Twenty-one per cent.
That is how much my stocks and shares Isa was up on the day Prime Minister Theresa May delivered her 'Full Brexit' speech.
It was a warm feeling, seeing that figure nestled at the bottom of my 'portfolio view' page on the Hargreaves Lansdown Vantage site.
Previously, the portfolio had been dawdling around 14 per cent to 15 per cent. And it has been in double-digit territory nearly every month for the past two years.
Given recent news that the majority of active fund managers have barely been able, on average, to outperform markets gross of fees - only 21 per cent outperformed the markets in 2016 - I am not unhappy with my work. And I don't charge myself a fee.
True, I don't have much money in my S&S Isa, and true, I've also bought into the City Investment Trust and the Woodford Patient Capital Investment Trust, both of whom have been consistently red since purchase (I was looking for both dividends and long-term growth potential in smaller companies).
I'm watching these closely and patiently. One of these will be ditched (not telling you which one) but I can wait until there has been enough of a recovery so that I make some money off them net of the trading fees.
People who mock ethical funds really ought to pay more attention to the composition metrics of these funds, and consider adding these into client portfolios.It's also true that the Vantage platform is not the cheapest in terms of trading fees, but even taking into consideration the costs, a 21 per cent return, with costs taken out, would still make an active fund manager rub his bony little pinky-ring-bedecked hands together with Scroogian desire.
How was this possible? Quite frankly, I don't know. I don't watch the markets or play with the markets or dive in and out of things. I just listen to people, read stuff and make my own decisions about investments.
When I started in financial journalism, in the late 1990s, I was on Pensions World. One of my first articles was about the Core/Satellite approach to portfolio composition.
The mathematics of correlation - or the lack of correlation - between asset classes has been something else that fascinated me. The way any US dollar-denominated investments tended to work in inverse patterns to the gold price.
So it made sense to me to structure a portfolio with one big whack of cash in a central, low-risk, steadfast, don't-shoot-the-lights-out globally diversified dividend fund. That has been my core. Divvies rolled up, of course. I don't need income when I have a job.
Around the edges - my satellites - I put a gold and gold-related securities fund, and a cheapo US index fund. What I didn't expect was that instead of acting as a hedge for each other, they've both been really strong performers for the past 18 months. So my hedge bet didn't come off but I ain't complaining.
When everyone was sniping at Saga before it listed, I considered that it would come into its own eventually because a) Pension Freedoms were on their way and b) Demographics suggests it will get more users over the years. So I bought into it on listing, held on for several months through some red times, and have been relatively happy since.
Funnily enough, a couple of rivals thought I was nuts and decided to lob tweets my way in an attempt to humiliate me publicly over Saga. I ignored this; I've been around far longer than any of them to care about being mocked by the inexperienced.
Then came an ethical fund - a global growth ethical unit trust. This has been consistently outperforming since purchase. It has never seen a down month. People who mock ethical funds really ought to pay more attention to the composition metrics of these funds, and consider adding these into client portfolios.
Recently I've decided Shin Nippon could be a good performer. A lot of its investee companies have improved their corporate governance and their shareholder focus, and with a more positive outlook in terms of cash, I think it will be a good long-term earner in the fund, not right now, but in a few years' time.
And that's about it. I put it together, and have left it. No obsessive tweaking, no weekly checking, just a note to keep an eye on it and put the monthly standing order to work where I think it should go.
I'm not a fund manager. I will make mistakes (possibly by chasing UK dividends in an investment trust when it was too late to do this). I will probably see the US holdings shake, rattle and maybe roll this year. I will have to wait a long time to see the Japanese investment trust come into its own. I could yet be bitten by Saga (unless the oldies pay out).
But I know what I want, and what I believe. I want growth, with a little divvy reinvestment to help my holdings grow. I didn't aim for DD (goodness me, don't tell Trump!) but there you go.
And I believe in long-term, steady, sensible, globally diversified portfolios. I believe in creating hedges, and investing in different asset classes, styles and market capitalisations. I could be very, very wrong in my beliefs. But given the current situation, I would state the days of double-digit growth are not over - yet.
simoney.kyriakou@ft.com
