Standard Life Wraps - any comments?

robbieroy

I would appreciate any comments on Standard Life as a product provider and any informed opinions on the advantages, disadvantages and costs associated with Standard Life Wraps, in particular:-

1. Standard Life Mutual Investment Portfolio with the following funds:
Jupiter European
Jupiter Growth & Income
Newton Real Return Fund
Ecclesiastical Amity International Fund
Jupiter Financial Opportunities

2. Standard Life ISA
With the same funds as above

3. Standard Life International Portfolio Bond

Thanks in anticipation
RR

dunstonh

Its a platform like other platforms. Most platforms are very similar at the basic level with just how they charge and what features they offer being different.

IFAs have to do due diligence on platforms to eliminate/select them. So, if you are using an IFA, ask the IFA for their research info as to why they have recommended Standard Life over the others. i.e. what features did you want that make using the Standard Life platform the best option? If you are using a tied sales rep of Standard Life then you should ask them (and then stop using them unless you like paying more in charges for a lesser service).

robbieroy

dunstonh wrote: »

Its a platform like other platforms. Most platforms are very similar at the basic level with just how they charge and what features they offer being different.

IFAs have to do due diligence on platforms to eliminate/select them. So, if you are using an IFA, ask the IFA for their research info as to why they have recommended Standard Life over the others. i.e. what features did you want that make using the Standard Life platform the best option? If you are using a tied sales rep of Standard Life then you should ask them (and then stop using them unless you like paying more in charges for a lesser service).

Thanks dunstonh - I appreciate the advice and will ask my IFA about the features which make this the suggested platform. I am new to all this good advice is always appreciated.
RR

dunstonh

If the adviser hasnt got the research to show you or hasnt done a comparison of providers then walk away. Some firms pick a platform and use it for everyone. That is considered bad. The FSA did a thematic review on platforms earlier in the year and highlighted good and bad points. It does expect the adviser to have done a comparison and have that research available. It also expects the research to be personal to you and not for the firm.

robbieroy

dunstonh wrote: »

If the adviser hasnt got the research to show you or hasnt done a comparison of providers then walk away. Some firms pick a platform and use it for everyone. That is considered bad. The FSA did a thematic review on platforms earlier in the year and highlighted good and bad points. It does expect the adviser to have done a comparison and have that research available. It also expects the research to be personal to you and not for the firm.

Thanks again for the further advice.
I will pose the question and see what the reply is.
The purpose of the above platform and suggested funds is to generate income to supplement my actuarially reduced pension. I am looking to invest circa £90,000, approximately 2/3 of which will be in the international portfolio bond.
RR

mr_fishbulb

The Standard Life online portal for my pension is rubbish. You can't see individual holdings for each fund, just one total amount I have in my pot.

I use morningstar and trustnet to track my individual funds.

dunstonh

The use of an international portfolio bond for just £90k would be interesting. Has a cost/tax analysis been done comparing the bond to unit trusts/OEICs? (another thing you would expect). Bonds have pros and cons. They can be better suited to larger investors (higher rate taxpayers or those that use their annual CGT allowance). However, for others they can be less effective. You would "expect" a comparison showing bond vs OEIC on like for like basis to see which comes out best. Sometimes there can be a crossover point where one starts better but the other gets better later. Ideally this should also take into account things like bed&ISA. e.g. you have £90k for the bond, if there are two of you then £20,400 a year can be placed in the ISA. So, within 5 years, the whole lot be moved into the ISA (bed & ISA is the move from OEIC to ISA). Servicing advisers will obviously look towards doing that whereas transactional advisers will not. The bond can be a bit "transactional" at times as you are limited on what you can take out and that can prevent feeding the annual ISA allowance. You may have other funds to do that each year though.

Never be afraid to ask to see why an option is considered best. Bond vs OEIC is a very common comparison and I would guess that less than 20% of cases should go down the bond route. So, when you are being recommended the bond option (the minority option) its worth asking why.

The Standard Life online portal for my pension is rubbish. You can't see individual holdings for each fund, just one total amount I have in my pot.

Is that on the Standard Life platform or Standard Life as the insurer (the old style pension contracts). I suspect yours is not platform. I have to admit though that I find the choice of Standard Life interesting. I know who tends to come out at the top end for cost and features and Standard Life is not one that I would expect to be there. I find them to be typically mid table. Looking at the last platform research I did (which covered 18 platforms) they came out 8th (that was using the same tax wrappers and investments in the same way on all platforms). That was on £100k and it was £5000 more expensive over the term than the first 5 platforms which were virtually identical in cost. Cost is not everything. Hence, what is it about Standard Life that justifies selection in this case?

mr_fishbulb

dunstonh wrote: »

Is that on the Standard Life platform or Standard Life as the insurer (the old style pension contracts).

Berrrr I don't know It's the Group Flexible Retirement Plan

I went with them as my work get discount on the fund charges.

dunstonh

mr_fishbulb wrote: »

Berrrr I don't know It's the Group Flexible Retirement Plan

I went with them as my work get discount on the fund charges.

Thats the insurance side of SL. Not the platform.

A lot of the insurers are either launching their own platforms or getting into bed with existing ones as they realise that that is the future.

robbieroy

Dunstonh
Thanks for getting back to me again. I met with the IFA and I am convinced that the IFA has a good handle on my particular situation regarding income v growth and also my current tax position. It would appear that the SL wrap facilities were more suited to my particular needs in terms of providing:
- tax deferred income via the offshore bond
- tax reclaim via a VCT
- bed and ISA shares I have
- transfer in of existing S&S ISA
- cash ISA facilities
- general cash fund
- accessing a range of funds for income at medium risk
- cost of setting up, annual charges and fund management were all considered together with IFA meetings and fees - effective cost all in taking into account rebates, fund charges IFA costs etc is 2.09% pa
I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of this and my financial terminology sadly limited.

The bottom line is that the IFA knows my situation, and backed up choices with a 20 page report detailing my present circumstances and needs together with justification of the choices that have been made for me with a further 20 pages of "quote information" for the choices.
Thanks again
RR

jem16

robbieroy wrote: »

-tax deferred income via the offshore bond

When are you deferring the tax till?

From the figures you sent me, you are a higher rate taxpayer this tax year as you were working but from April you will become a basic rate taxpayer and not near the age related allowance reduction.