Portfolio sanity check, please

dunstonh

Are they available without involving an IFA? Sadly, my IFA continues to ignore my emails regards moving my Skandia holdings in the low-fee direction.

Most of the HSBC trackers are now pretty cheap, and my overall TER seems fairly good. However, Blackrock does seem to offer more variety.

If you are already on the Skandia platform then you can do fund switches without needing the IFA via the client login.

Is that for new portfolios or are existing ones being rebalanced in that direction?

For automatic rebalacning without an IFA it will use the allocations put in place at time of application. For a servicing IFA, you would expect them to use the current allocations (otherwise what is the point of using the IFA)

gadgetmind

Ark_Welder wrote: »

The underlying assets for the tracker are still company shares. In the event that markets in general take a hit, so shares are unloaded en masse rather than just individual companies/sectors/countries

I can take that on the chin as they can bounce back just as fast IF they haven't been forced to fire-sale their underlying assets.

Depends on how you think the world's economies are going to develop. FE and EMs still have dependencies on the developed economies, so slow-downs here will still have an effect there - they're still a way away from having enough trade just between themselves, although they are getting there.

I've always had a global view, and <5% of my current business is in the UK, so I'm happy to have a negative "home bias". Currency risk is an issue.

I'll merely note that the Marlborough fund would make the asset-allocation decisions for you...;)

I *hate* people making decisions for me. Just bring me the sodding menu, and stop recommending stuff!

If you do have a specific target date then you could consider holding one conventional and one linker, both of which mature around that date.

I like that idea.

Some of this might also depend upon your investment platform, i.e. are there platform charges for holding gilts but none for funds? Will RDR change this anyway?

Well, thanks to HL's "suicide note" today regards platform charges, that's well up in the air. I'm currently looking at Fidelity and Bestinvest. With Fidelity, it's funds only, but no extra fees, and loads of HSBC and L&G trackers. Bestinvest want £100+VAT pa in a SIPP, and £50+vat in an ISA, for holding any of those nasty things that don't grease their palms, but I can live with that as they have the Vanguard trackers and plenty of ETFs for those areas such as small cap and property that trackers don't always cover.

gadgetmind

dunstonh wrote: »

If you are already on the Skandia platform then you can do fund switches without needing the IFA via the client login.

If I go ahead and do that, what happens regards trail commission?

I'm really after a clean break here as the sod has now totally ignored FOUR emails despite me getting delivery and read receipts. Not impressed.

dunstonh

If I go ahead and do that, what happens regards trail commission?

If the IFA has documented trail to cover servicing then you can tell the IFA that you no longer require them to provide servicing and to reduce the trail accordingly.
At the moment, Skandia cannot go lower than 0.5% on ISAs but can on the CIA and pension.

Alternatively, if you have an IFA that you know who doesnt mind making a change on your behalf, you could get it transferred to their agency and put on nil trail or 0.1% trail at the same time.

gadgetmind

dunstonh wrote: »

Alternatively, if you have an IFA that you know who doesnt mind making a change on your behalf, you could get it transferred to their agency and put on nil trail or 0.1% trail at the same time.

There is every chance such an IFA might be getting a PM/mail shortly.

xx_Law_Grad_xx

You may not need a stand alone commodities fund.

The FTSE 100 has plenty of exposure already as will any emerging markets/asia pacific fund you might hold.

If you are looking to diversify your portfolio and reduce risk a commodities fund which invests in mining companies will not do that as they are quite highly correlated to the performance of equities.

I am wary of commodity etfs due to the effects of contango. This can be avoided through physical backed funds such as ETFS Physical Precious Metals. 5% of my portfolio is in ETFS Physical Gold.

atush

I also think you have too much in japan and are using L&G index for emerging markets (which I still like the sector I am not too sure about that index?).

I also like asian smaller companies (I hold aberdeen asian sc). Have held them for a number of years and they are doing well for me.

Linton

atush wrote: »

I also think you have too much in japan and are using L&G index for emerging markets (which I still like the sector I am not too sure about that index?).

I also like asian smaller companies (I hold aberdeen asian sc). Have held them for a number of years and they are doing well for me.

I would share the unease about the index.

Presumably one invests in EM because one sees those countries becoming relatively more wealthy over the long term. However the index is 27% into global raw materials whose value is a function of global supply and demand, and has very little relationship with the development of the local economy.

Secondly if one looks at the performance of the index over the past 5 years in comparison with the average fund (the IMA Index) one sees that the Index is very much more volatile with no obvious compensation in terms of return.

dunstonh

Japan is a great sector to have on a rebalancing portfolio. The volatility it has suits rebalancing. On a portfolio without rebalancing then Japan is not a good idea.

Going back to the original post, the sector marked "Global developed = 6%" is I think misnamed. The allocation for that is typically marked as global specialist. It can use global equity funds to trim down the risk but it is the allocation where the specialist/niche funds would be held. i.e. JPM Natural Resources, Jupiter India, Blackrock Gold & Gen, Neptune Russia etc. Your highly volatile funds that dont fit into a conventional sector. For someone with a low level of tolerance to volatility, you would tone it down which is why you could see a generic global equity fund in there.

atush

I didn't say no Japan ( I have a tiny amt) but 6% is way too high IMHO.