Hagreaves Lansdown - Poor Independent Advice and Asset Management

Kavor

It's not exactly a fair comparison though is it, as you're happy with BestInvest whom you appear to have invested with in 2009, after the crash, but you're not happy with HL whom you invested with in 2006, before the crash.

You've mentioned several times the HL funds failure to beat the benchmark by 2% pa, so lets loook at those figures. For the Active Managed sector, the cumulative performance for 4 years is 7.27%, and for 5 years 22.68%. The HL Multi Manager Special Situations fund has a cumulative performance for 4 years of 10.16% and for 5 years 28.06%. The HL Multi Manager Balanced fund has a cumulative performance for 4 years of 6.28% and for 5 years 22.76%. Not a great deal of difference between those two funds and the benchmark. Likewise, if you look at the annual performance of the two funds, some years they outperform that benchmark, and some years they don't, which isn't inline with one of your earlier comments that the funds have failed to match the benchmark for each of the last 4 years.

Obviously the performance figures above don't take into account the initial charge and annual charge that HL would be charging on top for their 'advice'.

PatrickGrant

jem16 wrote: »

Perhaps a little unfair to compare then.

Your HL funds also made over 30% in the last year but they were having to recover from a major crash the year before.

Not at all. It shows an amateur can get a better result than Hargreaves Lansdwon "pros" !!! I don't think they are as good they like to think they are....

PatrickGrant

sunil1234 wrote: »

Ok patrick thanks, so bestinvest spread you across all those funds? I thought they only have 6-8 in their model portfolios ?

Certainly hindsight is a wonderful thing,

Yep. That is what you get when you take their advice on structuring the portfolio.

I reckon the commission was worth every penny (and I cannot say that about Hargreaves Lansdown they are complete failures.)

The good thing is they get your to balance you portfolio better than you would on your own bearing in mind your risk pofile. Mine is "Adventurous". If you decide to take your profits when the market slides down or MACD suggests it, do it ...yer never a fool to take yer profits...

jem16

PatrickGrant wrote: »

Not at all. It shows an amateur can get a better result than Hargreaves Lansdwon "pros" !!! I don't think they are as good they like to think they are....

The fund manager has to follow the remit of the fund - it can't just decide to alter that and sell everything.

Why didn't you decide to take the profits from the HL funds?

PatrickGrant

jem16 wrote: »

The fund manager has to follow the remit of the fund - it can't just decide to alter that and sell everything.

Why didn't you decide to take the profits from the HL funds?

What remit? How can you tell if they are following the remit of the fund or folowing their own remit?

It seems to me generally Managed Funds do not perform partcularly well either in Unit Trusts or Pensions. But in the case of HL, it does appear to have invested in funds that HL benefitted from by way of fund expenses and commissions - and that eats into their customer's investments, which is why I think they performed poorly againstly equals the their benchmark. Coincidenattly, the shortfall against benchmark roughly equals the extra expenses incurred.

dach

why does clicking on this thread introduce a cookie from www.trustnet.com onto my computer???

no other thread does - strange

jem16

PatrickGrant wrote: »

What remit?

Each fund within the multimanager fund has a specific remit. Click through on any fund and look for the factsheet.

http://www.h-l.co.uk/funds/multi-manager-funds/hl-mm-special-situations

None of them will be take it all out into cash.

How can you tell if they are following the remit of the fund or folowing their own remit?

Read their report factsheet on their website?

I still feel you are trying to compare things that cannot be fairly compared - i.e. MM funds on advice vs DIY portfolio of funds. Plus a very different risk profile on both, one adventurous and one cautious.


Big questions remain;

1. Why did you accept a recommendation to use HL MM Funds as part of their DIM service?

2. Why didn't you cash in your investment in 2007/8 and buy back later as you did with BestInvest?

LongTermLurker

dach wrote: »

why does clicking on this thread introduce a cookie from www.trustnet.com onto my computer???

no other thread does - strange

Cepheus' post http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=37410544&postcount=6

And you win the "most hard to compromise user award" :T

PatrickGrant

dach wrote: »

why does clicking on this thread introduce a cookie from www.trustnet.com onto my computer???

no other thread does - strange

No idea, nothing to do with me. It must this web site.

PatrickGrant

There are few things you have not understood - or I have not conveyed.
======================

jem16 wrote: »

Each fund within the multimanager fund has a specific remit. Click through on any fund and look for the factsheet.

http://www.h-l.co.uk/funds/multi-manager-funds/hl-mm-special-situations

None of them will be take it all out into cash.


Read their report factsheet on their website?

I still feel you are trying to compare things that cannot be fairly compared - i.e. MM funds on advice vs DIY portfolio of funds. Plus a very different risk profile on both, one adventurous and one cautious.


Big questions remain;

1. Why did you accept a recommendation to use HL MM Funds as part of their DIM service?

2. Why didn't you cash in your investment in 2007/8 and buy back later as you did with BestInvest?

1. The advise was to invest in the Discretionary Investment Management. Why ignore paid for advice?

2. At that point, the DIM fund value was 26% less than I paid in. If I had changed in a period of volatility I could have lost even more.

3. I don't think there is afact sheet for the DIM fund, but there are for Funds it invests in....