
Betting against Uncle Sam is a high-risk strategy
If you are only just getting round to taking advantage of your Isa and pension allowances for the tax year that runs out next week, you will not be alone. Human nature means we investors are terrible procrastinators. You'd be surprised how many people top up their tax-free investment accounts in the dying minutes of April 5.
If this sounds like you, you are probably also uncertain about where to invest this year's contribution. The no-brainer investment for many years has been a US-focused fund. But the wisdom of that approach is less clear, 100 days into an unpredictable second Trump term. What looked like a glass-half-full tax cuts and deregulation story three months ago, now looks to be a half-empty tariff, inflation, and possibly recession narrative.
But old habits die hard. Professional money managers may be falling over each other to rebalance out of the US stock market, but their retail counterparts are keeping the faith. In February there was an almost unprecedented swing from optimism to pessimism among Wall Street fund managers polled by Bank of America. Even as the big hitters run for cover, however, those investing on their own accounts are busy 'buying the dip'.
Investing after a pull back in the market has tended to pay off. The market generally rises over time, so topping up after a setback should boost your returns. That's the logic behind the almost $70bn (£54bn) of inflows to the US market in the year to date from the retail investors monitored by VandaTrack, a data provider. To put that figure in context, it is barely lower than the $71bn put to work in the same way by the same investors in the final three months of 2024, when the Trump Trade sounded less ironic.
Adjusting to the 'new normal'
Over here, we are seeing a more nuanced picture. In February, the UBS S&P 500 Index Fund and the Fidelity Index US Fund – both, as their names suggest, passive funds designed to track the performance of the US stock market – remained among the 10 most popular funds on our platform. While it is true that the US market only peaked halfway through the month, that still looks more like force of habit than strong conviction in the outlook for US shares.
Less surprising was the presence in the top ten last month of three money market, or cash, funds. Royal London Short Term Money Market, Fidelity Cash and Legal & General Cash are popular among both Isa and personal pension investors. I suspect there are two reasons for this. First, with interest rates finding a 'new normal' around 4pc, investors can expect a decent, inflation-beating return with almost no risk.
Second, there's a seasonal tax-planning effect. If you can't decide whether the recent US underperformance is a blip or the shape of things to come, parking your tax-year-end contribution in cash while you decide what to do is not such a bad idea. Doing so via a cash fund will earn you 1pc to 1.5pc more income than if you were to simply leave the money sitting on the platform while you make up your mind.
Global funds account for most of the rest of our top ten lists. That makes sense to me. The reversal of the regional performance tables I focused on last week shows how easy it is to be on the wrong side of the market's rotations. Investing globally means you will have some exposure to the best-performing markets, even if the price you pay for that is a more pedestrian return than if you were lucky enough to pick the winners each year.
I wonder, however, if investors in the global funds that are taking such a high proportion of the last-minute Isa and Sipp money this year understand the unintentional bet they are placing on the US regaining its position at the top of the leader board. Six out of the ten most popular funds bought by our most successful investors – those who have accumulated at least £1m in their Isas – have a weighting of at least 50pc to US stocks.
'Ten funds for 10 years'
That may turn out to be a shrewd reading of the tea leaves. The market correction since mid-February stabilised last week, and early this week tech stocks led a rebound on Wall Street as investors became more optimistic that Donald Trump's looming tariffs at the start of April may be less aggressive than feared. Betting against Uncle Sam is a high-risk strategy.
The high degree of uncertainty in the final days of the 2024/25 tax year gives me added confidence in the ' 10 funds for 10 years ' strategy that I described a few weeks ago. If, like me, you will be putting new money to work in the next few days to take advantage of what continues for now to be a very generous tax-free Isa and pension investment allowance, you might want to consider some of the following.
For growth: Rathbone Global Opportunities and Brown Advisory US Smaller Companies. For value: Fidelity Global Dividend and Dodge & Cox Worldwide Global Stock. For defence: iShares Physical Gold ETF and International Public Partnerships, an infrastructure investment trust. Because you also don't know whether the US will regain top spot or hand on the baton: iShares S&P 500 Equal Weighted ETF and Fidelity Special Situations. And because whatever happens this year, the world will continue to evolve: Fidelity Global Technology and Lazard Emerging Markets.
All the usual caveats apply. I don't know anything about your personal circumstances, so this is not advice. It's what I'm doing. I hope you find it useful.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
38 minutes ago
- The Independent
The myriad of countries arming Russia and Ukraine – and the billions it costs
Donald Trump has suggested that the US could send more Patriot missile systems to Ukraine, and has not ruled out providing the war-torn country with a new military support package. Speaking at the Nato summit in the Netherlands on Wednesday, the president said 'we'll see what happens' when asked whether Washington would add to the $8 billion pledged by Nato allies. "They do want to have the anti-missile missiles, OK, as they call them, the Patriots," the US president said. "And we're going to see if we can make some available. We need them, too. We're supplying them to Israel, and they're very effective, 100 per cent effective. Hard to believe how effective. They do want that more than any other thing.' Click here for the latest updates on the Ukraine war It would be a major boost for Kyiv to receive direct military assistance from the Trump administration, which has been highly resistant to sending the levels of weaponry provided to Ukraine during the Biden era. Here, The Independent takes a look at what weapons the US and other countries have been sending to Ukraine and Russia as the war show no signs of ending soon. Who is arming Ukraine? Kyiv's most significant military support comes from the US. The Kiel Institute, which runs a database tracking the level of military support to Ukraine since the war began, says Washington has provided more 64 billion euros (£55 billion) in military support. Since November, the US-made ATACMS missiles have been used by Ukraine in crucial strikes on targets deep inside Russia, with a range of around 190 miles (300 kilometres). The US has also provided hundreds of Howitzer artillery weapons, more than 20 tanks, alongside anti-aircraft surface-to-air missile systems and multiple rocket launch systems. US aid has totaled 114.6 billion euros of financial, humanitarian and military donations to Ukraine since the war began. Of military aid, it has provided 64.5 per cent of the support Ukraine has received. This is followed by the UK at 14.5 per cent, then Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, France, and a host of further European countries. While the EU has provided huge tranches of humanitarian and financial support, as an economic bloc it does not provide direct military support. Ukraine has been supplied with British Storm Shadow missiles, F-16 fighter jets built in the US, Leopard 2 tanks from Germany - despite years of hesitation from Berlin - British challenger tanks, and Polish drones. The UK has committed to spending £18 billion on Ukraine, including £13bn on military support and £5bn on non-military. Separately, European leaders in Nato announced on Wednesday that they have agreed to Mr Trump's demands to increase defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. Who is arming Russia? Russia too has received a host of support from a number of its allies who are pitched alongside Moscow against Western interests - although the exact picture is a little more blurred. Iran and North Korea are two of Moscow's clearest military supporters. Tehran has provided crucial support for Russia's air capabilities, providing it with thousands of the Shahed drones which have brought huge destruction to Ukraine since the war began in February 2022. Russia regularly fires hundreds of the mass-produced drones at Ukraine overnight, in a modern style of warfare which has transformed how a conventional conflict is carried out. But Moscow believes Tehran's importance as a supplier has declined as Russia has localised production of the drones - a move which Iran has provided significant support for. North Korea, meanwhile, has sent thousands of troops to Russia to help fight Ukrainian forces in Russia's Kursk region. After signing a treaty which includes a mutual defence pact, Kim Jong-un is said to have sent around 12,000 North Korean troops, who assisted Russian forces in driving the Ukrainian military out of the region. South Korea's National Intelligence Service (NIS) believes Russia may be readying to mount a large-scale assault against Ukraine in July or August, after noting a new round up of troops by the military and the visit of a top Russian presidential security official, lawmakers said this week. Western countries have also claimed China is militarily supporting the war effort in Ukraine, something which Beijing has repeatedly denied. Russia and China have built an increasingly close bond since the war began. Presidents Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin signed a 'no-limits' partnership and have repeatedly hailed each other as'dear friends'. Beijing has been sending so-called dual-use technology which can be used for both civilian and military purposes, leaving plausible deniability for China to avoid Western sanctions. According to Politico, Russian imports of drones and ceramics - which is a component used in body armor - has significantly increased since the war has begun. The Wall Street Journal reports that dual-use navigation equipment, jamming technology, and fighter jet parts were sold to Russian state-owned companies. In April, Mr Zelensky said Ukrainian intelligence had found that gunpowder and artillery had been supplied by Chinese enterprises. "We talked with the Chinese leader and he gave me his word that he won't sell or give weapons to Russia. Unfortunately, we have facts and see the opposite information,' Mr Zelensky said at the time. On Thursday, China's foreign ministry denied it was supplying weapons to parties in the Ukraine war, and accused "relevant NATO personnel" of slandering China's "normal military build-up". Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for the foreign ministry, was responding to Nato chief Mark Rutte saying there was a "massive build-up" of the military in China.


The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
China moving against fentanyl manufacture amid US pressure
China announced stricter regulations on two chemicals, 4-piperidone and 1-Boc-4-piperidone, used in fentanyl manufacturing, effective 20 July. The decision is viewed by some as a potential step towards resolving a contentious issue in US-China relations, following recent high-level discussions. Chinese officials maintain the action was an independent measure aligned with international conventions, asserting that fentanyl is primarily a problem for the United States. China has criticised punitive tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, which cited China's alleged inaction on fentanyl. The United States has also intensified its efforts to combat fentanyl trafficking by sanctioning Mexican financial institutions for facilitating payments to Chinese suppliers.


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
BBC to charge Americans for news as Britons ditch licence fee
The BBC is to start charging US-based users for access to news and live TV amid a decline in Britons paying the licence fee. The broadcaster unveiled details of the paywall on Thursday, which will see American households charged $8.99 (£6.55) a month for a 'premium service'. An annual subscription will be priced at $49.99. The package will grant users unlimited access to news and feature articles, while a livestream of the BBC News channel will also be available. Ad-free documentary series and films will be included in the subscription, which will be launched on Thursday. It is the first time that users outside the UK will have to pay for the BBC's news coverage, although bosses said there were no plans to introduce a similar model outside the US. The introduction of a paid-for subscription service comes as the BBC seeks alternative sources of revenue to counter a growing number of people not paying the licence fee. The number of UK households paying the fee dropped by roughly 500,000 last year. BBC executives are targeting the US as they believe it represents a major commercial opportunity for the broadcaster, largely owing to the country's lack of impartial news coverage. American appeal The BBC has become increasingly popular across the Atlantic in recent years. In 2020, a Reuters survey found it to be more trusted by American audiences than large US domestic media brands such as CBS and The New York Times. Its website alone reaches 60m Americans, which is almost half of its 139m global visitors. However, the BBC's global expansion efforts have been hampered by the rise of streaming services such as Netflix. This has been compounded by dwindling income from the licence fee, which fell by 30pc in real terms between 2010 and 2020. Tim Davie, the BBC's director-general, has called for the licence fee, which costs £174.50 per year, to be raised to stem what he called a decade of 'grinding cuts'. He said earlier this month: 'I do want universal funding and I want proper investment and not begrudging, grinding cuts to the BBC, which you've had in the last 10 years, which have just not helped.' Americans who choose not to pay for the service will still be able to access a selection of news stories and will be able to listen to BBC radio stations and podcasts. It comes ahead of talks over the renewal of the BBC's Royal Charter, which is likely to determine how the broadcaster is funded. Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, has previously said the licence fee was 'unenforceable' and ruled out funding the BBC through regular taxes, saying she would like to 'support a BBC that is empowered to continue to deliver a vital public service, funded in a sustainable way'. Following the paywall's announcement, Rebecca Glashow, the chief executive of BBC Studios' global media and streaming, said: 'Over three years ago, we set out on a bold mission: to completely reimagine how we deliver the BBC's world-class news and factual content to consumers in the US. 'Over the next few months, as we test and learn more about audience needs and habits, additional long-form factual content will be added to the offer for paying users. 'This is a major milestone and just the beginning of an exciting new chapter.'