Accumulation vs Inclusive Accumulation

zenmaster

I'm attempting to pick some funds for a SIPP. What a steep learning curve!

I think I understand the difference between Income and Accumulation but what the hell is Inclusive Income and Inclusive Accumulation and which should I go for?

TIA.

zenmaster

I found the answer buried deep in the FAQs on the HL website.

If anyone else doesn't know, Inclusive means that it includes a charge for commission to the broker which, I understand is no longer the case.

zagfles

zenmaster wrote: »

I found the answer buried deep in the FAQs on the HL website.

If anyone else doesn't know, Inclusive means that it includes a charge for commission to the broker which, I understand is no longer the case.

It is the case, but you should get it back via "loyalty bonuses". Some unbundled funds have loyalty bonuses too but much smaller. See http://www.hl.co.uk/funds/wealth-150/plus/fund-comparison-tool

grey_gym_sock

ah yes, HL call it "inclusive", but the correct term is "dirty"

and they say "unbundled", when they should say "clean".

dunstonh

I havent heard the phrase inclusive used anywhere. bundled, retail and dirty are most commonly used. However, unbundled and clean are the main two for "clean".

zenmaster

dunstonh wrote: »

I havent heard the phrase inclusive used anywhere. bundled, retail and dirty are most commonly used. However, unbundled and clean are the main two for "clean".

It's like this on HL -

BlackRock Natural Resources Growth & Income (Inclusive Accumulation)

I guess

BlackRock Natural Resources Growth & Income (Dirty)

doesn't sound so appealing.

As zagfles says, I do believe that HL refund the commission (do they have a choice? Rhetorical question!!!). I would have thought it simpler to just not offer this option.

Anyway, it begs another question arguably worthy of a separate thread.

On the application form it asks for a "full fund or share name". Now, the box is quite small, my handwriting is scrawly and some of the fund names are ridiculously long (see above). If I just put the ISIN would this be acceptable?

Thank you.

bigadaj

Whilst it's colloquially useful to use dirty and clean I don't think it's practical to expect this to be quoted by the industry as it seems so perjorative, bundled and unbundled is probably the best were going to get.

grey_gym_sock

"BlackRock Natural Resources Growth & Income (Dirty)" sounds about right - it's mostly fossil fuels and miners