Vestra Wealth Management?

lolly5648

We haven't put our cash ISAs with Vestra - we manage them ourselves. Vestra manage our equity ISAs and our share portfolio

Our position is different. We have one adviser at Vestra whom we have been with for many years. He was originally part of the Laing & Cruikshank team until that operation was sold to UBS. Vestra was formed when virtually the whole of the UBS wealth management team (almost 500 people) left en masse. The top guys set up Vestra and the rest followed which means that as a team they do have a track record.

I feel I have answered the OP's original question abour Vestra. I do not have the time nor do I want to manage our portfolio. I am not interested in a discussion on what different people charge.

I agree with Dunstonh in that I am getting exactly what I neeed from a DIM. They send me a letter whenever they buy or sell and tell me why they have done so. We have a meeting once a year and I can ring or email any queries.

Domain.Rider

Rollinghome wrote: »

What would seriously concern me about this arrangment is that you appear to be paying at least three, and possibly four, levels of charges.

In particular, I'd wonder what the IFA is doing to justify 0.5%? Normally an IFA working on commision would pocket a 0.5% trail commission on the UTs he sells. For this he supposedly gives some sort of ongoing service that would include reviews and portfolio balancing. A better option for many would be an IFA who charges on an hourly basis and refunds the trail commission to the client. In this case, if the IFA's work is being done by Vestra I'm not sure what he's getting paid for. It seems to be solely an ongoing introduction fee.

I can understand your concern, but for me, the consideration is whether they will give me growth (and later, income) that is significantly better than I am getting or would get myself, bearing in mind any portfolio management by me is and would be sporadic and superficial. Charges on funds clearly should be taken into account when they decide to invest in them - I presume the projected net return is the key figure. I'm paying them 1.5% so I don't have to spend my time and effort with that kind of hassle. The IFA has done a considerable amount of work for me already, and there's more to come - his fee is coming of the commission from Vestra.

The points you raise are valid, however, and I will ask them how the fee arrangements work - they claim to be transparent on their charges, so I'm sure they'll be happy to explain in full.

The bottom line, for me, is better growth without the hassle. If they can make a comfortable profit at the same time, good luck to them - that's why they're in the business.

Domain.Rider

lolly5648 wrote: »

From 31st March to 30th September 2009 we have seen a growth of 35% in our Vestra Funds. Because the money was transferred from UBS in dribs and drabs this is the most appropriate period over which to take a view.

That sounds pretty good whichever way one looks at it.

Thanks.

nattynick

It never ceases to amaze me how many people buy financial services without a clue what it is they're buying or how to evaluate the service they're getting and no idea of the relationship between risk and reward. Then they bleat when it all goes wrong.

Rollinghome

Domain.Rider wrote: »

That sounds pretty good whichever way one looks at it.

As you probably know the markets were at a 10 year low in March. Since then the FTSE All Share is up 52% which you could have got by just investing in a tracker fund or ETF charging 0.2% or so and Asia/Emerging Markets UT funds are typically up 70-95% over the same period.

So while +35% looks pretty awful in that context it's totally meaningless without knowing what was invested in or how much was uninvested and held in cash.

lolly5648

Rollinghome wrote: »

As you probably know the markets were at a 10 year low in March. Since then the FTSE All Share is up 52% which you could have got by just investing in a tracker fund or ETF charging 0.2% or so and Asia/Emerging Markets UT funds are typically up 70-95% over the same period.

So while +35% looks pretty awful in that context it's totally meaningless without knowing what was invested in or how much was uninvested and held in cash.

According to the report I received the FTSE All Share was also 35% over the same period. As I stated earlier our risk factor is 'low', no doubt if we were medium or high risk we might have got higher returns.

My point is that I am satisfied with Vestra handling our portfolio. When we did it ourselves we were too slow to respond to what was happening in the markets and reluctant to sell. This works for me.

dunstonh

Most people dont have the risk profile to be 100% equity based. So, comparing the performance of the FTSE in a growth period to a low risk portfolio is misleading as its not comparing like for like.

This company are offering personalised portfolios that are built on your objectives and risk profiles and ongoing management of that. They are not there to cater for lazy investors wanting 100% FTSE allshare on the cheap. The two consumer types are totally different. Also, 35% does not look awful for a cautious portfolio. Lower risk portfolios are not going to go up as much in growth periods.

Domain.Rider

nattynick wrote: »

It never ceases to amaze me how many people buy financial services without a clue what it is they're buying or how to evaluate the service they're getting and no idea of the relationship between risk and reward. Then they bleat when it all goes wrong.

It doesn't really amaze me - as the great physicist Richard Feynman said "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool".

That's why I come to a site like this to get a selection of opinions and experience to add to what I can glean elsewhere.

Do you have some useful advice?

Domain.Rider

Rollinghome wrote: »

As you probably know the markets were at a 10 year low in March. Since then the FTSE All Share is up 52% which you could have got by just investing in a tracker fund or ETF charging 0.2% or so and Asia/Emerging Markets UT funds are typically up 70-95% over the same period.

So while +35% looks pretty awful in that context it's totally meaningless without knowing what was invested in or how much was uninvested and held in cash.

Perhaps it's not meaningless to Lolly if it is more than the investment(s) would have made on a cautious approach without Vestra. I got the impression that Lolly sees it that way.

Domain.Rider

Just thought I'd drop back in to update the thread with my experience of Vestra so far.

Funds started transferring early in January, with reinvestments continuing through January. There are still some investments awaiting transfer, but the bulk has gone over and is now reinvested. Already the portfolio growth has nominally more than covered all the IFA fees (there was a fixed fee I forgot to mention) and initial charges, which is comforting (yes, I know it's just a current valuation, not cash in the bank).

The online service allows me to see statements, valuations, all transactions, and details of all funds involved (links to graphs, prospecti, relevant web sites, etc).

The support has been very rapid, responsive and detailed - better than I was expecting. So far, very encouraging.