Financial Advisors / Wealth Managers

etg2

Is it possible for replies to dissapear; I'm sure someone (a retired IFA?) posted a reply to me last night giving advice and suggesting I contact him but there is no sign of it now! I'd love to hear from you.

DeepSporran

Yes, replies can disappear. Either the poster of the reply subsequently deletes the entry, or a moderator or other administrator might delete it if it was regarded as spam or otherwise unacceptable.

Rollinghome

etg2 wrote: »

Many thanks for your reply

I'm not considering it a failure, especially as I've 'beaten' the ASX (over 5 yrs) - beginners luck and that is the problem as I know I have too many funds. Monitoring these fairly closely and making occassional changes is what takes the time.

Sounds as if you were being unduly harsh on yourself. If you've done better after costs than whichever benchmark you use then you haven't done badly and probably a lot better than many whose money disappears paying for advice. Don't forget that all those rubbish New Star funds, now defunct, were largely sold by professional advisers as were the infamous Arch Cru funds.

If you do come across someone who appears to have a magic touch, he could turn out to be the next Bernie Madoff. Someone who achieves an average return, before they deduct their fees, is more likely.

If time is an issue you could certainly aim for fewer than 40 funds. Only one fund in a sector will give the winning performance over any period. Having several reduces the chance of getting the worst outcome but also ensures not getting the best. A compromise of not putting all your eggs in one basket but seeking out the best two or so could be the best course.

Another way would be to consider more funds with wider mandates and have the fund manager earn his money by making more of the allocation decisions.

dunstonh

Don't forget that all those rubbish New Star funds, now defunct, were largely sold by professional advisers as were the infamous Arch Cru funds.

Yet on this site, it was the IFAs that were saying not to use Arch Cru yet a number of DIY posters here did. Anyone can pick a fund that goes wrong.

pressuredrop_2

etg2 wrote: »

Hence, I guess, what I'm looking for is for help in finding a few appropriate long term funds which will give a good spread of investments ((through appropriate types and regions) without me having to decide (second guess!) whether I should be in latin America or gold for example) which will give a good steady return without too much fall in value in the bad times (ie a perfect absolute return fund perhaps!).

I'm surprised you can't find any defensive multi-asset funds considering you manage a portfolio of 40 funds.

Rollinghome

dunstonh wrote: »

Yet on this site, it was the IFAs that were saying not to use Arch Cru yet a number of DIY posters here did. Anyone can pick a fund that goes wrong.

Indeed, I remember the fans for it here even though it screamed out to be wary. I can't remember any IFA here making a recommendation either for or against it and it wouldn't have been right if they had.

Why any IFA would sell a dodgy new fund like that is beyond me other than that it was paying double the normal commisssion (and then they had the brass neck to whinge everywhere because they didn't get it).

We had one poster here whose elderly mother had £400,000 put into Arch Cru by her IFA: described as a Cautious managed fund. See: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2449851

Moral is to be very cautious on where you obtain advice.

etg2

pressuredrop wrote: »

I'm surprised you can't find any defensive multi-asset funds considering you manage a portfolio of 40 funds.

No doubt I could if I spent a lot of time to do it to my satisfaction. That is the whole point, I am fed up with managing finance and wish, at least, to get help in finding the appropriate funds, at best to hand the whole lot over to someone who is reliable and competant. Perhaps the conclusion is that such an organisation doesnt exist?!

dunstonh

Why any IFA would sell a dodgy new fund like that is beyond me other than that it was paying double the normal commisssion (and then they had the brass neck to whinge everywhere because they didn't get it).

I agree and I said it at the time (before it closed) that there is not enough info for an IFA to recommend it as there was too much in the way of undisclosed assets. From what I have seen, Arch Cru courted firms that had chartered financial planners and dealt with high net worth clients. The marketing of the fund was inaccurate and it appears that the small number of IFAs that used them (as the vast majority didnt) were taken in by the marketing from Cru that positioned it as low risk (indeed, they called it near cash) and the ABI that stuck it in cautious managed sector. Still doesn't let the adviser off the hook as they should have completed due intelligence. That said, none of the ones I have come across to sort out took double commission and most as I understand it were bought via platforms using the platform rate and not the provider rate.

We had one poster here whose elderly mother had £400,000 put into Arch Cru by her IFA: described as a Cautious managed fund. See: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=2449851

Moral is to be very cautious on where you obtain advice.

At least she will have consumer protection because she sought advice. Unlike those that didnt and still bought it.

Hermanmunster_2

When looking for a financial advisor or “wealth manager “make sure he is genuinely good at wealth management insofar as he is fairly wealthy himself. A fair few of them seem to be scraping by hand to mouth paying a mortgage and car lease with no spare money to invest themselves and no real world experience of how someone that has acquired a bit of worth (usually through a lifetime of hard work) feels towards his wealth and investments hopes and fears etc. The Banks tend to turn out “wealth managers “on a conveyor belt so be careful.

Rollinghome

etg2 wrote: »

Perhaps the conclusion is that such an organisation doesnt exist?!

I'm sure they do exist but there are problems depending on what you expect from them and hope to achieve.

Should be possible to find someone to competently handle your affairs for you at a price. But if you're hoping to find someone to achieve a better return than you can yourself, unless you're particularly inept, that becomes more difficult if only due to the fees themselves. You also substitute one problem for others. Are you going to just sit back and let them put your money wherever they think, including possibly another Arch Cru or New Star? How will you know how competent they are when there aren't performance tables for advisers as there are for your unit trusts and how will they behave when their interests conflict with yours?

If you are going to monitor them are you going to end up buying a dog and barking yourself?

I've hadn recommendations from friends, including successful professionals, and invariably when learning the details they haven't understood just how average to poor their return has been and how much they've paid. There seems to be a rule: the less they understand, the more satisfied they are.

I've met with various IFAs, stockbrokers, and wealth managers over the years and have yet to meet one whose services I'd recommend paying for. They've ranged from competent to incompent to outright dishonest. None seemed likely to be cost-effective. I've not totally given up and live in hope. Suppose there'll eventually come a day when I'm too gagga to have any choice.