020 8542 8084 |info@solomonsifa.co.uk
FacebookLinkedInInstagram

Tracker/Index funds

Sam Harris
May 2025  •  2 min read

Tracker/Index funds

You may have heard the terms ‘Tracker’ and ‘Index’ thrown around when we talk about investments or your portfolio, but what do these terms mean and what are the key features?

Simply put, a tracker portfolio aims to mimic the performance of global markets. This is typically done through index funds. An index in the context of stock markets is essentially just a list of companies. Though, there are often certain criteria a company must satisfy in order to be included, such as market capitalisation (the value of the company).

I’m sure you’re already familiar with well-known indices such as the FTSE 100, which is an index made up of the 100 largest British publicly traded companies. Or even the S&P 500 which is comprised of the 500 largest American companies. These funds ‘track’ the UK stock market and the American stock markets respectively.

Index tracking funds come with the added benefit of generally being less expensive than most alternatives. This is due to the passive nature of this type of investment, these funds are simply trying to replicate an index so most of the hard work has already been done by another organisation. For example, Vanguard might offer an equity fund which tracks the FTSE 100 index, however the index itself is calculated and maintained by FTSE Russell.

The Tracker portfolios we use at Solomon’s are prime examples of utilising index funds to ensure investments are well diversified. Meaning, that the markets which are performing well help mitigate losses from markets which are struggling. Conversely, this could also be seen as underperforming markets eating into the gains of strong markets. Though ultimately, diversification is a strategy used to reduce risk, rather than to increase returns. The aim is not to beat the global markets, but rather to match them.

Tracker/Index funds2025-05-27T10:47:03+01:00

Money & climate change

Dominic Thomas
May 2025  •  4 min read

Money & climate change

There are an awful lot of changes coming as to how the financial services sector can describe ESG investment solutions. We are all aware of the greenwashing that has gone on … if you are an enormous company (or even a small one) simply paying into some carbon offset scheme doesn’t really address the issue of your own actions. Equally, a so-called environmental company that makes electric cars may be run by an individual who, well, let’s say isn’t on my list of people to emulate in any way.

A sector that is high risk (you really can see all of your money disappear) is the startup, venture capital space. This is not for the faint-hearted. The sector is often looked to as the potential saviour of the planet and innovators for tomorrow. Well, we can hope that’s the case …

Here in the UK, we have Government incentives to step outside of the normal ‘investment world’ (which we call the retail investment sector) and consider a portion of your portfolio for venture capital. What has been concerning me over the last couple of years is that this and the previous Government seem to think allowing mainstream pensions to invest in this space is wise. It really isn’t. This is only for those who are willing to stake a relatively small part of their wealth in the hope of excellent returns and some serious do-gooding, with an understanding that it may also go horribly wrong.

As someone who generally advises you to have very low cost portfolios, tracking markets and not attempting to second guess the future; here I split off into a different character and acknowledge that the benefits of venture capital might be worth consideration for some of you.

EIS, SEIS and VCTs all have tax incentives … the Government adds 30%, 50% and 30% respectively to your investment. Though how it works is that you get this back as a tax refund. There are some conditions to maintaining this of course, but these are reasonable. Most investments are early stage and realistically need holding for 7-10 years as a minimum.

The pots of these investments are generally very small. Sometimes no more than half a dozen companies, rather than the multiple thousands that are in your regular portfolio (which reduces risk). The chance of failure is high, but the potential rewards can be significantly better than anything the retail markets might achieve.

Those who specialise, for example, in solutions to climate change include an EIS Fund by One Capital. I recently met with their team. I am not suggesting here that you invest in this, I want to use it as an example of the type of investment, nothing more – if you want relevant specific advice get in touch.

One of their holdings is with Bristol-based Kelpi, who make “plastic like” food containers from kelp and do the job, but without the plastic. You can have a look for yourself at their website here: https://www.kelpi.net/.

All investment managers of this type start with what they call ‘deal flow’ which is usually hundreds of people with ideas pitching them for money to develop and take their service or product to market. This is then whittled down by the investment managers to a manageable number before some deep dive due diligence is conducted. Eventually they may be left with a handful of companies that they believe have good prospects that suit their particular fund outlook.

Great ideas often fail to make great businesses; you need the right people. So this is an occasion where the managers and their hands-on approach and experience are all rather vital  … and expensive. EIS, VCT and SEIS all have much higher expenses and management fees than anything you are currently invested into.

Anyway, this sort of stuff is really only for those who have used up the normal allowance options (ISAs and Pensions), but if you would like to know more and perhaps have a specific focus for a small element of your money (say on climate change) then please get in touch. The tax year end is a factor in the process.

Just for interest, here is a short video by One Planet.

Video link here

Please note that I am NOT advising you to invest in this fund, you have understood that by now, this is simply an example of what is available. Investment should always be in line with your circumstances, values and goals as closely as possible.

Money & climate change2025-05-09T16:50:23+01:00

The Last Showgirl

Dominic Thomas
May 2025  •  3 min read

The Last Showgirl

Rare is the day that the word ‘pension’ is mentioned half a dozen times within the first half of a film, yet as I sat in my local cinema recently, I couldn’t help but notice this unusual occurrence. A new film written by Kate Gersten and directed by Gia Coppola with Pamela Anderson in the lead role is probably much as you might have anticipated. Anderson plays Shelly, a senior (57-year-old) Vegas showgirl, both the show and her career are forced to face the cold reality of dwindling interest.

In the gambling capital of the US, Shelly’s story is of a woman who assumed that her career could continue uninterrupted. For her, the spotlight of the much-needed attention was almost reward enough except sadly she has not reaped any financial rewards beyond merely managing to stay a little ahead of the next set of bills.

We learn about her struggle to balance life and the personal sacrifices she makes for her career that result in an estranged relationship with her daughter. The experience that many (most) women have in the workplace juggling childcare (and care for parents), relationships and a career and the brutal savagery that the loss of a youthful appearance is rarely a career-ending problem for men. This is, albeit a fairly untypical example, one of the various structural problems that many women face and why so few have careers, pensions or investments that are on a par with men. Scottish Widows run an annual report on the gender divide, the latest is here: https://www.scottishwidows.co.uk/employer/insight/eh-insight-gender-pension-gap.html

Annette (Jamie Lee Curtis) has perhaps an all-too-common experience for women towards the bottom of the economic ladder. Already dropped from the showgirls, she is working as a waitress on a zero hours contract and minimum pay. When asked if she will save her gambling winnings for her retirement she answers:

Annette: Retire? like, bankers retire. Waddaya think I have a 501K? I’m gonna work and then I’m gonna work some more and then I’m gonna die. I’ll probably die in my uniform. That’s my long-term plan.

Jodie: You don’t want to retire?

Annette: It’s not an option, Jodie.

Our opinions about the American dream may have altered over the years as it evidently has not worked for the many; but certainly for a very few. Annette is for me, symbolic of the optimism that Americans have, having the courage to keep going, but numbing the pain of reality with another margarita. You won’t forget the performance by JLC.

Men by comparison have it easier (there, I said it). Men also have it cheaper – we simply don’t have anything like the pressure of appearances. However, life is clearly more complicated and nuanced than I suggest. On the one hand, this is a tale about the consequences of a lack of planning (and saving), making assumptions about the future, which all too swiftly arrives ready to consume hope. This happens to lots of people (most) irrespective of gender, but certainly women generally are at a significant disadvantage.

The film has received a warm response. There are rather obvious parallels with Anderson’s own life (though I imagine she was and is better resourced financially) known primarily for her ability to run across a beach in Baywatch (1989-2001) which at one point was the most watched TV series with a weekly audience of 1.1bn.

In some senses, this is a story of consequences, of not paying attention to the important and being caught up in the familiar. At 57 it isn’t impossible to start a new career or finally start saving for your future into a pension, but it is certainly a lot harder.

The financial services sector hasn’t been the most welcoming to women, there are relatively few female advisers or business owners in the sector, but things are improving. Here at Solomon’s more than half of our clients are women, I hope it’s partly due to the sense of trust and transparency in our advice and connecting money with being used to facilitate the really important things in life, something which many men simply neglect in the pursuit of more.

The sooner you speak with a financial planner who puts your interests first, the better. Whether you are 24, 34, 44 or 84, I can assure you that we can make money make sense.

Here is the trailer for the film The Last Showgirl

The Last Showgirl2025-05-06T10:24:53+01:00

Sit tight

Dominic Thomas
April 2025  •  2 min read

Sit Tight

What the global markets are currently experiencing is not new. It is only different in the sense that it’s utterly pointless and caused by one particular individual. That in itself suggests that ‘the system’ is very flawed and if I could change it I would – but I can’t and neither can you.

Our regulator would want you to know that a 10% fall has happened – it hasn’t yet, but frankly by the time you read this, it may have done. Knowing that doesn’t help. In fact, I would argue that you are better off switching off the news and social media and not looking at your portfolio at all. It’s not good for your mental health or any sense of wellbeing.

Your financial plan is designed for the long-term – the rest of your life. It is not designed for the next year, but for every year. We believe, because of the wealth of evidence from history, that markets rise and fall very suddenly, often for poor or misguided reasons. However, they always recover, given enough time (which is key). I do not like seeing the valuation of funds drop any more than you do – I can assure you. In fact, I am pretty certain I’m far more fed up with it, as it is so needless.

“Sit tight” is very easy for me to say, but it’s very hard to do, I know that. However, we have been through similar events before, lots of them. It’s never comfortable and often feels like “this time it’s different”.  It is certainly different having an idiot as a President, but there are lots of similarly foolish and vile men (and some women) running countries around the world. It’s part of our lives and something we each contend with. Yes; Trump is unpredictable (other than in his capacity to lie) but even so, there is a limit to his real power.  You are invested in companies around the world, many of them trade with each other and are interconnected, something that Trump will never understand. No economy is an island of penguins.

Yes, this is concerning, anyone who has invested in the last month has taken a hit on value, but it will recover. You still own and hold the same ‘stuff’, it’s just that the perceived value is lower than it was at the start of January. Attempting to ‘time the market’ is only ever easy in hindsight and requires at least two decisions, to exit and to re-enter. Neither are easy and from experience most fail to get even close (and if they do, to be honest it’s nothing more than luck as they can never repeat their achievement).

Your portfolio is global, hugely diversified and very low cost. Values will rise again once we have got through this period of self-inflicted insanity. Sadly, I have nothing good to say about the current President of the United States, or his cabinet and supporters. To me they look, speak, sound and smell very much like a fascist dictatorship, certainly it shows all the signs and actions of one in its infancy. I can only hope that his premiership and his regime ends very suddenly before the allotted time. He has no sense of decency and no understanding of history. The sooner he is gone the better.

Sit tight2025-04-11T15:47:25+01:00

Sanctions, sanity and sanctuary

Dominic Thomas
April 2025  •  5 min read

Sanctions, sanity and sanctuary

You are old enough to know that the world is fairly mad. Nations are often run by fairly despicable people, sometimes elected into power, sometimes they simply take it. At some point in life (for some this might be their entire lifetime) an opinion is formed about ‘others’ who are used as the excuse for many ills and failures. The truth is a victim of agenda and despite the cold epitaphs of November Remembrance services, nothing is really learned other than to repackage misery.

We take it as a sad reflection of “man’s inhumanity to man” that some people don’t and won’t get on, invariably due to holding a different opinion about religion or politics or both. In a capitalist world, withholding money and trade (or making it harder for both) is a way of attempting to coerce a required behaviour. This may have worked in the 1980s with sanctions imposed against South Africa; whether it has worked elsewhere is debatable. Yet it remains a rather obvious tool.

Idealists (which I am prone to myself at times) may well argue that the power of withholding custom or money from some companies may help nudge them towards better behaviour. Trying is arguably better than doing nothing.

In the investment world, screening out companies (or even countries) is not without its challenges. One man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist. Perspective and narrative are up for grabs and twisted to suit.

The war in Palestine, which is horrendous, poses challenges. For some to criticise Israeli politics is to be antisemitic, which is, in my opinion, utterly daft. Anyone who has paid attention to history, knows the misery and horrors inflicted upon Jews for centuries, particularly in the last World War with the holocaust. It is more than understandable that Jewish people would wish to defend themselves. However, any reasonable person, would not consider the atrocities in Gaza anything remotely reasonable but rather more ironically fascistic.

When Government fails to address a problem, individuals are left to find ways that they might express their concern, and investors reduce or completely withdraw from particular sectors or countries. We are all investors; most people simply don’t know how things really work. If you have a final salary pension (lucky you!) then you may not be aware that money doesn’t simply appear, it is the consequence of investment in property, debt and shares in companies. You do not get to select the investment and given the size of the scheme and pressure on it to provide a guaranteed income for your lifetime and your spouse’s, there isn’t really that much invested into shares due to the need for predictable income and an inflation linked one at that.

Some protest groups have taken to highlighting “investment into Israel” or ammunitions and defence companies that supply Israel (amongst many others). They call for a ban on such holdings as an attempt to influence the behaviour of the companies and Governments concerned. I have sympathy with the sentiment, but as a member of such a scheme you don’t get to choose how and what the pension is invested in and it is enormous. The Local Government Pension for England and Wales for example stood at £354,047,000,000 (£354billion) at the end of 2023. This is a scheme where more is paid out (in pensions) than paid in (contributions by employed members). Roughly 51% of the LGPS is invested in shares. Interesting (for me) the investment costs for 22/23 were £1,726,500,000 which is about 0.4876% of the portfolio (so your portfolio – if arranged by us – gets lower investment costs than the massive pension schemes).

In 2022/23 there were 6.49million members of the LGPS, up from the previous year by 0.1million. Active members (people employed and contributing) amounted to 2.09m (32%); deferred members (former employees not yet taking their pension) 2.39m (37%) and 2.0m people (31%) drawing a pension. To say getting this balance right is difficult would be an understatement.

So, to exclusion … well one article I saw claimed that “81 local government pension funds have known complicit investments” and that £12,214,286,216 was the sum involved. Don’t forget that the value will fluctuate wildly each day (they are shares). These include Amazon and Google, I’m going to guess that you use these services so would be deemed complicit too. If I may infer that roughly half of the LGPS is invested in shares (£180bn or so) then the focus (£12.2bn) is on about 6% of the shares held (by value) – or 3% of the total value of the LGPS.

I’m not going to pretend that this is an easy problem and telling the Board of LGPS to divest itself of £12bn into other shares is either a wise, good or bad thing. Will it make any difference? Is 3% of something an issue that normally causes you distress and guilt? How much of your tax is spent on things you don’t agree with or approve of? Do you write to your MP about it?

£12bn is a lot of money, it should be enough to make most of us stop and think, but when presented as 3% – does that alter your perspective?

Sadly, the world is a chaotic, messy and often nasty place. My privileges of living here in the UK (amongst many others) are not lost on me. I don’t have the answers for the crisis, which is both decades and centuries long. Flexing an economic muscle has its appeal, but quite how much this particular issue is of significance I am afraid that I’m unable to say.

Members of final salary (Defined Benefit) pensions are not able to select funds, but of course are able to lobby the Board about their concerns. For those of you with an investment-based pension, we can discuss screening policy at any time.

If you are seeking a personal opinion, then I would say that lobbying is a good approach to the problem, but it isn’t an easy or straightforward process. Arguably, UK Government (or broader) sanctions might have more of an impact.  Demonstrated by the fact that Mr Musk’s remarks and gestures have not gone unnoticed and have resulted in a dramatic change in Tesla’s valuation.

References:

Sanctions, sanity and sanctuary2025-04-08T11:14:04+01:00

Market turbulence

Dominic Thomas
March 2025  •  3 min read

Market turbulence

If you have followed the news, you will appreciate that global stock markets have been falling sharply over recent weeks. This is in response to the wave of changes and abandonment of normal policy by the new, rather insane US Government.

Your portfolio will have fallen. It will recover, the question is really how much worse will things get and how long before they recover. To which the answer is, “I don’t know” and nobody knows.

I would remind you that we have seen significant falls in market values every year (on average -15% every year at some point), it’s simply that some years you and the media pay more attention.

You can view your portfolio in our secure portal or on the platform portal that we are using for you, typically Fundment, Nucleus, Parmenion or Transact.  However I would caution against doing so regularly as this will merely increase your anxiety, which isn’t good for your health or your financial plan.

Many of us realised that Trump was not someone to be trusted, based on his actions over many years, but despite his very odd decades-long special relationship with Putin, it seems that there are still swathes of Americans who are unable to discern this (even if it smacked them around the face with a kipper). Denial and distortion of facts and reality are in evident supply, unlike truth and justice.

In terms of helpful and reassuring information and our approach to evidence-based investing, JP Morgan produce data about the worst declines in valuation during each calendar year.  Admittedly, this is the FTSE All-Share not the global market, but the principles are exactly the same. It’s a chart that you would have seen before in our client magazine Spotlight.

The chart shows the grey bars as the final return for the calendar year since 1986. It shows that of the 39 completed years, 27 (70%) were positive, 12 (30%) were negative. That means that roughly one year in four is negative. The red dots indicate the worst or deepest decline in each of those years. Every year has a ‘crash’. The average drop is 15% and the median (the middle value when all lined up in order) drop is 12%.

This knowledge hopefully provides some comfort about the reality of ‘drops’ each year, but the message is really – don’t panic, stay in your seat. Admittedly you could say “sell it, get me out” but this will actually realise a loss (make it real rather than notional) and it is unlikely that you will re-invest at a point that is any more favourable, if you do that’s probably luck rather than skill.

We have built your financial plan making allowance for these scenarios. Investments do not grow in straight neat lines; they are erratic.  The greater the proportion you hold in equities (shares), the more volatile, but also the greater the reward over time. Your plan is designed for your entire lifetime and beyond.

As of now (March 17th 2025), the global equity market is down -3.75% since the start of 2025. Global Bonds are up +0.85% and a 50/50 portfolio is down -1.73%. The numbers in pounds will look considerably worse than this, they always do because you relate to pounds in terms of your income and spending rather than your capital, but it is healthier to consider it in percentage terms. The chart below shows the Year to Date (YTD) figures for Timeline Tracker 100 (green) 50 (yellow) 0 (red).

Looking at a longer term perspective helps provide some context.

None of us like to see portfolios hit heavily, it is unnerving. As I have said, this is currently down to the politics of the US Government, with proposed tariffs and appointing billionaires to act as parodies of Bond villains providing ‘advice’ to the White House. Personally, I hope that he is removed from office as soon as possible, but it is also clear that the Vice President is perhaps even worse, possessing very little understanding of how the world works.

Generally in life we tend to assume that wisdom is correlated with age. At the age of 78 I find no evidence that Trump possesses any. Mr Vance at age 40 certainly hasn’t acquired any yet.

Market turbulence2025-03-20T16:51:04+00:00

Premium bonds – do you feel lucky punk?

Dominic Thomas
March 2025  •  2 min read

Premium bonds – do you feel lucky punk?

You may remember the character portrayed by Clint Eastwood – Harry Callahan – aka Dirty Harry, who regularly had shoot outs with villains.  As he faced them after a shootout and everyone had lost count of the number of bullets that had been fired, he aims his magnum 44 pistol and utters the words “do you feel lucky punk?”. Such was the ‘enlightened policing’ of the 1960s and 1970s …

Like many of you, I have a bit of a soft spot for premium bonds. There is something nostalgic about them; they feel safe (you are essentially depositing money with the UK Government). You have a bit of a monthly gamble, which unlike other forms of gambling, you do not lose your money if you don’t pick the winner (or place). The winnings are also tax-free and frankly who wouldn’t want to win a million British pounds? Besides, a Premium Bond is only £1 – and you can have up to 50,000 of them.

But let’s be honest with ourselves.

There are around 129 billion bonds in the draw each month. Two will win the £1m jackpot. Your chance of holding the winning bond is 1 in 64 billion.

There are a total of 5,902,600 prizes or winners each month. The chance of winning any sum from the smallest of £25 to £1m is 0.004%. Whilst that looks like a lot of winners (nearly six million) the vast majority (98.77%) win £100 or less. There are only 20,371 that win £1,000 or more.

As most people won’t win, they tend to get out of the habit of checking. At the last time of checking since October 2024, there are unclaimed prizes to the tune of more than £92m.

Yes you get to stay in the monthly draw, but chances do not improve unless you hold more than £24,500 of premium bonds; as the chance of winning any prize is 24,500:1 – in other words £25 winnings for £24,500 – each month – so expected winnings of £300 a year or 1.2%. This is not exactly an inflation-beating rate.

The annual prize rate is 1.4% – that’s the total amount of prizes paid in a year across all the deposits. So if inflation is at 3% or more in the real world, then you are going backwards, more so if you hold less than £24,500.

Meanwhile – deposit rates can be achieved of 3-4% without too much fuss at the moment (March 2025).

Do you feel that lucky? 1 in 64 billion lucky? – they haven’t even inflated the £1m winnings. Perhaps like Harry Callahan, you may not really know why you keep “doing it”, but it certainly isn’t about the interest.

Premium bonds – do you feel lucky punk?2025-03-14T16:16:13+00:00

Will Reeves Slash Cash ISAs?

Dominic Thomas
Feb 2025  •  2 min read

Will Reeves Slash Cash ISAs?

Hopefully you will know that I am a fan of having cash, we all need it for ‘liquidity’. In plain English – that means having money easily available without needing to sell anything. This is usually best for your emergency fund. This is a number (sum) that helps you to sleep well at night and quite frankly depends on your life stage. A measure of 3, 6 or 12 months of normal spending is helpful plus planned spending projects (not normal spending) over the next three years.

Keeping more than this in cash will likely erode the value of your spending power. You are likely to be going backwards. You might say “backwards, but at least with certainty – compared to investments” well, that is true in the short term but in the long term, whilst nothing is certain, we have yet to see a period when cash beats shares over 10 years or longer.

So, the news that the Chancellor (Rachel Reeves) is contemplating either scrapping or reducing the Cash ISA allowance from £20,000 to £4,000 may be a surprise for some of you. It’s because in theory holding cash doesn’t really serve anyone very well, least of all the economy, but investing in businesses … well that helps create wealth. That’s why she is considering it.

It would seem that this will only start from the new tax year (if at all) and nobody is expecting her to tell us that you can only hold £4,000 in total in Cash ISAs – which would be highly unlikely. Whilst you may find this an unwelcome change, it’s worth remembering that Cash ISAs always had a lower allowance until the 2015/16 tax year when the allowance became £15,240.

As we are still in the 2024/25 tax year data isn’t up to date, honestly in this digital age, I don’t understand why HMRC are so behind. Anyway, interest rates obviously improved over the last couple of years and more people used Cash ISAs, 63% of contributions to ISAs in 2021/22 were into Cash ISAs. People forget the impact of inflation which is still not within range, and Cash ISAs continue to provide a negative return. Quilter did some research and found that £10,000 into a Cash ISA in December 2012 would now be worth £11,955 but when adjusted for inflation that’s really £7,918. In contrast, the same amount invested into a global shares index fund would be worth £33,526 (£22,221 after inflation).

You may have seen my inflation diagram about a first-class stamp, something we can all relate to and perhaps why there are fewer Christmas and Birthday cards being sent.

  • 1985: 17p
  • 1995: 25p
  • 2005: 30p
  • 2015: 63p
  • 2025: £1.65

Your money has to keep pace with inflation.  10 years races by, but holding your hard-earned money in cash that provides a negative return is only good for short-term projects and emergency funds.

The current ISA allowance for 2024/25 is £20,000.  The Junior ISA allowance (for those under 18) is £9,000.

Will Reeves Slash Cash ISAs?2025-02-27T11:05:24+00:00

Geopolitics and Market Volatility

Matt Loadwick
Feb 2025  •  3 min read

Geopolitics and Market Volatility

The stability, or otherwise, and volatility of global stock markets can be affected by a number of factors, which can be both economic and political in nature. In terms of economic factors, both UK and US economies are currently experiencing well-documented inflation, the result of rising costs of goods and services. This leads to increased borrowing costs, and to market uncertainty, as investors get spooked by high costs, and have a tendency to wait for prices to drop before investing.

In the UK, a glimmer of light appeared when the rate of inflation dropped by 0.1% in December compared to November, easing the pressure on Chancellor Rachel Reeves, and going some way to improve market confidence as the odds increase of the Bank of England reducing interest rates early this year. That said, it does feel like the current news cycle in the UK will provide reasons to be cheerful one day, followed by reasons to despair on the following, fuelling further volatility as markets react.

Global stock markets are also influenced by geopolitical events, where often the unpredictability surrounding such events can lead to increased volatility. As an example, the Russian invasion of Ukraine resulted in firms that had strong ties to Russia experiencing a significant fall in share prices.

It is also worth pointing out that politics and economics clearly do not exist in a vacuum, with both influencing each other symbiotically – as politicians drive their economic agenda, markets respond accordingly depending on the success (or otherwise) of their policies …

As the 47th President of the United States was sworn in for the second time earlier in January, the world is braced for increasing geopolitical uncertainty with a Trump administration once again at the helm. Indeed, they have taken little time to give us a taste of what is to come over the next four years, creating headlines through divisive policies, such as the proposed mass deportations of illegal immigrants, withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement (compounded by plans to increase drilling for oil to promote as a key US export), pardoning the circa 1,500 Trump supporters who were charged over the 2021 US Capitol riots, and far-fetched rumours (we hope) of an interest in invading Greenland.

Such examples certainly give the impression that this administration may cause something of ‘a bumpy ride’ for markets in the coming years, particularly in the context of ongoing conflicts in the Middle-East and Ukraine. This is reflected in research undertaken by Scottish Widows, which suggests that geopolitics and volatility are likely to be among the top concerns for advisers in 2025.

If at some point you were to watch the value of your investments take a temporary drop, it is only human nature to feel a sense of nervousness. In the face of this expected volatility, we at Solomon’s are here as ever to encourage calm, and to ensure that our clients do not lose sight of the importance of planning for the long term.

Geopolitics and Market Volatility2025-02-10T10:02:08+00:00

The Rule of 72

Dominic Thomas
Dec 2024  •  2 min read

The Rule of 72

In the finance world we sometimes use the rule of 72, in truth it’s mainly for examination questions. The purpose of the rule is to establish how long it would take to double your money given a set investment return.

Those with a keen sense of maths will appreciate that returns are very rarely fixed, so the formula has limitations for real-life application.

So let’s take an example of a cash deposit paying 3% a year

72/3 = 24 (years)

An investment with a return of 9% a year would take  8 years (72/9 = 8).

As we enter 2025, those of you holding cash of £100,000 would need to wait until 2049 to see this become £200,000. For those investing and achieving 9% a year, your £100,000 becomes £200,000 in 2033 and £400,000 by 2041 and £800,000 by 2049.

Now for those of you working within financial services, or if you work for the FCA, I am not suggesting investments are 9% a year, this is merely designed to demonstrate the point of the maths and yes I am ignoring inflation. In this theoretical world with predictable results of compounding annual returns we might observe the values over time as shown below. The orange line being a 3% annual return and 9% being the blue line.

So whilst theoretical, there are obvious inferences. Investments offering low returns are often deemed as having less risk… but less risk of what? In the same way that higher returns are considered higher risk. For most people building wealth over time, holding too much in ‘low risk’ / low growth investments will have a detrimental effect over time.

So the questions you need to consider are the timeframe for your goals and how much you need to allocate towards growth (genuine growth assets).

The Rule of 722025-01-21T15:53:23+00:00

LOCATION

Solomon’s
The Old Mill
Cobham Park Road
Cobham
Surrey
KT11 3NE

OTHER

Home
FAQ
Financial Services Sector
Press & Media
Privacy Policy

CONTACT

info@solomonsifa.co.uk
020 8542 8084

Go to Top