Quote Originally Posted by SBQ View Post
Utter rubbish! The problem with all these stated figures is they make unrealistic assumptions. One being you can not assume the market return a static ie. 5 or 6% return compounded until the person retires nor can any advisor be held accountable if their investment plan does not work out. Believe me, these advisors are very good at tweaking things and pitching scenarios to their clients... but will never admit any fault.



The article also doesn't say WHY individuals would switch from aggressive to conservative? Based on what logic? Do we assume the individual is scared and rather than 'risk' losing more by staying in the aggressive fund, they feel they want to go to a lower risk fund? What if there was no recovery and it proved the conservative funds fared better than the aggressive funds?? Sounds to be (like all these articles), they're cherry picking based on a hindsight 20/20 scenario. If you ask all of the top long time running stock pickers, from Buffet to Ray Dalio, to any reputable fund manager, they ALL agree that timing does matter. They also do not believe holding bonds, to any long term certainty, is a wise plan to reach retirement. Buffet has never been a big fan of investing into junk bonds but would gladly underwrite the terms of such bonds in his favour.

I've mentioned before, the whole problem of NZ's Kiwi Saver is the lack of any real financial advice and the absence of how funds manage their risk levels between portfolios. That is the difference between say an aggressive vs a conservative is mainly due to the % holdings in bonds or interest bearing assets in each portfolio. An aggressive fund would have a low allocation of cash & bonds while the low risk funds would have a very high % of holding cash and bonds. This is very different to the managed funds over in N. America where financial advisor point you to reputable mutual funds that specialise in that area. Out of the 5000+ managed funds you can pick, no financial advisor is going to pick ONE family of funds that so happens to have various portfolios and let their clients choose in between the risk categories.


I'm still waiting for Stuff to report the huge tax difference between investing in NZ residential properties vs investing in Kiwi Saver funds. Not even Ms Ardern could address this problem by not allowing CGT.
Let’s just face it, you need to move back to Canada. So down on NZ investment opportunities. Kiwis don’t have an option to invest in overseas retirement savings schemes. Your glass half full it’s really tedious to be honest, and we still have no ideas whether you have any credentials to back up your assertions or advice. Do you?

The article simply said it was a bad idea to switch a long term fixed investment from growth to cash. And that’s exactly how it worked out. My KiwiSaver for example which I didn’t touch and is balanced/growth is substantially up since the COVID crash and recovery.

The message it’s pretty simple which you choose to distort and deflect from … Just decide a KiwiSaver strategy and stick to it, don’t duck around with it trying to time the market.

Back on ignore, you bore me to tears and I really dislike your negativity