My book has been shortlisted for an award. I'd very much appreciate you voting for it so I can tell the family that it was time well spent and a good reason to start the second (family, if you are reading this I'm joking 😜)
https://t.co/m3MEqnPkN7
@fundhunter_co @JohnRalfe1@FT @PaulineSkypala @AdairTurnerUK I never understood this argument, given that option pricing does not rely on the underlying expected return.
https://t.co/6hUJpREJWy
"instead replacing the security's expected return with the risk-neutral rate"
@MBajc23@AlanJLSmith Pretty sure the equity components are broadly as in the link below (the equity allocations would be scaled down as bonds are introduced).
@realkpr16 @theRFM1 @AlanJLSmith@cyclist_jim increasing the risk (volatility) means a greater possibility we run out of money (outcome)"
Not necessarily.
@Wealth_Mgmt_Guy@AlanJLSmith I believe you are U.S. based. Our rapidly depreciating tinpot currency rescued our equity holdings (we don't FX hedge equity). Value also did well as you say (our fund was slightly up on the year IIRC). Bond outcomes were very much dependent on duration.
@notoriouspjg@AlanJLSmith "And 80% can give worse outcome than 60%"
Agreed that it "could". The point was more that we have the historical data to show that 100% has had some inferior outcomes vs 80%. We don't typically see this (over the typical 30 year retirement) for 60 vs 80.
@Wealth_Mgmt_Guy@AlanJLSmith "is having the client freak out when they drop 10% and pull the ripcord on the plan"
I'd suggest it's not noise such as this, more the steeper, more prolonged drawdowns which we've not had for ~15 years that are going to make some clients nervous.