Top products from r/FIREUK

We found 62 product mentions on r/FIREUK. We ranked the 9 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/FIREUK:

u/DaveJSawyer · 4 pointsr/FIREUK

Hi, @PM_ME_WEALTH_ADVICE

Thanks, sounds like you know of what you speak.

This is an excellent question, thanks.

So, 95% of me thinks that if you didn't like the fictional reading, you probably won't like the rest of the book. On that basis, you shouldn't read or buy it. The rest of the book is non-fiction but the writing style is similar, and if that doesn't interest you, I doubt it's worth your investing the money or time.

The other 5% of me thinks, even given the above, give it a whirl. For these reasons:

  1. You're clearly passionate about FIRE. This book has many facets, but a big one is my attempt to translate the US FIRE movement to a UK context. It sounds like you'd be interested in that.
  2. I can guarantee you'll find new information/ideas in this book, albeit your three-part recipe for FIRE above sounds like it'd get you there a lot faster that what I'm suggesting:O).
  3. I'm the author, so "I would say that". Perhaps check out the Amazon reviews for an idea of what others have made of it? There seem to be a lot of people among the 55 reviewers who are already on some stage of their journey to financial independence. The reviews are here.
  4. It seems like, as I'm sure many on this sub are, you are very well-read on all things FI, and have devoured Ben Graham and Tim Hale's books. Given that, you may be interested that William Danko (The Millionaire Next Door), Jacob Fisker (Early Retirement Extreme) and John Kingham (The Defensive Value Investor) have all read RESET and are quoted in the book praise on the first few pages.
  5. Last, as I mentioned in the original post, the only UK FIRE-related blogger I read religiously prior to publishing a couple of months ago was Monevator. I love his accessible writing style, combined with a real passion for sharing thoroughly fact-checked knowledge and research. Here's what he said after reading my book: " Hidden in plain sight within the 300 or so pages of RESET is an elegant synthesis of the latest thinking in financial independence, lifestyle design, and age-old philosophical wisdom – cunningly disguised as a breezy pep talk from your witty mate down the pub. In a world that's forever racing past us on a screen, it's a reminder of the potentially life-changing power of a book.”

    Cheers for taking an interest in RESET, @PM_ME_WEALTH_ADVICE.

    Best, Dave
u/strolls · 2 pointsr/FIREUK

I spent about 2 hours composing a reply to you, and my browser just crashed.

I wrote this sentence, apologised that I'm not going to reproduce the whole comment for you, and wrote a bit more. My browser crashed again. 🤬

The term "asset class" is not restricted to stocks vs bonds (or vs commodities) - it just means any group of assets you might wish to compare or contrast together. The S&P 500 and FTSE 100 are two asset classes, US and British large cap respectively, within the larger asset class of developed world equities.

In turn, developed world equities is a sub-class of all world equities, including developed and emerging.

The Investopedia definition of asset class assists - "a grouping of investments that exhibit similar characteristics and are subject to the same laws and regulations"

My emphasis in the above quotation explains the point - developed and emerging market equities are different asset classes because they have fundamentally different characteristics, exposed to (for example) different degrees of political and regulatory risk.

Different allocations to developed and emerging markets will move the portfolio along the Markowitz bullet. In that illustration, asset class A is emerging market equities and asset class B is developed world equities.

You can see that any blended portfolio will earn higher returns than developed world equities alone, and it's possible to earn higher returns with less risk than developed world equities alone. Whilst I am not a financial statistician, I don't think it would be that hard for those boffins to compose a portfolio that is in the section of the efficient frontier to the left of 100% B - I'm not sure if there's an official name for this part of the bullet, so let's call it the "optimal" portfolio.

Investments are not like lottery tickets because lottery tickets are not exchange traded. The National Lottery returns 45% of its income as prizes, so if you acquired 1,000,000 random lottery tickets, in the days when lottery tickets still cost £1 each (just to keep the numbers round), and sold them on the stockmarket they would be worth a bit less than £450,000.

For exchange-traded assets, investors pay what they think they are worth, and fundamental analysis of stock values compares expected returns to a baseline of the returns given by US or UK government bonds. The risk of the US or British government defaulting on their bonds is near zero, so we consider their returns to be "riskless".

If government bonds are returning 3% pa, you would be unlikely to pay £1 per share for a supermarket chain which has earned about 3p per share in annual profits the last 10 years. You would be taking the risk of loss if the supermarket is mismanaged or the grocery sector goes into decline, and you would have no greater reward than you'd get by buying riskless government bonds.

Speculators might be prepared to pay £2, £3 or even £5 per share for a company which earned only 3p per share this year, if there is expectation of earnings growth and a belief that the company will earn 10p or 20p per share in the future. You find mining companies with no history of profits trading at disproportionate price levels, but not supermarkets with established history of profits. Speculators are often irrational.

Based on the prices of Tesco, Morrisons and Sainsbury's, you'd expect to pay 45p - 60p per share for a supermarket that has earned about 3p per share in profits the last 10 years. To confirm this for yourself, look up those three firms and see what their PE ratios are, or EPS (price-earnings ratio and earnings-per-share are different ways of saying the same thing).

Consider the Argentine financial collapse, the great Venezuelan clusterfuck or this week's rioting in Chile. If you find a South American supermarket chain that has averaged a profit of 3p per share the last decade, will you pay 45p or 60p per share for it? You can buy Tesco, Morrisons or Sainsbury's for that much, but they don't have quite the same risks of riot damage or political moronism. You would expect shares in the South American supermarket chain to be much cheaper - I guess half the price, but I don't know.

The price of emerging markets stocks must reflect the risk, otherwise you wouldn't buy them. By the price, I mean the price relative to the fundamentals, such as the company's book value or earnings per share. The efficient markets hypothesis says this and, in this case, it is true in reality too. The returns of an investment must always be compared to how much your money could earn elsewhere.

No-one's advocating going all in on emerging markets, but its common to tilt a bit towards them. In his book Smarter Investing Tim Hale refers to assets like emerging markets, commodities and small cap as "returns boosters". Emerging markets are 10% of global market cap - I think you will find that the optimal portfolio contains 15% or 20% emerging markets. Perhaps as much as 25%, but I doubt 30%.

I'm sorry this comment is not as complete as the one I wrote before, although I covered some other ground too. I hope you will forgive me for reiterating - the price of exchange-traded assets must reflect their anticipated returns, relative to their risk and a riskless baseline.

You pay 25p for a share of a Brazilian supermarket that has earned 3p per share profit the last 10 years and it issues a profits warning next year because of flooding from the favelas. But in aggregate, you buy the emerging markets index and those risks cancel out - you can expect to earn 12% annual profits from your Brazilian supermarkets, Philippine telecoms companies, Nigerian breweries and Indian construction companies.

u/thatstevelord · 2 pointsr/FIREUK

> Has anyone got any experience they would like to share with the AIM?

I started chasing yield, looking at a high yield portfolio and reinvesting dividends at the high end of the FTSE, but after reading a few interesting books and watching reactions to Carillion from other HYP-ers, my impressions were confirmed: I was effectively lending money to large ex-growth debt-ridden companies in the hope that over 20 years I'd get it back. I read Jim Slater's books and realised HYPs give a better illusion of growth over time compared to total return, but risks are often underestimated.

I started looking at piworld and in particular some of Leon Boros' talks and I realised three things:

  1. Leon Boros got very lucky with Bioventix
  2. Boros understands Free Cash Flow way better than I do
  3. He learned from (and talks about) his mistakes

    I then went and read The Art of Execution, which frankly both baked my gourd and opened my eyes. I developed a set of rules based around hunting, cutting losses and top slicing winners. With the approach I'm taking I need a 20% success rate to break even (success being defined as doubling in value). I'm still learning and tweaking my rules as I go, but I'm now at the point where I'm comfortable with every investment I'm in across every asset class I use.

    > Did the investments perform well / badly?

    All of my investments in smaller companies have done well while I held them. All of my investments in blue chips have been unmitigated disasters.

    > What lessons did you learn?

  • To quote Jim Slater, "Elephants don't jump".
  • Quality is better than value but hard to spot at early stage.
  • Avoid things you don't understand, even if they might be profitable.
  • Work out your entry and exit conditions, and stick to the plan.
  • Money management appears to be more important than most other factors.

    > Does the AIM make for a fun side hustle?

    I'm not doing this for fun. The more boring this gets, the less likely I'll mess with it. AIM seems to be very caveat emptor, but you can get an edge by learning more about a company before institutional money gets in at scale. You have to be strict about what you're doing, because there are charlatans and frauds everywhere, but so far I seem to be doing better at the low end than the high.
u/_ImposterSyndrome_ · 3 pointsr/FIREUK

> First up, a great book. Alain De Botton's Status Anxiety . Not finance focused, but a book that will help you adjust your mindset to cope with all elements of status anxiety.

Thanks for the recommendation. I just purhcased it on Audible, purely on your recommendation, because the subject resonates with me.

u/isezno · 1 pointr/FIREUK

I’d highly recommend reading this book - Stocks for the Long Run by Jeremy Siegel

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Stocks-Long-Run-Definitive-Investment/dp/0071800514

It’s US focussed but the same principles apply anywhere. You can get a free pdf online if you search.

u/GaryHarrisEsquire · 2 pointsr/FIREUK

I really recommend this book. Couple of quid second hand. It will change how you see your anxiety. You will get better it’s just difficult to see a way out when your nerves are sensitised. But there is, millions of people do it every year. Chin up OP https://www.amazon.co.uk/Self-Help-Your-Nerves-overcoming-stress/dp/0722531559#productDescription_secondary_view_div_1521490242353

u/mapryan · 1 pointr/FIREUK

Pete Matthews from Meaningful Money has just brought out a new book. I’ve not read it but perhaps someone else could comment.