Where to Invest Once Interest Rates Start Going down? (2025-2030?)

This time it is not as clear as the last boom-bust cycle because China is slowing and is basically on the brink of collapse with many people being made to repay their government salaries (are you shocked?). The Australian economy is vulnerable with the mining sector being in a precarious position which has been noted by the RBA.

Australian Housing seems quite bubblish compared to previous cycles but risks remain as a lot of low cost steel is being dumped from China and if the Ukraine conflict ends there could be additional shocks as Russian wooden engineering beams could come flooding the market.

Ultimately, there are concerns that apartment prices could collapse significantly as temporary migrants disappear and construction costs come down sharply. My preference is to avoid further investment in housing unless you are doing property development, but what are your insights?

Which sectors are best suited for investing in light of the current upcoming conditions? Of course leaving it in the bank at 2% rates is not acceptable if ANZ's actions hint where the bottom will be. Let's assume we have a reasonable amount to invest such as $800k to cover a broad range of strategies and a 5 year time horizon before the next possible round of interest rate hikes.

Since 2030 is coming up, are there any other unusual investments that could pay off, i.e. sustainable investments?

I am skeptical of whether Australia can come out of this next crash unscathed, and the next one might be so severe that it will put the US recession to a shame because of our excessive dependence on China. China is building more coal power stations, but they are burning less coal, with even less coal consumption to follow as more manufacturing is leaving the country. That production is being moved to more renewable friendly countries in south/south east Asia and the whole region is building out their renewables infrastructure collectively at a faster rate than China by itself could. This is because of the larger amount of space available across the Asian continent which means more solar/wind projects overall as every country in Asia joined onto the 2030 Agenda. Many other countries like Vietnam have pledged not to build additional coal plants after 2030.

This is good for the environment. But…

Ultimately that is a problem for the Australian economy with the climate goals of 2030 edging closer and closer.

Where are you considering investing for the next 5 years?

It is no good to see a pump in mining stock prices for 2-3 years for it to all come crashing down as we approach the year 2030. Maybe that is what will happen. I don't know.

Comments

                  • @Thenarrator: It's not as simple as comparing the prices as something like VDHG (the index mutual fund) as it rebalances so you are seeing some of the capital gains through out the year which should then be reinvested. The actual unit price is sometimes only half (or less) of the story and unit prices usally stay in a pretty pretty narrow range. You need to factor in the dividend and you're also not accounting for dollar cost averaging - your method is just the simple return.

                    • @mac2403: ive already factored in dividend, see above. Theres no need to "account" for dollar cost averaging.
                      Perhaps your argument is saying "i used the peak in 2017 and the trough in 2024 to calculate the shitty return and if i had used DCA, i could've taken a lower 2017 peak and higher trough in 2024".
                      well, i hadnt. And ive taken a 7 year average return which is long enough period to smooth out any peaks or troughs.

                      • @Thenarrator: Thanks for the reply and added explanation. I'm not sure if something is missing here as I'm seeing very different total return numbers p.a for vdhg but appreciate you sharing your knowledge.

                        Edit: also just on your point about hisa vs an ETF or fund…how can you compare this to the 5-7 year average of these funds to current rates? Rates have only been that high over the last year or so. E.g. vdhg was returning 9pc annually over the last 5 years when rates in that period were close to 0. So you have have had close to 0 growth in a hisa for some of those years. If you look over the last year its even worse at 15 -20 range (for various etfs and funds) vs 5.7? Also don't forget the amount cap and other conditions on high interest accounts.

                        • @mac2403: How exactly did you calculate 9% pa over last 5 year?

                          VDHG in August 2019 is $55
                          VDHG in August 2024 today is $65.

                          Thats 18.5% return over 5 years

                          Which is 3.7% pa

                          Now add your average dividend for VDHG of 3.5%. Thats 7.2%pa over the last 5 year.

                          Also 2 of the last 5 year experienced inflation in the 7-9% mark. Is VDHG really that good?

  • Bonds

    • +8

      6 packs?
      very comfy.

      • +1

        That's missing 1 day of the week?

        • +2

          2 packs is enough for a year. One pair for each month.

  • +3

    Based on your analysis …

    • Exit Australian property
    • Short sell Australian mining
    • Short sell Australian hardwood
    • Invest in renewable suppliers (solar panels, etc)
    • Invest in non-China Asian markets
    • +1

      And what a successful strategy that would have been in the past few years when all the macro stuff was equally true…

  • +3

    Gold!
    Oops, that was last week.

  • +4

    Data consistently shows US equity indexes outperform everything else over a long period.

    Property in Australia is all leveraged bets and as supply and tax reforms happen, it will platue.

    30 year returns:

    over three decades:

    7x, if invested in US shares
    5x, if invested in Australian shares
    5x, if invested in International shares
    4x, if invested in Australian listed property; and
    1x, if invested in Australian bonds.

    • https://www.vanguard.com.au/adviser/tools/index-chart

      It has gained a lot, the statistics from 2024 Vanguard Index.

    • +1

      Missing from your list
      30 year returns:
      6.4x if invested in Australian residential real estate.

      The data doesn't account for leverage or risk.

      Real estate allows for higher levarage and lower risk. The lower risk translates into low cost of finance.

      Would you put $1 million into the ASX at 5x leverage with a $200k investment? If you could even get the finance the interest rate would be so high that you would not make any money.

      We wouldn't have a housing bubble if housing made less money than index investing.

      • A 2x on equity indexes would be safer, cheaper and return more compared to a 5x on property.

        • Explain? Because it's not possible based on the growth rates we are quoting here, the unleveraged returns are almost equal.

          I don't even need to consider the safer and cheaper claims.

          • @greatlamp: First. All leverage is bad. There is no safe leverage.

            But if you were to leverage you need to remove funding costs from returns. This chart does not include those. This cost is current 5% pa for RE and 1 to 2 pa for equities dependent on your relationship. Not to mention a 2x lev funding is less than 5x leverage property funding to match equal returns.

            Over 20 years holding and paying funding makes property the absolute worst investment (even with these crazy valuations).

            Yes short term and in low interest rate environments it becomes feasible. This however makes it more risky as the return is dependent on rates. No such problems with equities.

            And if ever shit hits the fan, a country will prioritize the stock market and industries over RE. That has not happened in recent times, but GFC has good examples of what happens then. Stocks bounce, property defaults.

            • @ozBFM: I think the interest rate you are using, 1-2%, is incorrect.

              I found this article where it explains the interest rate on a margin loan is around 2.5% above the mortgage interest rate. However if you buy into a leveraged indexed fund e.g. the Betashares GEAR fund, the interest rate incorporated into the fund costs is 1-2% below the mortgage interest rate.

              https://prosolution.com.au/borrowing-to-invest-in-shares-str…

              Either way far higher than just 1-2%.

              More interesting, with these figures (cost of ETF leverage 3% and cost of mortgage 5%) both investments end up returning almost the same, a bit over 11%.

              And if ever shit hits the fan, a country will prioritize the stock market and industries over RE. That has not happened in recent times, but GFC has good examples of what happens then. Stocks bounce, property defaults.

              The government prioritises access to cashflow for businesses during a downturn. The idea is you shouldn't let good businesses fail due to a lack of access to cash when they have good financials. Listed companies benefit from this neoliberal doctrine and traders now expect it.

              Both property and stocks will bounce, the only question is if you can afford the holding costs during a downturn.

              Over 20 years holding and paying funding makes property the absolute worst investment (even with these crazy valuations).

              This isn't supported by an objective look at a property investment. High holding costs are more than offset by rent income.

            • @ozBFM: "First. All leverage is bad." What?

              • @Bdawg: Leverage should be used as a short term instrument if ever used and only by those who understand and can take the loss.

                Literally every financial meltdown has happened because of leverage, especially speculating property.

                In simpler term:

                Number go up fast with leverage and go down fast also. But when it go down fast, it will wipe you out.

                Without leverage you can just ride out the bad times with no risks of being wiped out.

                • @ozBFM: My property investing experience says otherwise.

  • +1

    I think inflation is going to stay high for the next couple years, so buy some index funds that do well in inflation.

    I bought some QUAL a little while back as they are considered to do well through inflation. QUAL is up 21% over the last 12 months. Better than my VAS @ 12% and VGS @ 16% over the same period. Their dividends are 1-2% higher though.

  • Real estate. Not going down until WW3.

    • +1

      Nah, can you imagine Australia with decent roads, infrastructure, airports, public transport and technology once China conquers us (in approximately 2 weeks), even more people will be flocking here 😂

    • Not going down until WW3.

      OPs investment time frame is 2025-2030 though…

    • Give it a few weeks

  • +6

    I hope one day property is not thought of as investment and more of as someone's home and people invest in other areas.

    • -1

      So that it's impossible to rent? Just live at home until you are ready to buy a place? Or will rental properties be made available by non-profit organisations/charities or government?

      • +2

        yeah, everyone who gets investment properties are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts for renters. A lot of people rent because they cant afford to buy because they cant compete buying their home when they are bidding against someone who is buying his 5th investment property.

        • yeah, everyone who gets investment properties are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts for renters.

          Yeah, that's my point. If rental properties are not a profitable investment, due to tax breaks or otherwise, who will build them? Or will the CFMEU lower construction costs so that they are affordable for everyone?

          • -1

            @donga100: lol, yeah the unions at fault for house pricing, what does that have to do with land prices? Majority of people who rent would prefer to buy if they could afford it, They would be able to afford it if people didnt look at it as an investment and keep buying more and more for themselves. Once you have a couple of properties, you always have the advantage over someone looking to buy their own first home. So basically people with multiple, just keep increasing their stranglehold on the property market, meanwhile for every extra house one person owns, thats a home someone else could have bought and called their home.

          • +2

            @donga100: The idea that you need landlords to build new properties for tenants is illogical. It's time this 'idea' was put to bed.

            Making real estate less attractive for investors will reduce $ invested in the industry, it will not reduce the number of homes demanded, hence the number of homes built will be unchanged. The extra $ invested in the industry ends up as excess land value not as new development, if that wasn't true we would have excess supply at the moment

            If being a landlord was not as profitable, prices would increase more slowly as there would be less $ entering the market (or fall temporarily as landlords exit the market). These homes don't disappear, they are purchased by homeowners. Over time there would be less tenants because there would be more homeowners. The average $ per property is higher when real estate attracts the majority of the spare cash generated by the entire economy.

            Demand (the number of properties people want to buy, distinct from price) is created by the population. High prices cause more people to be in the tenant category rather than the homeowner category, the total demand is unchanged.

            The reason we have a shortage of construction is because we have high cost of finance, high cost of labour and materials, and high land prices which make projects difficult to get off the ground. Whether homes are purchased by landlords or homeowners is irrelevant. The only impact it would have is that landlords prefer lower quality homes.

            • @greatlamp: I'm building another investment property for rent, the surrounding subdivision was only available for low income purchasers with a very attractive equity share scheme with the government - very few takers, many blocks still available. So how does that fit in with your narrative?

              • @Bdawg: If they weren't bought by investors like you the price of those blocks would eventually fall.

                The owners of land aren't going to discount blocks when the expectation is that their value continually increases.

                This is ensured though tax policy which is partially justified by the idea that you need landlords to build new properties for tenants.

                Anything you disagree with?

                • @greatlamp: The blocks were sold by the government under market value targeting the poor. The government wasn't land banking or price gouging. The price of building a house on those blocks has doubled since that point. So even if the already ludicrously low land value dropped, it wouldn't make a difference. Some blocks were effectively free after first home buyer grants, yet still not taken. So if they weren't selling at effectively $0 how would they sell now if they were effectively -$ but the build cost has skyrocketed (and this is not due to investors)?

                  I don't agree with the insane speculation in real estate in our economy with negative gearing on pre-existing homes but without people doing what I'm doing there would be more homeless people in my area. Some people just don't have the current desire, risk appetite, or the capacity to purchase a house by any means.

                  • -1

                    @Bdawg: Because the prices are too high. If nothing is done to allow the prices to fall this situation cannot change. You are describing the problems with the current system and using these problems to justify why the current system should continue.

                    When this is done by our politicians it ensures that landlords are needed, because too many working prople cannot afford their own home.

                    So there is no inconsistency, this idea needs to die.

                    Some people just don't have the current desire, risk appetite, or the capacity to purchase a house by any means.

                    Buying a home off the plan avoids all these risks.
                    You have arrived at the point I am making. The construction industry does not need landlords

                    • @greatlamp: How is the price on an effectively free block of land too high? As to 'buying a house off the plan avoids all these risks' ermm.. do you even know what has been happening in the building industry lately? What a ludicrous statement.

                      • @Bdawg: I have no idea what is going on in your specific example since you haven't shared the details. A free block of land is ludicrous. Please share the details, I will buy one too.

                        If you aren't able to criticise anything I have suggested then there is no ludicrous statement on my end. Pulling out some obscure exceptional situation does not invalidate how economics works.

                        do you even know what has been happening in the building industry lately?

                        What does that have to do with the desire or risk appetite or capacity to purchase? Costs rose above fixed price contracts so builders cancelled contracts. Do YOU understand what is going on in the building industry?

    • +1

      Get rid of (or reduce) negative gearing and that would be more of a reality

      • -1

        Yup, I agree this has to go. I voted for it to go last time. Apparently we are one of the few countries that has a scheme like this still.

  • A house, farm or unit to live in, out of the over inflated cities is what I would buy.

    Physical Gold and Silver, not ETF's. With the worlds big banks buying gold hard core as well as the Chinese population and the Indian's buying silver I don't think you could lose on them as a store of value in high inflation times, as never in history as there been such huge populations vying for a safe bet's as most current Fiat currencies struggle to survive.

    Maybe crypto like XRP if it becomes the basis of BRIC's otherwise crypto is just a hyper speculative asset, which is good if you got in early but for everyone else probably not that good.

    • +1

      I'm sure your holdings of XRP is small….

      • I don't think Andym's comment is pro crypto…

        • Read it as: "everything is hyper speculative except for this one obscure crypto I know of…."

          • @serpserpserp: There are two points made

            1.

            Maybe crypto like XRP if it becomes the basis of BRIC's

            2.

            crypto is just a hyper speculative asset, which is good if you got in early but for everyone else probably not that good.

            They aren't saying to buy XRP now, only if it becomes an official currency of BRICS trade.

            If BRICS were to officially establish a trade agreement and declare a common currency it would rival the Euro and USD, but I don't see why they would tie themselves to an existing cryptocurrency when they could just create their own.
            More likely they will each be convinced to adopt the Chinese state digital currency

  • Shares, Houses, Crypto. They all never go down.

    • +5

      Crypto never does down, unless you bought one of the 99% that has literally collapsed in price.

      • +1

        it never gone down because they bought BTC at 1c so it'll always be up

  • +1

    Hello, may I suggest buying a small trade business?

    I highly recommend a boring but stable business like plumbing, home repair, painting, handyman etc.

    • How does one do that with tradesmen prices through the roof?

  • SCHG

    • NDQ is better

      • Why?

        • better growth and dividends

          Australian based domicile investing in in US vs SCHG US domicile which requires 8 Ben forms and chuck of dividends are taxed in the US instead of here

          you got many SCHG?

    • High yield vanguard (VHY) did very well last year

  • If you have money you are not afraid to lose, I would put $5000 into LRV

    • what that and have you invested?

      • I have around 290k shares at the average price of $0.16

        • LRV? Tell Me more they are please

          • @Poor Ass: might be a bit late now as at the time of posting the sp is around 23c, today its 40c. So the risk is now much higher than before.

            if you want to know more then google LRV on the ASX.

            https://smallcaps.com.au/larvotto-resources-second-drilling-…

            If you dont know what Antimony is and when the China Ban starts, then you should avoid this as you are not ready to invest.

            Not Financial advise

            • @Aerith-Waifu: Wow you got inside info?

              Massive gains after you mentioned it

              • @Poor Ass: I got the shares since its IPO at $0.20 and at the worst I was down like 85% and I actually written the whole thing off before the China news break. Never thought I get my money back before the news drops…..guess been patience does help (sometimes)

  • Good time to buy is when people start worrying that prices are going to go down.

    • wouldn't a good time to buy is when it is actually down ?

      • It’s the next best thing coz it doesn’t really go down. People miss out coz they’re waiting for the drop that doesn’t come and instead it goes up again.

        • Maybe macd or Fibonacci

          How much down you like?
          5%, 20% etc?

  • Time in the marking beats timing the market. Forget the armchair geopoliticking and crystal ball gazing.

    If you have the means and desire to invest, start now. Pick some ETFs or diversified funds that allow you to make regular contributions. If you are not comfortable putting in a lump sum in right away, ease yourself in with a monthly contribution over a period of time. Five year horizon? Hedge your bets in cash - half in a high interest savings and half in a diversified fund.

    • no point putting in cash…… all in lump sum and wait for long term gains

    • Half in cash in 'high interest savings' is foolish. Have a warchest for bargain grabbing by all means, but not half.

  • Where ever there is no supply but demand.

  • +1

    China is slowing and is basically on the brink of collapse with many people being made to repay their government salaries

    What nonsense are you spreading? Do you have a source for this? Sounds ridiculous.

    • Wait until OP hears they're also being asked to pay income taxes now…

    • +1

      China is slowing

      Fact. The GDP growth is slowing, and the 3 main drivers of Chinese economy — exports, consumption and investment — have all reduced/slowed down comparing to pre-COVID. Youth unemployment rate is rising. Real estate is not doing well. Having inflations and deflations at the same time (daily necessities vs luxury items). But it's more than just statistics. You can ask people on the street (or even ask some of the newly arrived international students here) how do they find Chinese economy.

      basically on the brink of collapse

      Not likely. I think China and Chinese people are quite resilient. Being the 2nd biggest economy in the world and in control their own currency, "on the brink of collapse" is exaggerating. They have gone through invasion, civil war, great Chinese famine, culture revolution, etc last century without collapsing so I doubt the recent economy problem will.

      many people being made to repay their government salaries

      Not from what I've heard. Public servants are probably the most protected jobs in China with almost guaranteed remuneration and pension. On the other hand I have heard some Chinese private enterprise being asked by local governments to pay back tax rebate / benefits from up to 30 years. Some of my Chinese friends who went back to China to work 3-4 years ago also got their salary slashed, or had to pay back their bonuses.

      As of OP's concern, Chinese steel index has dropped to 7 year low and I would be a bit stressed if I'm holding shares that export Australian iron ore and metallurgical coal.

  • +2

    China is slowing and is basically on the brink of collapse

    Been hearing that wishful thinking for twenty years now. I prefer the one about their demographic time bomb meaning they'll be back to rickshaws and rice farming in a few months

  • +1

    Asset price growth will continue to exceed wage growth in the coming decade, squeezing the middle class further, reducing rates of home ownership and expanding inequalities.

    We will see this occur for all quality assets: well positioned homes and land, gold, blue chip stocks, vintage cars, classical art, and bitcoin.

    The trick is to own as many quality assets as you can. The prices will get bid up as ownership moves from the hands of the middle class to the upper class.

    We are moving from a working class economy to an asset led economy. Wages are becoming increasingly less important than what assets you own.

  • -1

    Hope all your investment properties tank to 5% of their value, so the rest of Australia can actually afford a place to live.

Login or Join to leave a comment