Multi-manager funds?

planteria

i dont touch these. much more interesting to select some funds yourself. my SIPP includes 8 funds:

UK Smaller Companies
Biotechnology
Agriculture
Africa & Middle East
Latin America
Russia
India
China

Jonbvn

I would recommend that you avoid fund of funds.

See this MF article for the reason.
http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/2011/02/17/why-funds-of-funds-arent-funny.aspx?source=ufwflwlnk0000001

purch

I have come to the conclusion that a MM fund is appropriate in my situation (thanks especially dunstonh) until time (and experience) allows me to pick my own funds with confidence

If you don't have the time and experience to pick your own funds, how are you going to find the time and experience to pick your own MM fund ??

Totton

I do like multi manager funds and in particular I like the Jupiter Merlin range and M&G Managed Growth. At the moment I favour Merlin Growth as a core holding whilst M&G are relegated to a satellite holding of just Global Basics which is one of the managed growth components.

Like many others I found these MM funds to be expensive and avoided them, but over time I have found that if you compare your entire portfolio with something such as Merlin Growth, then the fund usually sits in the middle performance wise and often beats your portfolio as a whole. It is worthwhile noting that you still need to keep an eye on these as they do undergo periods of under-performance as does just about every other fund out there.

Best Wishes,
Mickey

Coeus

:money:

purch wrote: »

If you don't have the time and experience to pick your own funds, how are you going to find the time and experience to pick your own MM fund ??

I'm glad this post is still generating interest but I've moved on since then - just letting you all know. Researched and picked my own funds - now I will be assessing how much time I can achieve in post-investment monitoring and research.

As for the above quote - sorry but it seems a very simple answer in any case. Which is more time intensive:

1. Researching multiple funds in multiple sectors whilst simulataneously researching and building a risk-spread portfolio based on said funds and sectors.

2. Researching the best performing risk-acceptable (active managed) multi-manager fund.

With a multi-manager fund you (i) don't have to research beyond the (active managed) single class of multi-manager funds or (ii) design, implement and adjust your own portfolio of multiple funds on a regular basis.

browniej

feesarefare wrote: »

Correct - not everyone agrees but I think if people say MM/Fund of Fund are expensive, they should say compared to what. Its commonplace for IFAs/ Diecretionary managers to put together portfolios and take 1% trail.

I thought the norm was 0.5%?

Or higher?

Most of the ones I looked at were 1.67%.

The TERS we have are between 0.9% and 1.65% including platform charges. So certainly not the cheapest , but we don't get any trail as we are not involved in the invetsment process, however we have an investment process that our customers are comfortable with.

Presumably you have separate fees then?

Now that is a problem. Its not possible to give recommendations but they are out there believe me.

Sorry I wasn't looking for a recommendation. It was more a question of who to approach as I hadn't seen them anywhere.

browniej

feesarefare wrote: »

Was that the AMC or TER?

That was the TER. The AMC was 1.5%. So with a TER of 1.67% plus an extra 0.5% if the IFA takes 1% would that not make the TER 2.17% rather than 2.5% as you mentioned? Or am I missing something?

Yes, we charge fees for the cashflow planning, tax planning, risk management and generally making sure our clients make the most of their lives without having to fear they might run out of money.

I assume there is an initial fee and an annual fee? If I'm not being too cheeky how much would the annual fee be?

Obviously this would have to be added onto the TERs you mentioned earlier of between 0.9% and 1.65%. That's quite a big spread on the TERs - what makes the difference?

browniej

Feesarefare - as you have not replied to my question regarding your annual fees I assume you felt I was being cheeky asking. My apologies - you're correct. It was not appropriate to ask on a forum.

However I am interested in your multi-manager portfolios as I am interested in supplementing my teacher's pension in some way and have been seeing some IFAs already. Is the difference from 0.9% TER to 1.65% TER down to risk level and expected returns?

I know past performance is no guide to future returns but do you have performance figures for the 0.9% portfolio and the 1.65% portfolio?

I like the idea of an expert managing the portfolio but just a little concerned that the cost may outweigh the advantages as the article I linked to earlier seemed to suggest.

It would also be interesting to hear the performance figures of an IFA managed portfolio but I'm not sure how one would find that out.

browniej

feesarefare wrote: »

No its Ok - I missed that you replied to my last post.

Financial Plan £1000+vat
Annual Fee £75+ per month.
Implementation of products £41-£180 per hour depending on task- technical,research admin etc.

Many thanks.

The portfolios we use are only just over a year old so no long term record.

Would be happy even to see performance figures for one year.

As I said previously for us (and our clients) it not about out and out performance, its more to do with having the peace of mind that a robust process is being adherred too.

I see what you are saying and to a certain extent I agree. However I would have to say that performance would matter for me too as I would expect the investment to at least outdo cash savings otherwise why bother?

Perhaps one the other IFAs on here can give you that.

Hopefully they will.

browniej

feesarefare wrote: »

OK

Straight from Trustnet

3 most popular portfolios

Thank you - that's very helpful.

Now perhaps dunstonh ( assuming he manages his own clients' portfolios? ) could give me figures for 3 similar clients' portfolios - that would be a great help.