Scottish Friendly My UK Tracker Options (ISA)

masonic

mal48 wrote: »

As for figures, you can check both L and G funds and the Scottish F Active fund every weekday on the Money Observer website, Mal

Money Observer lists only two funds from Scottish Friendly:
http://www.moneyobserver.com/funds-by-Scottish-Friendly-Assurance
UK Growth and Managed Growth

It also lists a number of pension funds.

Trustnet lists a few options too:
http://www.trustnet.com/Tools/Search.aspx?keyword=scottish+friendly&on=F&uw=uw

None of these look like the right one.

There is no point looking up the performance of the underlying L&G funds, because those will be the same as the index less their 0.3% charges.

masonic

I know it's not the right fund, but just to illustrate Scottish Friendly's performance record, this fund has generated returns over 10 years of 32%, compared to a sector average of 45%.

Over the 6 month period between October 2007 and April 2008, it sustained a 45% loss, compared to the sector average of 30%.

So this really illustrates how these sorts of tactical asset allocation funds can underperform, especially in falling markets, owing to the higher risk of trying to time the market.

planteria

i have some investments with mutuals but have never invested with Scottish Friendly.
anything along the lines of a tracker needs to be at genuinely low cost, as is clear from the above. i prefer actively managed funds, or selecting the companies myself, in the hope of beating the market, not just tracking it.
if Scottish Friendly have a with profits fund that is well-managed then perhaps that is a decent option to sit alongside more adventurous investments:think:

mal48

Read carefully. The external fund is the underlying fund and I have checked performance to confirm this.Vanguard 100 costs .24% plus platform charge of .25% minimum. So the difference with SF is 1.01%..At the moment, I prefer SF Higher Fund because it's potentially (not at present) a mixed fund, which is likely to make it lower risk than V100, M

mal48

It's true that L and G Multi Index funds are cheaper, but the comparable fund, Multi Index 7 consistently underperfoms the SF Higher Fund and by a wide margin. Today's 1 year figures were SF Higher Fund 15.1%, L and G Multi Index 7--9.5%. Of course, I quite understand that you believe charges are much more important than net returns!
The SF Active Fund is on the My Choice menu, so is relevant. It's managed by SVM and is generally a good performer, less so after Brexit, though at present it's in tbe black. It's been offset in my own portfolio by foreign earnings in the Higher Fund, so that's where the DIY's coming in- my own ability to switch between funds. No I would not describe SF as a rip off. Far from it, M

mal48

The SF Active Fund invests in the Growth Fund. This is managed by SVM, an external Edinburgh investment firm. As for referrals, SF may have a system, but it's nothing to do with me. It was Masonic who posted the website address-a double agent? Profitable investing, Mal

dunstonh

but the comparable fund, Multi Index 7 consistently underperfoms the SF Higher Fund and by a wide margin.

Not comparable. the SF is higher risk and more volatile.

mal48

Thanks for your unsupported assertion, but the figures do not bear it out. All the relevant mentioned funds have risk scores in the low 90s and since when has a mixed fund been higher risk than 100 % equity fund? Aiso the risk score of the Active Fund is in the mid 80s, Mal

mal48

I was thinking of Vanguard 100. It's true that L and G Multi Index 7 has a lowsr risk score in the 70s. I can only think it goes readily into bonds, or at least has the pontential to. Its performance whilst reasonable, is considerably below that of V 100 and SF Higher, but as you keep implying, charges are far more important than net returns!

mal48

I've been checking the figures for L and G Multi Index 7 over the last several months. It's volatility is on a par with SF Higher and V 100. It's returns are considerably less than either. Mind you, I suppose you could say that whilst it drops much lower than the other two funds, it doesn't rise nearly as high, so in this sense is less volatile. Charges are cheap as well!