We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Why Ongoing Charges / TER are different for Fidelity / HL?
HardCoreProgrammer
Posts: 155 Forumite
I am checking Ongoing Charges / TER for First State Asia Pacific Leaders (class B - accumulation) at the monent.
According to HL, it is 0.92% with a 0.05% discount (http://www.hl.co.uk/funds/fund-discounts,-prices--and--factsheets/search-results/f/first-state-asia-pacific-leaders-class-b-accumulation).
According to Fidelity, it is 0.89% (https://www.fidelity.co.uk/investor/research-funds/fund-supermarket/factsheet/summary.page?idtype=ISIN&fundid=GB0033874768&UseProxy=Yes&fundname=First%20State%20Asia%20Pacific%20Leaders%20B%20%C2%A3%20Acc&UserChannel=Direct).
Is there any reason why Ongoing Charges / TER vary on different platforms? Or could this be an error in one of the sites?
Please note that this is separate from platform charges (0.45% for HL, 0.35% for Fidelity).
According to HL, it is 0.92% with a 0.05% discount (http://www.hl.co.uk/funds/fund-discounts,-prices--and--factsheets/search-results/f/first-state-asia-pacific-leaders-class-b-accumulation).
According to Fidelity, it is 0.89% (https://www.fidelity.co.uk/investor/research-funds/fund-supermarket/factsheet/summary.page?idtype=ISIN&fundid=GB0033874768&UseProxy=Yes&fundname=First%20State%20Asia%20Pacific%20Leaders%20B%20%C2%A3%20Acc&UserChannel=Direct).
Is there any reason why Ongoing Charges / TER vary on different platforms? Or could this be an error in one of the sites?
Please note that this is separate from platform charges (0.45% for HL, 0.35% for Fidelity).
0
Comments
-
Published charge rates vary a bit over time depending on the fund's actual costs in the previous 12 months so it may depend on how up to date the various databases are. Trustnet says 0.85% annual charges, 0.9% OCF.0
-
The most likely explanation is that one is out of sync with a factsheet update from First State. Try checking the manager's website."Things are never so bad they can't be made worse" - Humphrey Bogart0
-
Thank you for your quick replies.
It seems to be 0.90% according to this link http://www.firststateinvestments.com/uploadedFiles/Content/UploadedLiterature/Auto/EMEA/pdffundfactsheets/GB0033874768_First%20State%20Asia%20Pacific%20Leaders%20Fund%20B%20GBP_en_gb.pdf.
So the charges should be 0.90% constant, whether the fund price goes up or down? Or have I misunderstood?0 -
An element of the charges are a fixed contractual percentage. The biggest component, for example, is the management fee at 0.85% of assets. Whether the fund grows or contracts its overall investment and cash portfolio (due to performance) or whether it gets more people to put money into it or more people take money out of it, they will always be charging the management fee at 0.85% ; an annual fee but worked out daily or weekly or monthly and perhaps more pounds per day at the end of the year than the beginning if the fund is growing.
The other costs, 0.04-0.06% (slightly higher on the income class than the accumulation class) will not necessarily be a fixed contractual percentage of asset values. They might pay their custodian or depositary a fixed number of basis points of the assets for looking after them, so if the fund size doubles the fee doubles. But if their auditor wants to charge £50k for reviewing the accuracy of a set of annual financial statements they will not suddenly change their mind and charge £50,100 if the fund size has grown by a fifth of a percent over the course of their review.
So, the actual total fees and charges which make up the running costs of the fund will be unknown and are estimated. If the audit fee is £50,000 - that is a lower percentage if the fund grows to £10 billion than if it stays at its current size of £8.5 billion or drops to £7 billion.
This is why the OCF Ongoing Charges Forecast can change from period to period. OCF is similar to TER total expense ratio. It is designed to be a measure of expenses as a ratio against fund size. If the fund size changes, not all the expenses will.
Examples of things in OCF besides just the fixed 0.85% p.a. management fee:
Audit fees;
Depositary fees & Custodian fees (including associated transaction charges)
Regulator fees;
Registrar fees;
Payments to legal and professional advisers;
Fees incurred in distributing income to Shareholders;
Fees in respect of publishing the price of the fund;
Costs of convening and holding Shareholder meetings;
The costs of printing and distributing reports, accounts and prospectus
Taxation costs of the fund;
Interest on and charges incurred in borrowings;
VAT is payable on these charges where appropriate
http://www.firststateinvestments.com/uploadedFiles/Content/UploadedLiterature/Manual/Emea/PdfProspectuses/Enhanced%20disclosure_First%20State%20Investments%20ICVC.pdf0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards