|
Post by Ace on Apr 5, 2020 12:17:20 GMT
I'm looking at my Vanguard online statement (investments/holdings page with Detailed View stitched on) and I can't understand the figure stated for VWRL in the Last Price column. It's currently (Sunday 5th April 2020) showing £51.86. This makes no sense to me as it's way below the 52 week low price for this share (£55.56). Also, it isn't the figure that has been used for the current valuation, which it's Friday's closing price of £57.26.
So, what is this Last Price? Vanguard obviously consider it an important figure to quote as it's 1 of only 2 price figures stated on the page, the other being the Average Unit Cost, which seems to be correct. This isn't a one off as I've seen this many times before, particular over the weekend.
This Last Price column for my other investments (LS funds) correctly shows Friday's closing price.
I know there are many VWRL advocates on this site and didn't want to bother Vanguard at this time as they will obviously be very busy and are likely to have a skeleton staff. I expect I'm being stupid as usual, but would appreciate any enlightenment.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Apr 5, 2020 13:09:50 GMT
I'm looking at my Vanguard online statement (investments/holdings page with Detailed View stitched on) and I can't understand the figure stated for VWRL in the Last Price column. It's currently (Sunday 5th April 2020) showing £51.86. This makes no sense to me as it's way below the 52 week low price for this share (£55.56). Also, it isn't the figure that has been used for the current valuation, which it's Friday's closing price of £57.26. So, what is this Last Price? Vanguard obviously consider it an important figure to quote as it's 1 of only 2 price figures stated on the page, the other being the Average Unit Cost, which seems to be correct. This isn't a one off as I've seen this many times before, particular over the weekend. This Last Price column for my other investments (LS funds) correctly shows Friday's closing price. I know there are many VWRL advocates on this site and didn't want to bother Vanguard at this time as they will obviously be very busy and are likely to have a skeleton staff. I expect I'm being stupid as usual, but would appreciate any enlightenment. Don’t know. ? Irrelevant
|
|
|
Post by gravitykillz on Apr 5, 2020 13:15:05 GMT
Could be your sell up price with vanguard charges included ??
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 5, 2020 14:15:56 GMT
Could be your sell up price with vanguard charges included ?? Thanks for trying, but selling fees would amount to roughly 2p per share, so can't be that.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Apr 5, 2020 17:01:18 GMT
AceThe spread is wide-enough to drive a bus through. 51.86 is the mid-point of the 20.72 spread (62.22 - (20.72/2)) That spread never existed though. It’s a fake spread. You only see that with penny stocks
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 5, 2020 17:04:02 GMT
Ace The spread is wide-enough to drive a bus through. 51.86 is the mid-point of the 20.72 spread (62.22 - (20.72/2)) Thanks. I realise I'm probably in for a spanking here for revealing my ignorance but... Where do you see this spread? I've been happily buying and selling these through the vanguard platform without any apparent spread between the buy and sell prices, just a £7.50 transaction fee. Even if I look at HL, where I have previously traded, there is only a very small spread (Sell:£57.21 Buy:£57.30).
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Apr 5, 2020 17:18:12 GMT
I'm looking at my Vanguard online statement (investments/holdings page with Detailed View stitched on) and I can't understand the figure stated for VWRL in the Last Price column. It's currently (Sunday 5th April 2020) showing £51.86. This makes no sense to me as it's way below the 52 week low price for this share (£55.56). Also, it isn't the figure that has been used for the current valuation, which it's Friday's closing price of £57.26. So, what is this Last Price? Vanguard obviously consider it an important figure to quote as it's 1 of only 2 price figures stated on the page, the other being the Average Unit Cost, which seems to be correct. This isn't a one off as I've seen this many times before, particular over the weekend. This Last Price column for my other investments (LS funds) correctly shows Friday's closing price. I know there are many VWRL advocates on this site and didn't want to bother Vanguard at this time as they will obviously be very busy and are likely to have a skeleton staff. I expect I'm being stupid as usual, but would appreciate any enlightenment. My stab in the dark - is that the last price you bought at, maybe? Anyway, can assure you the price is £57.26 now, whatever that odd number is.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 5, 2020 17:29:54 GMT
I'm looking at my Vanguard online statement (investments/holdings page with Detailed View stitched on) and I can't understand the figure stated for VWRL in the Last Price column. It's currently (Sunday 5th April 2020) showing £51.86. This makes no sense to me as it's way below the 52 week low price for this share (£55.56). Also, it isn't the figure that has been used for the current valuation, which it's Friday's closing price of £57.26. So, what is this Last Price? Vanguard obviously consider it an important figure to quote as it's 1 of only 2 price figures stated on the page, the other being the Average Unit Cost, which seems to be correct. This isn't a one off as I've seen this many times before, particular over the weekend. This Last Price column for my other investments (LS funds) correctly shows Friday's closing price. I know there are many VWRL advocates on this site and didn't want to bother Vanguard at this time as they will obviously be very busy and are likely to have a skeleton staff. I expect I'm being stupid as usual, but would appreciate any enlightenment. My stab in the dark - is that the last price you bought at, maybe? Anyway, can assure you the price is £57.26 now, whatever that odd number is. No. Thanks for trying, but that's not a price I've ever traded at. I think that @wallstreet must be right as his figures work out exactly, but I don't understand where they come from. Or why Vanguard would be stating the figure when it doesn't seem to be related to the price one can trade at on their platform.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Apr 5, 2020 17:37:15 GMT
My stab in the dark - is that the last price you bought at, maybe? Anyway, can assure you the price is £57.26 now, whatever that odd number is. No. Thanks for trying, but that's not a price I've ever traded at. I think that @wallstreet must be right as his figures work out exactly, but I don't understand where they come from. Or why Vanguard would be stating the figure when it doesn't seem to be related to the price one can trade at on their platform. Oh, yes indeed, I can see those figures here . I too would be keen to learn what that means in this context. I don't understand it, as VWRL has only traded anywhere near that level about 4 years ago. edit: especially doesn't make sense to me given that markets are entirely closed, and other indices which are effectively the same thing (AMS: VWRL, LON: VWRD) show bid/spread of 0. Isn't it just a glitch? I'll stop digging now :-)
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 6, 2020 8:32:21 GMT
Now that the markets are live the bid/ask prices on investing.com have indeed narrowed to a sensible range, and the Last Price on Vanguard is now also a sensible figure.
The questions remain as to why there was such a massive spread at the weekend and why Vanguard would quote the middle of this spread as a "Last Price" when this value was not close to any price that they were will to buy or sell at during the previous day.
|
|
jo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 728
Likes: 492
|
Post by jo on Apr 6, 2020 9:22:56 GMT
Is it anything to do with the Auction after hours when market makers balance books at price-weighted average prices? Sometimes you see crazy price trades shown as 'last trade' until the next market opening.
(I know nothing about VWRL - it may not even be subject to the above, if so apologies.)
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Apr 6, 2020 10:12:24 GMT
Oh well. Up at 59 now, good stuff. I don't think I've read any investment site in which they don't suggest implicitly or explicitly that this is a dead cat bounce. Perhaps this is the markets taking their revenge as usual on the maximum number of commentators I still don't believe that though. I mean, VWRL was at this level at Christmas 2018, does that seem like an appropriate discount for the lost revenues in this event? Not to me, certainly! (don't worry, hazellend, I didn't sell and in fact have bought 3 times - I still like to talk like a speculator though )
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Apr 6, 2020 10:35:22 GMT
Oh well. Up at 59 now, good stuff. I don't think I've read any investment site in which they don't suggest implicitly or explicitly that this is a dead cat bounce. Perhaps this is the markets taking their revenge as usual on the maximum number of commentators I still don't believe that though. I mean, VWRL was at this level at Christmas 2018, does that seem like an appropriate discount for the lost revenues in this event? Not to me, certainly! (don't worry, hazellend, I didn't sell and in fact have bought 3 times - I still like to talk like a speculator though ) Keep buying roo! The lower it goes the better your long term returns will be.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Apr 6, 2020 11:02:18 GMT
Oh well. Up at 59 now, good stuff. I don't think I've read any investment site in which they don't suggest implicitly or explicitly that this is a dead cat bounce. Perhaps this is the markets taking their revenge as usual on the maximum number of commentators I still don't believe that though. I mean, VWRL was at this level at Christmas 2018, does that seem like an appropriate discount for the lost revenues in this event? Not to me, certainly! (don't worry, hazellend , I didn't sell and in fact have bought 3 times - I still like to talk like a speculator though ) Keep buying roo! The lower it goes the better your long term returns will be. On that - the most useful investment blogpost I've read in the last 2 months is this one (did I post it already? ah well worth doing so again if so): ofdollarsanddata.com/buying-during-a-crisis/TLDR; It's a blindingly obvious statistical point, but in essence: If markets fall 20% and you buy, your investment will be 25% higher when it gets back to the top. If markets fall 25% and you buy, your investment will be 33% higher when it gets back to the top. If markets fall 33% and you buy (as they were when this article was written) your investment will be 50% higher when it gets back to the top. If you're lucky/brave enough and still have spare funds, if markets fall 50% and you buy then your investment will increase by 100% when the market gets back to its all time high. Wow. Some exponential things are good - who knew? edit: I also really like the next step in the logic. Add in your guess as to how long the market will take to recover. 3 years? So if you buy at 25% down, then if your prediction comes true, it would be a 33/3 = 11% p.a. return. And you wouldn't even have had to invest in Lendy.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 6, 2020 11:32:23 GMT
I haven't traded individual shares, other than from company share schemes, for over 20 years, when I concluded that I was rubbish at it, and therefore more suited to global trackers. These have done me very well since.
However, I sold a large portion of my trackers at the start of this crisis and I've been buying and selling VWRL for the past few weeks, so far to good effect. It's been fun during a time with a shortage of other entertainment. The price is so volatile that it has been fairly easy to make a profit. I'm intending for the whole pot to end up back in VWRL. I've only played with up to 20% of this pot so far. The strategy will only work if two key assumptions are correct:
1) that bottom of the market is still some way off, 2) the price will recover in the long term. Therefore, I can buy and sell during this period of mid-price volatility.
I'm fairly sure that the second assumption will hold true. The danger of the first assumption not being right it's that I'll end up having to buy back in at a higher price than i could have benefited from.
I have a two prices in mind where I will buy and hold no matter what.
One is a high price (10% below the price I originally sold at at the start of the crisis). This would be me accepting that I've missed out on possible major gains and will settle for 10% when the price recovers to my original selling price + my mid-price trading profits.
The other is a low price, where I'm effectively calling the bottom of the market for me. This low price would give me a 50% profit when the price recovers to my original selling price, plus any gains I've made from buying and selling during this time of volatility. This low price may be much higher than the actual bottom, which is way too tricky for me to guess.
All of this is totally contra to my investment philosophy for the past 20+ years, but having (sensibly as it's turned out) sold at the start of this crisis through fear of an imminent crash, I needed some strategy for how/when to get back in. I realise that one very sensible option would be to buy back in now, but I'm having fun and am happy to take the risk that I'm wrong about the market having further to fall.
|
|