Stocks & Shares ISA - Hargreaves Lansdown
Discussion
Pheo said:
If you are just starting out, have a look at the Vanguard Lifestrategy funds. They are quite good combined passive tracker funds. Monevator as mentioned has lots of info on passive vs active investing.
I think I pay HL 0.45% then the fund manager 0.23% for my Lifestrategy 80/20 equity/bond fund. Thats a global fund so its spread across multiple sectors and markets globally.
I looked at moving, but the amouunt of money I have invested its really not making a huge difference right now!
+1 - set and forgetI think I pay HL 0.45% then the fund manager 0.23% for my Lifestrategy 80/20 equity/bond fund. Thats a global fund so its spread across multiple sectors and markets globally.
I looked at moving, but the amouunt of money I have invested its really not making a huge difference right now!
Edited by Pheo on Tuesday 31st March 11:31
Basic summary is dont use H&L for funds. Only for Bonds, Stocks, ETF's and VCT etc where your costs are capped.
£45 for ISA and £200 or something for SIPP.
Paying 0.45% of your capital year on year is retarded and its not as if funds outperform the market either!
http://citywire.co.uk/money/how-investment-trusts-...
£45 for ISA and £200 or something for SIPP.
Paying 0.45% of your capital year on year is retarded and its not as if funds outperform the market either!
http://citywire.co.uk/money/how-investment-trusts-...
megaphone said:
curley said:
For those with a reasonable sized portfolio HL will negotiate on fees .
Mine are capped at an agreed lump sum and the percentage is less than 0.1% .
Interesting, what sort of value is a 'reasonable sized portfolio'? Mine are capped at an agreed lump sum and the percentage is less than 0.1% .
6 months ago they were VERY keen not to loose business when they moved to transparent fees . After i fixed mine i transferred some other pensions in and they were happy to stick with the original lump sum fee so the percentage fell quite a bit .
So, just for the benefit of a thicko (i.e. me) can someone explain how the HL or iWeb options work, do you pick the shares/type of holding you want to put money in to ? do they do it for you ?
Found a S&S ISA that performs rather well (at least 18% a year, after fees), just wondering if its the right thing to go for.
Found a S&S ISA that performs rather well (at least 18% a year, after fees), just wondering if its the right thing to go for.
Crafty_ said:
So, just for the benefit of a thicko (i.e. me) can someone explain how the HL or iWeb options work, do you pick the shares/type of holding you want to put money in to ? do they do it for you ?
Found a S&S ISA that performs rather well (at least 18% a year, after fees), just wondering if its the right thing to go for.
A S&S ISA is just a "bucket" into which you can place a variety of stocks/shares/funds/ETFs etc and receive certain tax benefits (no capital gains, no tax on income, IIRC).Found a S&S ISA that performs rather well (at least 18% a year, after fees), just wondering if its the right thing to go for.
So the whole premise of your "I found a S&S ISA which performs well" is a bit wrong. What you're saying is you think you've found a mix of things to put into it which you beleive will make you 18% / year.
Couple of things to note:
1) Past performance does not equal future performance.
2) What risk profile do you want? What is the risk profile of the investment?
3) What fees are you paying on the products? What fees to buy?
For HL/iWeb it is a non-advised/self-select service. HL for instance publishes general guidance about what shares /funds it thinks are good - but you don't have to pay a blind bit of notice (and I don't! Who says they know what to pick, etc). Its a fund/share supermarket, you go through and fill up your bucket with whatever you want.
Ok, I should re-phrase...
The product I'm looking at is what I perceive to be a managed fund. An assessment showed me willing to take "moderate risk" which led to a particular fund that they operate. Its made up (mostly) of shares and some other bits and pieces for a bit of stability.
The 18% figure comes from the documents of a family member who holds an S&S ISA in the same fund, its averaged 18% over the last 3 years (to Sept 14) after fees etc.. going back further it has been quite strong for some time. The latest statement Sept 14 - Feb 15 shows roughly a 20% gain.
Their own figures don't project anything like this for obvious reasons and obviously just because its done well previously is no assurance of future performance.
The fees are quite expensive though - 5% of contributions, + 1.7% a year, which mainly provides for any ongoing advice, reviews, changes etc.
In some ways its probably quite good for me as I don't have the knowledge (or time) to figure out what to invest in, obviously I'm paying for that though via the fees.
The fund is a bit old fashioned because its a "with profits", seems quite a lot of people don't like these, but as I see it for a long or mid length investment it doesn't really matter ?
I do have some more detailed info on the fund, but don't currently have it to hand, but can post more info later.
The product I'm looking at is what I perceive to be a managed fund. An assessment showed me willing to take "moderate risk" which led to a particular fund that they operate. Its made up (mostly) of shares and some other bits and pieces for a bit of stability.
The 18% figure comes from the documents of a family member who holds an S&S ISA in the same fund, its averaged 18% over the last 3 years (to Sept 14) after fees etc.. going back further it has been quite strong for some time. The latest statement Sept 14 - Feb 15 shows roughly a 20% gain.
Their own figures don't project anything like this for obvious reasons and obviously just because its done well previously is no assurance of future performance.
The fees are quite expensive though - 5% of contributions, + 1.7% a year, which mainly provides for any ongoing advice, reviews, changes etc.
In some ways its probably quite good for me as I don't have the knowledge (or time) to figure out what to invest in, obviously I'm paying for that though via the fees.
The fund is a bit old fashioned because its a "with profits", seems quite a lot of people don't like these, but as I see it for a long or mid length investment it doesn't really matter ?
I do have some more detailed info on the fund, but don't currently have it to hand, but can post more info later.
Crafty_ said:
The fees are quite expensive though - 5% of contributions, + 1.7% a year, which mainly provides for any ongoing advice, reviews, changes etc.
That's far too expensive IMHO.While their historical performance sounds good - if that is the only criteria just choose a managed fund at the top of the league tables.
http://www.trustnet.com/Managers/ManagerPerf.aspx
I had assumed that it was expensive on fees and the with profits thing is unpopular as well.
Need to do some more reading I think.
I came to the conclusion that cash ISAs are pretty much pointless, so need to look at something like S&S ISAs for investment/savings etc.
Need to do some more reading I think.
I came to the conclusion that cash ISAs are pretty much pointless, so need to look at something like S&S ISAs for investment/savings etc.
Edited by Crafty_ on Tuesday 14th April 16:29
Crafty_ said:
Ok, I should re-phrase...
The product I'm looking at is what I perceive to be a managed fund. An assessment showed me willing to take "moderate risk" which led to a particular fund that they operate. Its made up (mostly) of shares and some other bits and pieces for a bit of stability.
The 18% figure comes from the documents of a family member who holds an S&S ISA in the same fund, its averaged 18% over the last 3 years (to Sept 14) after fees etc.. going back further it has been quite strong for some time. The latest statement Sept 14 - Feb 15 shows roughly a 20% gain.
Their own figures don't project anything like this for obvious reasons and obviously just because its done well previously is no assurance of future performance.
The fees are quite expensive though - 5% of contributions, + 1.7% a year, which mainly provides for any ongoing advice, reviews, changes etc.
In some ways its probably quite good for me as I don't have the knowledge (or time) to figure out what to invest in, obviously I'm paying for that though via the fees.
The fund is a bit old fashioned because its a "with profits", seems quite a lot of people don't like these, but as I see it for a long or mid length investment it doesn't really matter ?
I do have some more detailed info on the fund, but don't currently have it to hand, but can post more info later.
Have you compared the market to this funds performance? To give you some idea, my vanguard lifestrategy 80/20 fund is up 15.86% - and the fees on that are ~0.24% + HL @ 0.45%. The product I'm looking at is what I perceive to be a managed fund. An assessment showed me willing to take "moderate risk" which led to a particular fund that they operate. Its made up (mostly) of shares and some other bits and pieces for a bit of stability.
The 18% figure comes from the documents of a family member who holds an S&S ISA in the same fund, its averaged 18% over the last 3 years (to Sept 14) after fees etc.. going back further it has been quite strong for some time. The latest statement Sept 14 - Feb 15 shows roughly a 20% gain.
Their own figures don't project anything like this for obvious reasons and obviously just because its done well previously is no assurance of future performance.
The fees are quite expensive though - 5% of contributions, + 1.7% a year, which mainly provides for any ongoing advice, reviews, changes etc.
In some ways its probably quite good for me as I don't have the knowledge (or time) to figure out what to invest in, obviously I'm paying for that though via the fees.
The fund is a bit old fashioned because its a "with profits", seems quite a lot of people don't like these, but as I see it for a long or mid length investment it doesn't really matter ?
I do have some more detailed info on the fund, but don't currently have it to hand, but can post more info later.
I would recommend you look at passive investing in a tracker for now, its a good way of dipping your toe in, but a) managing your risk b) not getting caught up in hyperbole c) not paying exzorbitant fees.
1.7% over time is going to make a massive difference to your investment. E.g. (fag packet calc) 18/3 = 6%/yr return, less 1.7% fee = 4.3%. Suddenly the 18% doesn't look that impressive!
"Hargreaves Lansdown is expensive: whichever way you cut it the country's biggest fund supermarket is pricey charging most people 0.45% a year. It will have to rely on customer inertia or convince people that its customer service and online tools and newsletter are worth the extra money.
The Sipp table tells a similar tale. "
http://m.citywire.co.uk/money/how-fund-supermarket...
The Sipp table tells a similar tale. "
http://m.citywire.co.uk/money/how-fund-supermarket...
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff