TD/II or iWeb
capital0ne
Posts: 872 Forumite
I'm sure this has been done to death, but just going on the latest table in the Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/isas/tables-the-cheapest-and-most-expensive-places-to-buy-an-isa/
II/TD and iWeb are on a par for portfolios above £50k, DD/II is £100/yr and iWeb is £80/yr, so what are all the original TD investors going to do - stick or switch?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/isas/tables-the-cheapest-and-most-expensive-places-to-buy-an-isa/
II/TD and iWeb are on a par for portfolios above £50k, DD/II is £100/yr and iWeb is £80/yr, so what are all the original TD investors going to do - stick or switch?
0
Comments
-
It would depend on how frequently they trade. The chart (which I find totally illegible) assumes that investors make four fund switches and two share trades per year.
The fewer trades made, the cheaper Iweb becomes. I expect to be paying them £10 this year, but then I don't switch funds that often.Eco Miser
Saving money for well over half a century0 -
Also, consider whether you want a platform where the fees disincentivise you from frequent trading, or one where they disincentivise you from having a more highly valued portfolio.0
-
looking at iweb website it looks like some kid with basic coding experience did. it looks like a joke.
im sticking with II. their platform is great.0 -
Well, I quite like iWeb and their website - and I don't invest in funds, I only trade a few times a year when rebalancing so it's a close cut thing as to what I do.0
-
Well, if you prefer to pay for a flashy website, that's your choice.looking at iweb website it looks like some kid with basic coding experience did. it looks like a joke.
im sticking with II. their platform is great.
Yes the public pages do look like they were written a long time ago, they probably were (certainly before I signed up).
The actual account pages have been recently upgraded and they do everything I need, as did their predecessors.Eco Miser
Saving money for well over half a century0 -
Have switch one GIA and ISA to iWeb.capital0ne wrote: ».....so what are all the original TD investors going to do - stick or switch?
TD were great. Have very little confidence in II to manage their processes appropriately, hense the switch.
If II can go a few years without creating issues, would reconsider. II just need to throw away their own processes and IT and utilise TDs (which is what they appear to be doing re the website).
For me II need to demonstrate they can manage things correctly for a period of time.Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
I don't see how ii and iWeb can be similar on cost when ii is charging £22.50 per quarter for an ISA and iWeb charges nothing? Can someone explain that?0
-
Read the explanation they have used to model it (about half way down linked to website):EdGasketTheSecond wrote: »I don't see how ii and iWeb can be similar on cost when ii is charging £22.50 per quarter for an ISA and iWeb charges nothing? Can someone explain that?
How the figures were calculated
Our figures, calculated independently by The Lang Cat, a consultancy, assume that investors have 80pc of their money in funds, and 20pc in shares.
They also assume that investors make four fund switches and two share trades per year.
The costs are for a DIY investor managing their own portfolio.
This would then take in to account II 'free' dealing trades as part of the charge structure.Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
See cloud_dog's comments.EdGasketTheSecond wrote: »I don't see how ii and iWeb can be similar on cost when ii is charging £22.50 per quarter for an ISA and iWeb charges nothing? Can someone explain that?
But maybe the smarter question is how iWeb can sustain its business model when it charges nothing if you don't trade, compared to others that charge £90 a year flat fee or some percentage of assets etc.
Obviously Halifax are able to financially back it as it uses some of their platform with a different front-end; but they don't get any real cross-selling opportunities given they don't promote it from their own website (presumably because it could lose them revenues if they did), or brand it the same, and there's no incentive to use any other Halifax products if you are already using IWeb so it doesn't drive new customers to the bank's door. With the consolidation in financial services you might expect them to eventually shut it down or properly co-brand it, rather than have a standalone no-frills service to complement their branded service which is already pretty no-frills.0 -
bowlhead99 wrote: »See cloud_dog's comments.
But maybe the smarter question is how iWeb can sustain its business model when it charges nothing if you don't trade, compared to others that charge £90 a year flat fee or some percentage of assets etc.
Given Halifax have been running iWeb like this since they took it over in 2003 I don't see any reason why things should change soon. As an iWeb customer they have sent me several surveys recently, which led me to think they may be planning a new strategy. However the questions have mostly centred on where I do my research before trading, so perhaps they are just thinking of tweaking that part of their site.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards