- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Cash beat Shares from 1995 to 2015
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Cash beat Shares from 1995 to 2015"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by LondonManc View PostNLUK has thanked you and liked it because he's completely out of his depth and now thinks that you have more brains than Kurt Cobain's garage wall.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by pjclarke View PostMain conclusion:-
A couple of points, the analysis seems to be to have taken an average Index tracker fund (in terms of charges) and compare it to the best 1 year deal available for cash, over various periods. But they only seemed to have looked at which 'won' or 'lost' rather than adding 'by how much', though this will be catered for by the analysis over different period lengths. I would have expected the tracker to have done better as the periods got longer, but they won decisively in short periods but in only 6% of 15-yr periods, rising to 100% of 20yr periods , though obviously the sample size is smaller.
However, I am not sure the last conclusion is backed up by the evidence.
Worthwhile reading for anyone investing for the long term, but I don't think you can apply the conclusions in the current low-interest, low-inflation climate for two reasons: firstly the base rate is at a record low of 0.25%, and seems to be stuck low. I would guess it averaged more like 5% over the study, which would favour cash, its hard to get a real positive return from cash right now, and secondly charges on passive funds have come down a lot due to competition in the market. The HSBC fund they chose currently has an annual charge of 0.18% (almost certainly higher in previous years as they concede and Any annual charge has a profound effect over the longer term. to quote the report) and you can buy a FTSE tracker now from the likes of Vanguard for 0.08%, less than half price.
I will not be locking my money into cash any time soon.
Leave a comment:
-
Main conclusion:-
The data presented here allow the boundary between cash and shares to be set at around 18 years. Less than that there is a better than evens risk that a shares tracker will produce a lower return than a series of best buy cash accounts. For periods below 12 years there is also a risk that a shares investment will lose money. Overall, for a random date and a random investment period the safer bet is active cash rather than tracker shares.
A couple of points, the analysis seems to be to have taken an average Index tracker fund (in terms of charges) and compare it to the best 1 year deal available for cash, over various periods. But they only seemed to have looked at which 'won' or 'lost' rather than adding 'by how much', though this will be catered for by the analysis over different period lengths. I would have expected the tracker to have done better as the periods got longer, but they won decisively in short periods but in only 6% of 15-yr periods, rising to 100% of 20yr periods , though obviously the sample size is smaller.
Adding all the data for all investment periods from one to twenty years cash wins in 55.7% of the 2520 periods and shares in 44.3% of them. Overall cash beat shares.
Over the whole 21 year period the tracker out-performs cash. £10,000 invested in a tracker on 1/1/1995 becomes £34,098 by December 2015, a compound growth rate of 6.0% a year. Cash achieves nearly £6000 less finishing at £28,105, a compound growth rate of 5.0%. But the low difference between the risk free cash and the risky shares is striking. Bodie*(Financial Analysts Journal May-June 1995 pp. 18-22)*finds that the risk of investing in shares does not diminish as time invested lengthens.
I will not be locking my money into cash any time soon.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by LondonManc View PostOn the hope that you'd managed to read it so it would save me doing so you clunge fraggle.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostSo why are you asking questions then you cock womble.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by BrilloPad View PostI spent all my cash with NLyUK. On the advice of my accountant.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by LondonManc View PostThank you.
While TL;DR may have been too long so you didn't read it, the DR bit meant that I, well, didn't read it!
Leave a comment:
-
The comparison is not very good as it simply compares the number of periods where cash beats shares and vice versa, and that a lot of the time cash beats shares. But as you can see from one of the graphs the shares bounce up and down and when they go up they go up much higher each time.
eg
This is my experience roughly:
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
cash 100 102 104 106 108
shares 100 76 85 95 130
Yes shares lose quite a lot of the time but they generally find their way up eventually.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by northernladuk View PostErm.. Well the first paragraph in the first link says..
While TL;DR may have been too long so you didn't read it, the DR bit meant that I, well, didn't read it!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by LondonManc View PostTL;DR - does it take dividends into consideration or just share prices versus cash value?
The new research compared returns from a simple tracker fund – which follows or ‘tracks’ the FTSE100 index of shares in our biggest hundred companies – with cash that is moved each year into a best buy one year deposit account with a bank or building society – sometimes called a ‘one year bond’. The tracker has dividends reinvested and the cash is reinvested each year with the interest earned.
Leave a comment:
-
TL;DR - does it take dividends into consideration or just share prices versus cash value?
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: