Genuine alternative to HL?

planteria

i have my ISA and SIPP with HL.

we are waiting to learn their new charging structure. i have found their CS to be good, and don't really have any complaints

...but costs, over the long-term, really matter, so i am open to moving away from them.

but who are the genuine alternatives to HL, that offer ISAs and SIPPs, that allow you to hold Funds, UK Shares and US Shares within both wrappers?

bigadaj

planteria wrote: »

i have my ISA and SIPP with HL.

we are waiting to learn their new charging structure. i have found their CS to be good, and don't really have any complaints

...but costs, over the long-term, really matter, so i am open to moving away from them.

but who are the genuine alternatives to HL, that offer ISAs and SIPPs, that allow you to hold Funds, UK Shares and US Shares within both wrappers?

Have you tried compare fund platforms, this should allow you to input your chosen mix for funds at least for isas and SIPPS.

It may well be the case that a wide range of investements within different wrappers will mean different holdings on different platforms, there's generally a balance between range and ease of use and costs.

gterr

Looks like I may be moving to Interactive Investor.


I hold mainly trackers plus a few side funds. I did have in mind to look at Charles Stanley Direct, but I've learned that Interactive Investor charge a £20 per quarter custody fee, and this single fee of £80 per year will cover my unwrapped funds account, my S&S Isa, plus those of my husband (total approx. £200k). Might even be able to extend it to cover my foster mother's account depending on how strict they are on the 'close relative' definition. There are fees for trading, which I'd be able to avoid with CS Direct, but I'm mainly a buy-and-hold investor, so these will be fairly small (and there is a small allowance built in to the custody fee).


I also notice that Interactive Investor have an offer (worth approx. £120 in trading fees) available to those transferring funds to them before the end of February. Interesting timing, that!

kidmugsy

I've seen the disagreeable new charges for ATS. But at least they guarantee not to raise them for two years. Does anyone else give such a guarantee, does anyone know?

planteria

Alliance Trust?

bowlhead99

I'm not sure anyone else is guaranteeing "no fee changes" at the moment. Basically by April, a whole bunch of providers will have changed their fees over the last year and only by that point will they all be able to see how they're all stacking up against each other, and whether they should target particular bunches of customers with offers or further (semi) permanent fee scale or fee structure changes.

One might presume the ones who announced more recently are less likely to change than the ones who were out of the blocks earlier. But if some of them come out with further changes to try to grow market share after seeing where their rivals went with pricing, who's to say that the direction of change will be up rather than broadly down ? In other words, is a "no price changes for x months/years" a particularly good hook?

Nobody wants to trigger a downward spiralling price war, but some could perhaps tweak their price downward to avoid haemorrhaging customers. It seems less likely someone would price at say 0.25%, see a rival at 0.35%, and then think, well I know I only put my prices up a few months back but customers won't mind if it goes up again to 0.34%, I can still get away with that.

Also, "price fixed til X" is pretty much code for, "price change due on X"...

I remember when ii announced their RDR pricing a couple of years back and customers were outraged on this board and elsewhere and looking to leave in droves as they felt were screwed over. Now only a couple of posts up, someone is looking to go to ii because looks pretty competitive in the grand scheme of things...

Anyway when all this outrage from ii customers was hanging fresh in the air in 2012, Sippdeal came out with a big banner on their page saying "no changes in price until 2014". Sure enough, 'RDR2' kicks in during 2014 and a few months ahead of it, Sippdeal come out bang on cue with their new 2014 price structure. Now we have a whole thread again for that provider deemed to be screwing over its customers with people being livid, template complaint letters ahoy, etc etc.

Not to poo-pooh the genuine complaints of some customers of that platform who feel they should be able to exit for free if they're one of the categories made worse off. But my point is, the competitive landscape moves in cycles and phases, and price rises and falls generally reflect someone leapfrogging another competitor to become the cheapest or the most expensive or the most mid-priced all-rounder, *for now*.

If your provider or prospective provider says no changes until at least X, they will certainly feel they can change their prices once we get a month or so past X, so please be comfortable with exit fees that could be involved when, not if, the price change comes to pass. Of course the price changes in 2016 might be fine compared to what is out there at that point or what others are about to change to if they also haven't changed since 2013.

Drp8713

I have thought about this and cant see one for a small investor like me.

If your only putting a few thousand a year into funds, there is no fund dealing charge, no set up fee, no initial charge on most funds, no annual fee. Basically all your paying is a 1-2% TER for active funds and less for trackers, so maximum £20 per £1000 in charges.

I have looked at others and they have a £40 set up or £100 a year charge which dont compare

Lokolo

Drp8713 wrote: »

I have thought about this and cant see one for a small investor like me.

If your only putting a few thousand a year into funds, there is no fund dealing charge, no set up fee, no initial charge on most funds, no annual fee. Basically all your paying is a 1-2% TER for active funds and less for trackers, so maximum £20 per £1000 in charges.

I have looked at others and they have a £40 set up or £100 a year charge which dont compare

Charles Stanley Direct. 0,25% when using clean funds so when you switch it may be cheaper to go with them.

westy22

Drp8713 wrote: »

I have thought about this and cant see one for a small investor like me.

If your only putting a few thousand a year into funds, there is no fund dealing charge, no set up fee, no initial charge on most funds, no annual fee. Basically all your paying is a 1-2% TER for active funds and less for trackers, so maximum £20 per £1000 in charges.

I have looked at others and they have a £40 set up or £100 a year charge which dont compare

Yes, but you are using the current HL pricing model for your assumptions - you will need to revise your analysis once HL announce their new charges in the next few weeks.

planteria

all good points.

i have c£70k with HL. so i'm a small investor too.

what none of us want is to have to keep moving around...especially if incurring exit fees in the process.

there don't seem to be many alternatives to me. will look at Charles Stanley when we know the lie of the land. but.....part of me thinks that just sticking with HL might turn out to be a reasonable decision, as, as bowlhead eloquently describes, it is a market that will always be evolving, and there has to be a decent chance that HL will sharpen their offer if they need to to retain customers, and that a prospective new platform may increase their prices to increase their profits at some stage in the not too distant.

to be honest, being unsure of getting a 'good deal' makes me reluctant to commit to investing as much as i, perhaps, could.

fimonkey

70k would be a huge investment for me :-) what hope does a tiny investor like me, who prior to RDR was doing quite well and learning about S&S, but not well enough to cover the charges have? ?......£80pa when I was when I was with ii was more than my return p.a.

Waiting to see the outcome after April because I quite enjoyed my little forays...I put between 100-200 per month aside.

I will have 1000 to invest in April, and can add 100pm..... but not sure what returns I would need to be able to cover minimum charges.

Following this thread with interest