True Potential Wealth Management

[gixermark]

Hi Guys,

anyone have first hand experience of investing via True Potential ? specifically interested in pensions........

they seem to have good applications/tools, and historical performance seems good....... i had invested through an IFA after an old final salary scheme went into administration into a Pru pension...... but he is now part of the True potential 'family' and not surprisingly is pitching their platform and products.

high level the costs seem comparable to offering from Pru - but this platform is more dynamic and much more flexible and can include multiple investments to use as an overall dashboard...

just interested in any real world views/opinions........... ?

[JulianPH]

gixermark said:

Hi Guys,

anyone have first hand experience of investing via True Potential ? specifically interested in pensions........

they seem to have good applications/tools, and historical performance seems good....... i had invested through an IFA after an old final salary scheme went into administration into a Pru pension...... but he is now part of the True potential 'family' and not surprisingly is pitching their platform and products.

high level the costs seem comparable to offering from Pru - but this platform is more dynamic and much more flexible and can include multiple investments to use as an overall dashboard...

just interested in any real world views/opinions........... ?

Hi Mark

They have a high a platform charge of 0.45% (on top of fund and adviser costs).

Their tech is pretty good though, you cannot fault them for that.

So if you don't mind the higher charges and are happy with the service level then it could be a good option.

If you want to keep your charges low whilst also getting a good service level then you also have many other choices (which may be much better and lower cost).

I know that IFAs were incentivised to move their clients to TP (I'm not sure if this is still the case) and there is a big push on investment into their own funds.

Were it me I would be asking your adviser why they didn't recommend TP before he joined, if he now believes they are so much better for you (he could have done this before joining them).

So whilst there is nothing wrong with them, it does sound very much like in pitching this to you he is acting more in TP's and his own benefit, rather than yours.

it smacks of "before I joined TP the Pru was the best home for your pension, but now I have joined TP then TP is the best home for your pension, even though nothing has changed with the Pru".

As I said, nothing stopped him recommending TP before.

[gixermark]

agree 100% Julian.....

i also think he is no longer is an IFA in my opinion - but i am far from a finance expert to confirm !

I'm happy with him, the platform looks good..... fees seem 'reasonable' you get a sense of security having your pension in the PRU as its a known/old brand, albeit they have since been sold to overseas company (i think) it woudl seem with TP you don't 'need' the IFA so much given the way things are managed within the platform/funds... but i may be wrong on that

i personally hadn't heard of True Potential before (albeit joe blogs probably only knows of the large institutions) hence was looking to get a feel of generally they are a safe/solid place to put my pension pot into..... at the end of the day they will invest in similar places given my risk profile to other providers.. but i'd rather know of any negatives

[JulianPH]

gixermark said:

agree 100% Julian.....

i also think he is no longer is an IFA in my opinion - but i am far from a finance expert to confirm !

I'm happy with him, the platform looks good..... fees seem 'reasonable' you get a sense of security having your pension in the PRU as its a known/old brand, albeit they have since been sold to overseas company (i think) it woudl seem with TP you don't 'need' the IFA so much given the way things are managed within the platform/funds... but i may be wrong on that

i personally hadn't heard of True Potential before (albeit joe blogs probably only knows of the large institutions) hence was looking to get a feel of generally they are a safe/solid place to put my pension pot into..... at the end of the day they will invest in similar places given my risk profile to other providers.. but i'd rather know of any negatives

True Potential are a decent size and profitable company, well know in financial adviser circles, so you won't have any problem on that front.

They put themselves on the market for sale last year but the deal eventually fell flat to to their inflated asking price.

TP also now offer a direct to public platform for people who don't want/need a financial adviser. IMHO there are much better alternatives to this though, such as Fidelity.

When TP first launched we actually provided the True Potential SIPP and True Potential Pension for them. Now they have pension permissions they run their own in house one, but many of the original advisers still feel more comfortable using our version.

So I do know the company quite well and can vouch for them being save/solid.

I think the main question here is your financial adviser's motive in switching you (and no doubt all of their other clients) to TP having now joined TP.

Unless they can clearly demonstrate cost savings and access to greater functionality (that you actually need/want) then there is likely to be more in it for him/TP than there is for you.

I would be quite robust in quizzing them on this, if it is in your best interest they have nothing to hide and should be completely open and transparent with you. If they start to get evasive and/or hide behind jargon you might want to consider your options.

Cheers

[chip*]

Hi,

If you are uncertain if your IFA is fully independent, you can simply ask him/her if they offer "whole of the market" advice. If yes, they are IFA, else they are FA with a restricted offering (also a 3rd type who provide informal guidance). The offerings from the two restricted adviser types may be good value, but ensure you go in with your eyes wide open (and do your due diligence) as they maybe serving their own interest, rather than yours.

To help you understand the type of advisers and their remit, please see below FCA link I posted before.

Rgds


https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/types-investment-...



1) Independent advisers
An adviser or firm that provides independent advice is able to consider and recommend all types of retail investment products that could meet your needs and objectives.

Independent advisers will also consider products from all firms across the market, and have to give unbiased and unrestricted advice.

An independent adviser may also be called an 'independent financial adviser' or 'IFA'.

2) Restricted advisers
A restricted adviser or firm can only recommend certain products, product providers, or both.

The adviser or firm has to clearly explain the nature of the restriction. If you are not sure you should ask for further information, but some examples of restricted advice are where:

the adviser works with one product provider and only considers products that company offers
the adviser considers products from several – but not all – product providers
the adviser can recommend one or some types of products, but not all retail investment products
the adviser has chosen to focus on a particular market, such as pensions, and considers products from all providers within that market
Restricted advisers and firms cannot describe the advice they offer as 'independent'.

3) Other types of financial advice
If you are only given general information about one or more investment products, or have products or related terms explained to you, you may have received guidance rather than advice. This is sometimes also called an information only or non-advice service.

The main difference between guidance and advice is that you decide what product to buy without having one or more recommended to you.

Buying an investment product in this way might reduce the cost involved but it also means you may not have access to the Financial Ombudsman Service(link is external) or Financial Services Compensation Scheme(link is external) (FSCS) if things go wrong.

If you are not sure whether you are receiving guidance or advice, and therefore how you would be protected, you should ask the adviser or firm to explain.

[/quote]

Edited by chip* on Wednesday 4th December 11:57

[JulianPH]

I think the issue here is that whilst this adviser may well be able to offer from the whole market (and so is independent), the reality is that they put all clients with the same platform.

Hence the OP saying he considered the IFA was no longer independent in his opinion.

[gixermark]

cheers guys,

his opinion/advise on switching was the performance of the TP funds looked more favorable (PRU have not done that well recently) and felt the way TP was ran would yield better gains long term...

the platform/technology piece was a strong factor too - and i must say i do like that, especially being able to combine things and have one view - easy for any ongoing investments etc.

my comment on him being independent was more i am unsure how truly independent you are if you are now part of TP.... i don't see how his advise is now independent, so unsure what value he will add if i am part of TP...... maybe he can steer my investments within TP, but i am genuinely not sure on that front.

at least from a provider/platform Julian what you have said does give me confidence..... i just need to make sure everything stacks up before i move anything across to them

[Mr Pointy]

You should at least ask some very robust questions about the total cost of all charges (fund, platform & advisor) as these have a significant impact on long term performance. If the total is much over 1% then you should either be getting above average returns from the funds or substantial ongoing support & advice on your financial affairs from your advisor.

A pretty user interface, whilst useful, isn't actually going to make you any money.

[gixermark]

100% agree on all guys.. thanks.

[Derek Chevalier]

Mr Pointy said:

then you should either be getting above average returns from the funds

That would be a warning sign.

[Mr Pointy]

Derek Chevalier said:

Mr Pointy said:

then you should either be getting above average returns from the funds

That would be a warning sign.

Nonsense. If he's paying over the odds he needs to be getting something for it.

Not every fund generates the same return: some are above average & some are below (that's how averages work). He should be in a fund that's above the average rather than below or his advisor isn't justifying his higher fees. If his advisor can't manage this he needs to charge less.

[Derek Chevalier]

Mr Pointy said:

Derek Chevalier said:

Mr Pointy said:

then you should either be getting above average returns from the funds

That would be a warning sign.

Nonsense. If he's paying over the odds he needs to be getting something for it.

Not every fund generates the same return: some are above average & some are below (that's how averages work). He should be in a fund that's above the average rather than below or his advisor isn't justifying his higher fees. If his advisor can't manage this he needs to charge less.

Unfortunately it's not possible to pick winning funds or shares in advance (some hedge funds have a slight edge in determining patterns of relative prices between shares (e.g. BP and Shell) but that's about it - certainly no one in the retail space I'm aware of).

If someone is claiming to do so, you should be asking further questions.

[Jockman]

Derek Chevalier said:

Unfortunately it's not possible to pick winning funds or shares in advance (some hedge funds have a slight edge in determining patterns of relative prices between shares (e.g. BP and Shell) but that's about it - certainly no one in the retail space I'm aware of).

If someone is claiming to do so, you should be asking further questions.

If there is no difference in ability to predict returns then why the difference in fee structure?

[Derek Chevalier]

Jockman said:

Derek Chevalier said:

Unfortunately it's not possible to pick winning funds or shares in advance (some hedge funds have a slight edge in determining patterns of relative prices between shares (e.g. BP and Shell) but that's about it - certainly no one in the retail space I'm aware of).

If someone is claiming to do so, you should be asking further questions.

If there is no difference in ability to predict returns then why the difference in fee structure?

Sorry, might have missed something. Difference between which fee structures?

[JulianPH]

Derek Chevalier said:

Unfortunately it's not possible to pick winning funds or shares in advance (some hedge funds have a slight edge in determining patterns of relative prices between shares (e.g. BP and Shell) but that's about it - certainly no one in the retail space I'm aware of).

If someone is claiming to do so, you should be asking further questions.

This is simply not true. As Jockman points out your wouldn't have an average if there were not out-performers and under-performers.

Granted though, it is very difficult to do and even harder to do it consistently.

This is why the vast majority of people are better off with a well diversified portfolio of low cost index trackers.

It is also a case in point as to why you should not be paying a financial adviser very expensive fees for selecting funds for you.

[Derek Chevalier]

JulianPH said:

Derek Chevalier said:

Unfortunately it's not possible to pick winning funds or shares in advance (some hedge funds have a slight edge in determining patterns of relative prices between shares (e.g. BP and Shell) but that's about it - certainly no one in the retail space I'm aware of).

If someone is claiming to do so, you should be asking further questions.

This is simply not true. As Jockman points out your wouldn't have an average if there were not out-performers and under-performers.

Granted though, it is very difficult to do and even harder to do it consistently.

This is why the vast majority of people are better off with a well diversified portfolio of low cost index trackers.

It is also a case in point as to why you should not be paying a financial adviser very expensive fees for selecting funds for you.

The real world and academic evidence would suggest it's not possible to consistently pick winning shares or funds in advance (there may be some edge cases, but these aren't in the public domain). Therefore why would you pay anyone to attempt to do this (not just an FA)?

Of course, we could debate this for hours, but if someone wants to make up their own mind it might be worth heading over to somewhere like Bogleheads and posting the question.

[gixermark]

I've had plenty of back and forth with the FA and spoken at length this morning.

overall the total fees are 'reasonable' for sure i could go to alternative platforms and save a bit... and arguably if i move across to TP i arguably don't NEED to be paying a % for FA at that stage, but for the ongoing support/advise as i move through phases of investment to protecting the fund... to looking at the most sensible draw down strategy etc. i think for me its worth paying for.

for simplicity the TOTAL charges are in the region of ~1.4% including platform/fund/advise.

the FA understands my profile and helped set up my pot from a previous final salary scheme that had went bust, and did that just over a year ago for sensible $$ compared to some i spoke to and have read about.

overall i think right now its the right step for me, will help me focus on ISA and other investing too which i've been a bit head in the sand about up till now.. but having on one clean platform will help.

[JulianPH]

Derek Chevalier said:

JulianPH said:

Derek Chevalier said:

Unfortunately it's not possible to pick winning funds or shares in advance (some hedge funds have a slight edge in determining patterns of relative prices between shares (e.g. BP and Shell) but that's about it - certainly no one in the retail space I'm aware of).

If someone is claiming to do so, you should be asking further questions.

This is simply not true. As Jockman points out your wouldn't have an average if there were not out-performers and under-performers.

Granted though, it is very difficult to do and even harder to do it consistently.

This is why the vast majority of people are better off with a well diversified portfolio of low cost index trackers.

It is also a case in point as to why you should not be paying a financial adviser very expensive fees for selecting funds for you.

The real world and academic evidence would suggest it's not possible to consistently pick winning shares or funds in advance (there may be some edge cases, but these aren't in the public domain). Therefore why would you pay anyone to attempt to do this (not just an FA)?

Of course, we could debate this for hours, but if someone wants to make up their own mind it might be worth heading over to somewhere like Bogleheads and posting the question.

I'm a bit confused by this as I am agreeing with you that passive tracking of markets is the best option for most people.

[JulianPH]

gixermark said:

I've had plenty of back and forth with the FA and spoken at length this morning.

overall the total fees are 'reasonable' for sure i could go to alternative platforms and save a bit... and arguably if i move across to TP i arguably don't NEED to be paying a % for FA at that stage, but for the ongoing support/advise as i move through phases of investment to protecting the fund... to looking at the most sensible draw down strategy etc. i think for me its worth paying for.

for simplicity the TOTAL charges are in the region of ~1.4% including platform/fund/advise.

the FA understands my profile and helped set up my pot from a previous final salary scheme that had went bust, and did that just over a year ago for sensible $$ compared to some i spoke to and have read about.

overall i think right now its the right step for me, will help me focus on ISA and other investing too which i've been a bit head in the sand about up till now.. but having on one clean platform will help.

That's great, you seem to have come to a sensible decision as to what is best for you right now and we right to seek assurances as to a company you had never heard of before.

Cheers

[Brads67]

This is timely as I think I have found an IFA that will do my transfer (nothing certain yet mind) and they only use TP. (Restrictive advise)

Fee's seemed a little higher and it means employing an IFA in tandem with TP but we'll see how that goes if the transfer goes through.