Stocks & Shares ISAs

chamelion

eskbanker wrote: »

You're on the right lines, other than using the HL Wealth 50 for ideas - this has always been a suspect marketing list and the Woodford debacle has almost entirely discredited it IMHO!

It's only the platform fee that you actually pay directly, while all funds have internal costs that affect their performance. The standard representation is Ongoing Charges Figure (OCF), which, as you've identified, is 0.56% for your selected fund. II do show this at https://www.ii.co.uk/funds/fidelity-moneybuilder-income-net-y/B3Z9PT6 but as you've spotted HL offer a discount, so on a like-for-like basis, the fund performance with HL would effectively be 0.2% better than with II. In other words, buying this fund with HL instead of II means a higher platform fee payable to HL but a better return, so it is legitimate to factor both figures into your evaluation of net return.

There are also transaction costs, but again these are internal to the fund rather than something you pay explicitly - the presentation of these isn't regulated in the same way as OCFs so they aren't so visible, but can usually be found in the more detailed costs breakdown, e.g. https://www.hl.co.uk/funds/fund-discounts,-prices--and--factsheets/search-results/f/fidelity-moneybuilder-income-class-y-income/costs

This is super useful, thank you Transaction costs I assume will be ROUGHLY similar between platforms so for now I'll omit (hope that's not a huge mistake...)

This is quite interesting - i guess this is why the suggestion is to go with understanding what fund you're investing in before picking a platform, and based on the total value.

Conscious above calculation was for 50k seeing the same annual fees on both platforms for very different services. But doubling that to 100k makes II 680 quid annually versus 810 on HL.

eskbanker

chamelion wrote: »

Conscious above calculation was for 50k seeing the same annual fees on both platforms for very different services. But doubling that to 100k makes II 680 quid annually versus 810 on HL.

Yes, the size (and constitution) of intended investments is always going to affect comparisons between platforms, as some have a fixed fee model (better for larger holdings) while others are percentage based (better for smaller holdings).

There are other differentiators as well, such as dealing costs for shares and/or funds, so that's why the comparison sites listed above prompt for data about anticipated investment profile, as this will directly affect the answer of which platform is best suited to their own personal requirements.

chamelion

eskbanker wrote: »

Yes, the size (and constitution) of intended investments is always going to affect comparisons between platforms, as some have a fixed fee model (better for larger holdings) while others are percentage based (better for smaller holdings).

There are other differentiators as well, such as dealing costs for shares and/or funds, so that's why the comparison sites listed above prompt for data about anticipated investment profile, as this will directly affect the answer of which platform is best suited to their own personal requirements.

I've made some good progress (i think!).
As a newbie funds investor (i'm no stranger to other forms of investing - p2p, crypto etc, so know the risks etc), i'm partial towards going for one of the Vanguard lifestrategy and/or FTSE 100 index funds.

Fees wise it appears that the larger the portfolio the cheaper iweb works out, with vanguard coming in 2nd, then ii, then hl (assuming 12 trades per year, and portfolio sizes of 30k, 60k, 100k+). at a 30k investment, vanguard tops the cheap list and offers lots more than iweb.

Unless i'm overlooking something pretty obvious...

badger09

chamelion wrote: »

I've made some good progress (i think!).
As a newbie funds investor (i'm no stranger to other forms of investing - p2p, crypto etc, so know the risks etc), i'm partial towards going for one of the Vanguard lifestrategy and/or FTSE 100 index funds.

Based on this, the clear winner in terms of fees is directly with Vanguard. For e.g. with 30k, looking at £66/year fees versus hl (201), iweb (126), ii (281) assuming 12 trades per year.
Upping this amount to 100k brings annual fees to 220, versus hl (670), iweb (280), ii (435).

If I wish to diversify beyond Vanguard beyond this, I could always look into the other platforms, but for the next few years with a few stocks + shares isa transfers in this should hold me for a while to come!

Unless i'm overlooking something pretty obvious...

Making no comment about your choice of funds, may I ask how you arrived at these costs, as its not immediately obvious, to me at least:o.

chamelion

badger09 wrote: »

Making no comment about your choice of funds, may I ask how you arrived at these costs, as its not immediately obvious, to me at least:o.

i edited - totally skipped the vanguard platform fees of 0.15%

masonic

chamelion wrote: »

I've made some good progress (i think!).
As a newbie funds investor (i'm no stranger to other forms of investing - p2p, crypto etc, so know the risks etc), i'm partial towards going for one of the Vanguard lifestrategy and/or FTSE 100 index funds.

Fees wise it appears that the larger the portfolio the cheaper iweb works out, with vanguard coming in 2nd, then ii, then hl (assuming 12 trades per year, and portfolio sizes of 30k, 60k, 100k+). at a 30k investment, vanguard tops the cheap list and offers lots more than iweb.

Unless i'm overlooking something pretty obvious...

Another factor to consider is funds vs ETFs (charging structure is different and the latter can work out cheap on platforms that would otherwise be expensive).

Vanguard Lifestrategy is already 25+% UK, while the UK makes up about 6% of global markets, so adding more UK exposure by way of a FTSE 100 tracker would be adding to an already significant overweight, while buying a FTSE 100 tracker instead of VLS would forego the diversification both geographically and across industries that a more global (and less concentrated) fund like VLS offers.

Nardge

Firstly, many thanks to the above individuals in the thread who assisted me with my entry into S&S earlier this year.

I'm very satisfied with the Vanguard Life Strategy 80:20 mix.



A 'Quick Query' though, one I suspect has been previously answered elsewhere:

I have about 6K I'd like to transfer from IFISA to the above S&S ISA...

Is it better to just stuff it all in as a lump sum, or to buy say 1K of units/month over a 6 month period?

I can think of reasons why either method might be the most profitable to pursue.



Thanking you in advance

With Kind Regards

badger09

Nardge wrote: »

Firstly , many thanks to the above individuals in the thread who assisted me with my entry into S&S earlier this year.

I'm very satisfied with the Vanguard Life Strategy 80:20 mix.



A 'Quick Query' though, one I suspect has been previously answered elsewhere:

I have about 6K I'd like to transfer from IFISA to the above S&S ISA...

Is it better to just stuff it all in as a lump sum, or to buy say 1K of units/month over a 6 month period?

I can think of reasons why either method might be the most profitable to pursue.



Thanking you in advance

With Kind Regards

There is no right or wrong answer. Statistically, given a long enough investment horizon, you would be better investing as soon as you have the money available.

However, if you would have sleepless nights, or even worse, sell up if the market fell steeply just after you had invested, then you would be better to drip feed.

How about 50:50?:)

Anneliese1

Following the death of my father I now have funds I wish to invest to reduce my eventual Inheritance Tax Liability. I have yet to use my 2019/20 ISA allowance and was waiting until the outcome of the Election/Brexit issue before considering investing in the Octopus ISA IHT. Does anyone have any experience of this type of investment, please? Thanks

jicms

I am completely new to stocks & shares ISAs and have £40k to invest and possibly another £40k in April. The more I read the more confused I become.

Should I go for what looks like the safest option with say Hargreaves Lansdown or go for one with lower charges like Nutmeg, ii or Wealthify. Is it worth trying to save on charges which might be outweighed by better returns from a more experienced platform’s fund. I presume changing platforms means having to sell and buy a different fund?

Also should I hold back the money to drip feed as seems to be the recommended route. Also is it usual to put the whole lot with one provider and fund or split it with someone like Vanguard?