I agree 100% Amin, that everyone has their own approach and it has to work for them, let them sleep at night, and so on.

And my own will likely change when I get to the point of not putting any more money in, for sure!

For now though a 50% drop would be the chance to add units at half price when making monthly top ups. Not that I want it to happen at all, but buying at a reduced price is a quicker way to accumulating wealth.

I'd see having a big chunk in something which will only drop slightly less than 100% equity in the short run but rise by a fair bit less than 100% equity in the long run as a drag on performance when I have 20+ years to go until I can access my SIPP.

But I absolutely understand why the thinking shifts over time from accumulation to preservation as those timescales change.

Ok we can say double if you like.....it certainly makes it sound more dramatic.

In the same way a 2% drop is double a 1% drop.

To me it just doesn't matter if my numbers on a screen temporarily show being down 10%, but to some it does.

With a 10 year time horizon with that specific chart in mind, in return for halving my short term drop, over 10 years I'd be up 60% odd rather than 160% odd.

As others have said it's not a fair comparison anyway.

Whilst not like for like, perhaps this one is fairer;

Crikey, I wish I'd never commented on this thread haha! It was only to say Monks isn't a good comparison :-(

But yes, you are factually correct that it was double.

In the chart shown, the temporary drop below money originally invested, which doesnt matter unless the person planned to access that money during that timescale, was double in the 100% equity option (which went on to return circa 160% over 10 years) compared to CGT (which went on to return circa 60% over the same 10 years).

Good to see you offering some thoughts here smg8. Always value your insight - even if it's 'not your bag' as you say!

I feel I should put a footnote on my contributions that says something like "please read this post in its entirety and don't pick out individual words - I'm only human, fallible and prone to wording errors".

CGT appears to be significantly more diversified between various asset classes than Fundsmith which is 100% equities.

That is not to say CGT will not have some volatility; it holds a significant % of risk-on assets (and can drift up to 80%, hence one should stay alert to that) and also a significant % of inflation linked bonds/TIPS, which are volatile themselves, as evidenced by their drop last March (but, as I understand it, if held until maturity would result in a gain). CGT anticipate rising inflation with the inflation rate well above base interest rate, and believe that they can trade their inflation linked bonds/TIPS for profit.

CGT recently announced that investors should anticipate greater volatility in their search to eek out gains (that is gains in excess of their 'benchmark', the UK RPI, presumably), which they anticipate will be much more difficult to achieve over the medium/long term.