again at current pricing levels. I'm still occasionally looking at the market movements and the prices of
the stocks I've recently sold, to see when it might be worthwhile dipping my
toe in the water again.
On the subject of taking small
profits every time, in the dim and distant past of the 1980s there was a long series
of IPOs for utility companies etc which were privatised by the government. In those days, before Crest etc, you had to
submit written application forms for everything, send cheques as payment and then
wait for weeks until you received a paper share certificate before you could
sell them on. These flotations were
also generally hugely over-subscribed, and so you tended to receive many fewer
shares than for which you applied, but this meant that market demand was
usually high after trading commenced.
Some of my colleagues at that time couldn't understand why I bothered
with all these new issues, given the hassle involved, when the end result was '..just
£100..' profit, in their words. I used
to counter by asking them how many hours they needed to work each month in
order to have £100 after tax to keep
entirely to themselves, and which was not already earmarked to be spent on
the mortgage, bills, kids etc....
Some great info there, thanks! Trading isn't something I'd consider doing right now, although it does interest me and I like to read about what other people are doing. I'd be interested to know which FTSE100 company enabled you to make £6k through trading. Of course, I understand if you don't wish to name them, in case people think you are providing advice to buy/sell!
ReplyDeleteHi. Thanks for stopping by again. No problem in naming this stock, now it doesn't really exist any more - it was Xstrata (XTA), now subsumed by Glencore into 'Glenstrata' or Glencore Xstrata as its formally known. A big dilution in value for Xstrata IMHO, who lost a lot of key people from the productive XTA side, including friends of mine who've jumped ship into other producers.
ReplyDeleteGlencore was basically a metals trader, as opposed to Xstrata which was a metals producer.
However, FWIW, I still have a small holding in the new combined company...
Thanks for the reply. Aha, I've heard of the old company before but never knew what they did - good job on making the £6k!
ReplyDeleteI just re-read your post and had a chuckle at the comment "oft-repeated recommendation seems to be that you need to be invested all the time, and at any cost." I've recently had some cash sitting in my share ISA and I was getting a bit twitchy that I couldn't buy anything with it. I guess as I don't follow the markets closely nor will I try to time it, I'll just buy something when there's enough cash to buy. Thanks for confirming that there are no rules! :-)
Hi. Thanks again. Regarding the '...confirmation that there are no rules...', I'm not a financial adviser..... you have to figure it out for yourself !!!
Delete