Top

The UK's favourite investments

Where are British savers investing their money?

At lovemoney.com we often emphasise the importance of saving money for your future. And there’s no question, it is really important. But that’s only half the story. It’s important to save but it’s also important to put your savings in the right place. So where is the best home for your money?

Well, I believe that everyone should put at least some of their money in a savings account. Cash in a savings account gives you a useful cushion if something goes wrong such as losing your job.

However, if you want your money to grow faster than inflation, I think you should at least consider investing in the stock market too. That’s because history suggests that shares normally, but not always, deliver outperform cash over the long-term (ten years or more.)

Many people invest in the stock market via investment funds, so I thought it would be interesting to look at the most popular investment funds in 2010.

Here’s the top ten:

1.

Vanguard FTSE Equity Index

2.

Vanguard FTSE Developed World Excluding UK Equity Index

3.

Alliance Trust Asset Management Monthly Income Bond

4.

Standard Life Investments Global Absolute Return Strategies

5.

Troy Asset Management Trojan Fund

6.

M&G Strategic Corporate Bond

7.

Aberdeen Emerging Markets

8.

Vanguard US Equity Index

9.

Legal & General Dynamic Bond Trust

10.

Legal & General UK Index

The funds in italics are all stock market tracker funds

Before I go any further, I should acknowledge that this list isn’t perfect. That’s because the table has been created using data from the Alliance Trust savings platform - a platform which enables people to invest in funds cheaply. Alliance Trust offers special deals on some funds, so those offers are bound to distort the results somewhat. Still, I think the above table is worth analysing.

Four stock market trackers

I’ve italicised four of the funds in the table because they are stock market tracker funds. In other words, they track the movements of a particular stock market index.

I’m very pleased to see this as I’m a big fan of tracker funds. I like their simplicity, their strong relative performance and their low charges.

I should add, however, that Vanguard’s funds aren’t available on most of the rival platforms to Alliance Trust, so some private investors will have come to the Alliance Trust platform purely because it offers the Vanguard funds. (Vanguard’s funds are arguably the cheapest tracker funds in the UK.)

But it’s still great news that people are buying trackers and they’re not just buying Vanguard funds. In tenth place, you can see Legal & General’s UK index tracker doing good business as well.

Bonds

Just as Vanguard’s strong performance won’t be repeated on other platforms, I doubt other platforms will see so much demand for Alliance Trust’s Monthly Income Bond. (An Alliance Trust fund might do better than usual on an Alliance Trust platform.)

However, I’m sure that investors elsewhere will be putting plenty of money into similar funds that invest in corporate bonds.

Personally, I think investing in corporate bond funds is a mistake for the majority of investors. Fans of corporate bond funds say they’re lower risk than funds which invest in conventional shares. There’s some truth in that but if you’re young, I think you should take the extra risk and go for shares. Even if corporate bonds beat shares over the next five years, a younger investor can afford to wait until shares almost inevitably win out over a longer period.

And anyway, as it happens, I suspect that shares will beat bonds over a relatively short period such as the next three or five years too. That’s because the value of bonds will fall if inflation and interest rates rise. So I believe that younger folk should steer clear of bonds and if older investors want to reduce their risk, they should consider moving some or all of their money straight from the stock market to cash. Leave out the half way house of bond funds.

Absolute return

Moving down the list to fourth place, we come to Standard Life’s Global Absolute Return fund. Absolute return funds have become very fashionable in recent years because they’re supposed to perform well regardless of what is happening on the stock market.

Trouble is, there’s no guarantee that the funds will deliver a positive return every year. What’s more, the charges are normally high. Standard Life’s fund is no exception. There’s an initial charge of 4% followed by an annual management charge of 1.5%. By contrast, Vanguard’s UK tracker fund only charges 0.15% a year!

Given that the stock market will probably perform well over ten years or more, I think you’re better off going for a tracker fund. If you have a more short-term horizon, you could do a 50/50 split between a tracker and cash. Or maybe go for 100% cash if you’re very risk averse.

Emerging markets

I’ve only got room to look at one more fund, so I’m going for the Aberdeen Emerging Markets fund, which comes seventh in the table.

This is a managed fund where a fund manager picks the shares. When it comes to emerging markets, I think you can make a stronger case for investing in an actively managed fund. That’s because I reckon it’s easier to beat the average in younger, less sophisticated markets. Aberdeen’s fund is a top-performer so I can quite understand why it’s popular.

So what are my conclusions?

-          A fair chunk of investors are going for tracker funds. Great!

-          Corporate bond funds are still pretty popular but they don’t deserve their popularity. Ditto for absolute return funds.

-          It’s good that emerging markets remain popular. Managed funds can be OK in this area.

Whatever decisions you make, good luck!

More:  The danger of using property as a pension  |  It’s financial war!

Most Recent


Comments



  • 14 February 2011

    Hello Sausage&Mash, You said: [i]"With the exception of Aberdeen Emerging Markets, the long-term total return performance on most of these funds has been very disappointing."[/i] I agree. So it's interesting that people are buying poorly-peforming funds. That said, last year's top performer could easily be this year's dog, and vice versa. "[i]The truth about equities is that over the last ten years you would have been better of in cash."[/i] Yes, i?t's true that the noughties was a poor decade for the stock market. For everyone else's interest, here are some figures for the ten years to December 31st 2009. They confirm your point. Equities: -1.2% annual real return Gilts: 2.6% annual real return Cash: 1.8% annual real return [i]From Barclays Gilt Equity Study 2010[/i] So as you say, cash comprehensively beat ??s?h?a?r?e?s? ?over that period. That said, many investors will have been drip feeding into the stock market over that period, so they'll have been buying on the lows as well as the highs. Their performance will look much better. And stock market performance has been much stronger over the last two years. I'm sure that the ten year figures to December 31st 2010 will look much better for equities as well. [i]"And the whole 'buy and hold' approach just doesn't stack up any longer - not with the trouble we've seen since 2007."[/i] I strongly disagree. There have been plenty of stock market crashes prior to 2007. Supporters of LBTH know this. We just argue that over the long run, you'll probably do fine with shares. And it makes massive sense to drip feed your investments so that you can take advantage of the dips when they come. [i]"You need a good asset allocator who can skillfully manage your exposure to asset classes within your acceptable risk parameters."[/i] Well, maybe. I'm sure there are some good allocators out there. But the danger is that you'll pay a lot of money for not very good advice. ???H?e?r?e?'?s? ?m?y? ?a?s?s?e?t? ?a?l?l?o?c?a?t?i?o?n? ?a?d?v?i?c?e??:? ??if you're young and you're saving for retirement, it makes sense to go 100% into equities with your retirement fund. Then as you get older? ??(?5?0?+??), gradually switch it over to gilts and cash. Simple really. Ed

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

  • 11 February 2011

    It's a rather pointless list. With the exception of Aberdeen Emerging Markets, the long-term total return performance on most of these funds has been very disappointing. Why not go to a big data provider for more comprehensive and informative results? They could have told you real inflows (ex market movements) and size this up against performance. The truth about equities is that over the last 10 years you would have been better of in cash. And the whole "buy and hold" approach just doesn't stack up any longer - not with the trouble we've seen since 2007. You need a good asset allocator who can skillfully manage your exposure to asset classes within your acceptable risk parameters. Asset classes are still highly correlated at the moment and it's for this very reason that it's important to stay diversified and ready to take action.

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

  • 11 February 2011

    The Trojan Fund is to be 'soft closed' after an embarrassment of inflow. You'll need at least a quarter-million and pay 5% off the top to get in, unless you deal through a platform which has negotiated a special exemption with the fund managers.

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

Do you want to comment on this article? You need to be signed in for this feature

Copyright © lovemoney.com All rights reserved.

 

loveMONEY.com Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) with Firm Reference Number (FRN): 479153.

loveMONEY.com is a company registered in England & Wales (Company Number: 7406028) with its registered address at First Floor Ridgeland House, 15 Carfax, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1DY, United Kingdom. loveMONEY.com Limited operates under the trading name of loveMONEY.com Financial Services Limited. We operate as a credit broker for consumer credit and do not lend directly. Our company maintains relationships with various affiliates and lenders, which we may promote within our editorial content in emails and on featured partner pages through affiliate links. Please note, that we may receive commission payments from some of the product and service providers featured on our website. In line with Consumer Duty regulations, we assess our partners to ensure they offer fair value, are transparent, and cater to the needs of all customers, including vulnerable groups. We continuously review our practices to ensure compliance with these standards. While we make every effort to ensure the accuracy and currency of our editorial content, users should independently verify information with their chosen product or service provider. This can be done by reviewing the product landing page information and the terms and conditions associated with the product. If you are uncertain whether a product is suitable, we strongly recommend seeking advice from a regulated independent financial advisor before applying for the products.