Hargreaves Lansdown charges.

cepheus

You just say these are additional which they have, so that's no excuse.

Interactive gave comparefunds various percentages. For my funds and circumstances the net charges after all the rebates etc are just over 1% overall excluding trading or fixed charges, however others on here think it should be much less. So I'm attempting to sort out the anomaly. I have resent them these figures, they should be able to confim this whilst ignoring all fixed costs.


Henderson UK & Irish Smlr Coms A Acc = Net: 1.02%
Royal London Sterl Extra Yld Bd B = 0.82%
Unicorn UK Smaller Companies A = 1.35

cepheus

foofi22 wrote: »

What exactly did you want to find out?

They would need to know how often you deal and in what, but in any case they probably wouldn't want to say it will 'cost you £x per year' because there are too many variables, and saying something like that may sound like a guarantee which could cause problems.

All the costs are on the website, can't you come to a ballpark figure yourself?

What everyone should have the right to know given the explicit details I provided, the overall net final cost per year.

I have already calculated it on comparefunds but people on here insist the calculation overestimates the net fund costs.

I have made it simpler for them and asked them to confirm these details on comparefunds which exclude all fixed costs.

Henderson UK & Irish Smlr Coms A Acc = 1.02%
Royal London Sterl Extra Yld Bd B = 0.82%
Unicorn UK Smaller Companies A = 1.35

this isn't rocket science just evasion!

Linton

cepheus wrote: »

What everyone should have the right to know given the explicit details I provided, the overall net final cost per year.

I have already calculated it on comparefunds but people on here insist the calculation overestimates the net fund costs.

I have made it simpler for them and asked them to confirm these details on comparefunds which exclude all fixed costs.

Henderson UK & Irish Smlr Coms A Acc = 1.02%
Royal London Sterl Extra Yld Bd B = 0.82%
Unicorn UK Smaller Companies A = 1.35

this isn't rocket science just evasion!

Its easy for you to do. For any particular fund/class the costs charged by the fund manager must be the same across all platforms. So you just need to look up the exact fund and class each plaform provides. The iii website also gives their rebate. The slight problem is then getting a correct TER for each one as the only people who can give the correct answer, the fund managers, dont tend to publicise it. In many cases they do give the OCF which would appear to be comparable.

foofi22

cepheus wrote: »

What everyone should have the right to know given the explicit details I provided, the overall net final cost per year.

I have already calculated it on comparefunds but people on here insist the calculation overestimates the net fund costs.

I have made it simpler for them and asked them to confirm these details on comparefunds which exclude all fixed costs.

Henderson UK & Irish Smlr Coms A Acc = 1.02%
Royal London Sterl Extra Yld Bd B = 0.82%
Unicorn UK Smaller Companies A = 1.35

this isn't rocket science just evasion!

I imagine II and others for that matter don't want to provide a 'final' cost for the year because that might be seen as some guarantee, which might come back to bit them! Especially when trading costs can't be accounted for, because what if you trade more than you originally expected...

Also, surely fund costs (assuming the same class, and excepting HL super-clean ones) will be the same across platforms?

JohnRo

I doubt those who drove forward the RDR could ever have imagined it would lead to such a shambles. The FCA should get involved at some point imho, since they're the ones in a past life who started this fire.

They need to force explicit pricing clarity and provide guidance to make matters far less convoluted than some platforms seem to be hoping they'll get away with. I'm sure the RDR was not only intended to make charges explicit but also just as importantly, simpler for retail customers.

What the regulators don't seem to have factored in to any of their calculations is that they're dealing with an industry built almost entirely on profit from kickbacks, obfuscation and hidden charges. At least breaking some of that culture apart is a start I suppose..

Linton

foofi22 wrote: »

I imagine II and others for that matter don't want to provide a 'final' cost for the year because that might be seen as some guarantee, which might come back to bit them! Especially when trading costs can't be accounted for, because what if you trade more than you originally expected...

Also, surely fund costs (assuming the same class, and excepting HL super-clean ones) will be the same across platforms?

Is it clear how HL Superclean will be implemented? I can only see two options: either a new class or a rebate. If its a new class why should it not be offered to all platforms that satisfy some criterion, presumably total units held. Is a rebate allowed under RDR?

JohnRo

I've got a problem with the whole super clean thing, what the heck are they playing at.. a fund should be either be priced as bundled or unbundled, end of.

It all sounds very anti-competition to me.

Linton

JohnRo wrote: »

I've got a problem with the whole super clean thing, what the heck are they playing at.. a fund should be either be priced as bundled or unbundled, end of.

It all sounds very anti-competition to me.

In principle I would agree, but there is the cost advantages to the manager of bulk buying by a fund's customers, the platforms, which it would be reasonable to reflect in some way.

jimjames

Linton wrote: »

Is it clear how HL Superclean will be implemented? I can only see two options: either a new class or a rebate. If its a new class why should it not be offered to all platforms that satisfy some criterion, presumably total units held. Is a rebate allowed under RDR?

Fidelity implied that they have got the same deal as HL. If that is the case when they are revealed then it will blow the HL pricing out of the water even further as there won't even be a benefit from superior fund pricing.

cepheus

I guess some of you guys could walk in a job at these places!

Anyway at least comparefunds quote the figure we are after assuming it is correct, the net annual charge, so II must have given it to them even if they don't display it on their own site.

http://www.comparefundplatforms.com/quick-search

Shame Hargreaves and Fidelity aren't included.

Something else which occurred to me earlier today, if you are not fully invested some of the time the overall charges for the companies with free platforms will become even more competitive. Even the small amount of interest II offer for cash on SIPPs of 0.5% would make a difference.