Important information: The value of investments and the income from them can go down as well as up, so you may get back less than you invest.
A year ago, I asked myself a difficult question. If I could buy only ten funds, and had to hold them through thick and thin for a decade, what would they be?
It was a surprisingly difficult exercise. Perhaps the hardest aspect of the job was to step back from the here and now to think long into the future. To take a strategic rather than a tactical approach to fund picking.
On one level this is hard to do with any degree of conviction. The future is unknowable as the events of the past ten years (from Covid to Ukraine, inflation to tariffs, and many others) have shown.
But disregarding the short-term news flow is also strangely liberating. The questions become easier to answer in some ways. Will the US still be a large part of the global economy? I suspect so. Will technology continue to drive economic growth and innovation? Of course.
The portfolio I ended up with reflects this balance of uncertainty and inevitability. It is well-diversified by design. I wanted to be able to ride the inevitable ups and downs of the markets, and the unavoidable variations in performance between different regions and asset classes.
Setting the ground rules
It’s worth re-capping the parameters I set when creating the Ten for 10 portfolio a year ago.
First, I needed to make clear what the portfolio was not. It was not a recommendation that was relevant to anyone else’s personal circumstances. I suggested that anyone looking for personal advice should seek out a suitably qualified adviser (either through Fidelity or elsewhere). Learn about Fidelity’s Advice Service.
I also noted that the portfolio was a reflection of my personal circumstances and choices, and (importantly) not the full extent of my savings and investments. Although I was 61 then (and a year older now), the portfolio has a heavier equity bias than many would think prudent. There are a couple of reasons for this:
- I continue to invest with a longish time horizon. Both my parents are still alive, so there is a reasonable chance that I could still be around in 30 years’ time. I live in hope of enjoying a good long retirement and one of my investment goals is to stay one step ahead of inflation - hence the bias towards the asset class with the best history of delivering high returns over time.
- I have also put money aside in cash to (a) provide dry powder in case a fall in the market provides a good buying opportunity and (b) to protect me if, for whatever reason, stock market returns turn out to be disappointing for an extended period of time. In other words, I have a ‘rainy decade’ fund.
I set the list up under five broad headings or themes:
1. Growth - investing for ten years meant I wanted exposure to what I hope will be the continuing growth of the global economy.
2. Value - After many years in which investors have sought growth rather than value, I recognised a gap between the two investment styles. I think the value approach will have its day again.
3. Defensiveness - after two years of strongly rising markets (and 17 years since the financial crisis) I wanted some protection against the growing maturity of the bull market.
4. US vs Rest of World - related to the previous two headings, and reflective of America’s growing disengagement from the rest of the world, its attitude to key institutions (like the Federal Reserve), and its higher starting valuation, I wanted to position myself for a potential rotation away from the most highly-valued corners of the US markets.
5. The changing world - investing for a decade or more, I was looking for exposure to unpredictable but inevitable changes in the world. The ongoing ascent of emerging markets and the importance of technology seemed likely to continue.
How have we done so far?
The table below shows the performance of my fund picks in the first year of the decade. The wide dispersion of performance and the ranking (unpredictable a year ago) makes a strong case for the diversified approach. I have assumed an equally weighted portfolio.
The overall performance I would describe as reasonable in a strong year for global markets.
| Performance from 4.2.25 to 3.2.26 | % change |
|---|---|
| iShares Physical Gold | 59.6 |
| Lazard Emerging Markets | 36.9 |
| Fidelity Special Situations | 27.8 |
| International Public Partnerships | 13.1 |
| Dodge & Cox Worldwide Global Stock | 12.5 |
| Fidelity Global Technology | 12.4 |
| Fidelity Global Dividend | 12.3 |
| iShares S&P 500 equal weighted | 1.9 |
| Rathbone Global Opportunities | -1.9 |
| Brown Advisory US Smaller Companies | -7.3 |
| Average | 16.7 |
Source: LSEG, total returns, 4.2.25 to 3.2.26.
It is important not to jump to too many conclusions after just one year. For someone investing for a decade, let along the 30 years I’m planning for, 12 months is neither here nor there. That said, we can take some lessons from the last year.
1. The first point to notice from the chart below (as opposed to the table above) is that the past year was not a year of straight-line performance. Launching the Ten-for-10 portfolio in early February 2025 was, to say the least, unfortunate timing. The stock market fell by around 20% between mid-February and the announcement of US tariffs in early April. It makes the recovery since then all the more remarkable.
2. In a relatively focused portfolio of just ten funds, a strong individual performance can have a big impact. Clearly, gold has been an important contributor to the overall outcome. I do not expect the precious metal to continue to perform as it has recently, and I recognise that history shows it can drift or fall for long periods.
3. The rotation out of the US got underway and I anticipate that it will continue from here. I nodded to this in my selections a year ago (smaller companies rather than the Magnificent Seven, an equal-weighted rather than capitalisation-weighted index) but the US weighting is clearly the biggest detractor in this portfolio for now (Rathbone Global Opportunities also has a US bias). That’s OK. The balance of US in the portfolio is the important factor, not the short-term performance.
4. My exposure to emerging markets and the UK helped me to benefit from the rotation away from the US. My only regret is that I did not also have some Japan and Europe in the portfolio. And not just because they did well last year. It is a glaring gap in a ten-year portfolio regardless of how well they have performed in the short run. I am not going to make any changes now, but if I were to add to the portfolio (a Dozen for a Decade?), this is where I would top up.
5. The two global portfolios performed in the middle of the pack. This is exactly the kind of stability I hoped they would provide. They play to my desire for more of a value weighting and a bias towards Europe rather than the US. If I were to rethink the equal balance between the ten that I have assumed, I would raise the weighting of the Dodge & Cox and Global Dividend funds.
Got a burning question you want to ask? Why not drop us a line. Click here to ask your question.
- Read: Precious metals: how to navigate a bubble
- Read: Savings by age: how much should you have by 30, 40, 50 and 60?
- Read: Top 10 best-selling ISA and SIPP funds in January
| (%) As at 31 Dec |
2020-2021 | 2021-2022 | 2022-2023 | 2023-2024 | 2024-2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| iShares Physical Gold | -2.8 | 11.8 | 7.2 | 28.2 | 53.6 |
| Lazard Emerging Markets | 6.7 | -5.1 | 15.4 | 9.2 | 32.4 |
| Fidelity Special Situations | 23.7 | -0.5 | 6.3 | 16.4 | 25.6 |
| International Public Partnerships | 6.9 | 4.4 | -6.7 | -5.8 | 11.0 |
| Dodge & Cox Worldwide Global Stock | 21.4 | 4.9 | 13.9 | 7.0 | 15.8 |
| Fidelity Global Technology | 24.5 | -13.5 | 37.6 | 19.8 | 17.1 |
| Fidelity Global Dividend | 12.8 | 0.2 | 9.5 | 13.5 | 15.1 |
| iShares S&P 500 equal weighted | - | - | 7.7 | 14.1 | 4.0 |
| Rathbone Global Opportunities | 20.5 | -20.4 | 18.3 | 17.5 | 6.0 |
| Brown Advisory US Smaller Companies | 9.1 | -10.3 | 6.5 | 6.6 | -4.5 |
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future returns
Source: Morningstar, total returns from 31.12.20 to 31.12.25. Excludes initial charge.
Important information -investors should note that the views expressed may no longer be current and may have already been acted upon. Overseas investments will be affected by movements in currency exchange rates. Investments in emerging markets can be more volatile than other more developed markets. There is no guarantee that the investment objective of any Index Tracking Sub-Fund will be achieved. The performance of the sub-fund may not match the performance of the index it tracks due to factors including, but not limited to, the investment strategy used, fees and expenses and taxes. The shares in the International Public Partnerships investment trust is listed on the London Stock Exchange and their price is affected by supply and demand. The investment trust can gain additional exposure to the market, known as gearing, potentially increasing volatility. The Key Investor Information Document (KIID) / Key Information Document (KID) for Fidelity and non-Fidelity funds is available in English and can be obtained from our website at www.fidelity.co.uk. Please note that the funds mentioned here and the Select 50 are not a personal recommendation for you. If you are unsure about the suitability of an investment you should speak to one of Fidelity’s advisers or an authorised financial adviser of your choice.
Share this article
Latest articles
Retirement plan checklist: 10 years from retirement
A step-by-step guide to staying on track with your retirement plans
Maxing your allowances can make a massive difference
Why using your tax allowances matters more than you might think