Anyone care to decide what they think of this investment fund?

phillw

zebra wrote: »

It suits me to keep using Nationwide as fin. advisor, so only question is whether I want to go to the L&G Primary Fund. I want a relatively hands-off approach with this investment pot, review it every 4-6 yrs maybe. I'm looking for long-term growth but not saving for anything specific.

I went through nationwide about ten years ago for a stocks and shares ISA & when I cashed out about five years ago I'd made an average of around 10% a year (I can't remember the fund name). I had to time selling though as we were going through some pretty crazy times & I was monitoring it at least once a month.

I'm a little more savvy now & wouldn't do it again. But if you're in the same place that I was then it's not horrendous, just remember that you're paying someones wages at nationwide out of your investment.

bigadaj

zebra wrote: »

Legal and General "Primary fund" was recommended to me by Nationwide BS. I can't find any independent opinions about it online. Do any of MSE forum users fancy having a peek & proffering an opinion?

I can't post links, but it's top link if you google "nationwide fund range primary legal and general"

I would be switching into this from a more conventional type of investment wrapper, which Nationwide calls a "Portfolio investment". About £25k total.

NWide says the Primary fund has advantage of more indexed management, lower management charges and "simplicity" because it's just one line summary to compare old & new balance. The Primary Fund is still spread across a range of risk levels/asset classes. I think only 8 actual fund choices to achieve that spread, though. I've had good experiences with L&G before.

It suits me to keep using Nationwide as fin. advisor, so only question is whether I want to go to the L&G Primary Fund. I want a relatively hands-off approach with this investment pot, review it every 4-6 yrs maybe. I'm looking for long-term growth but not saving for anything specific.

Thanks to anyone who feels curious enough to have a look at the link & give an opinion!

It appears as though total costs for this product are well in excess of 1%, they are just under that with online management but there's an additional charge apparently if you use a branch adviser.

Nationwide are also a firm that certainly until recently charged an initial fee, possibly 5%, which is unheard of for almost all supports for the last decade or more st James place being one of the very few exceptions.

There are a couple of dozen providers that could supply this at half the cost or less, and with a £25k lump sum this is more painful than a small regular investment.

Nothing wrong with the l&g product, but it's no better than similar funds from vanguard, black rock, fidelity HSBC etc and typically slightly more expensive, even without the additional nationwide charging layer.

zebra_2

Ah well, I'm glad their (alleged but in that case failed top up sales) tactics worked. 2 of the funds in the portfolio tanked. I wasn't paying proper attention until they brought that to my attention. Very good.

Darn, I don't have much insight from this thread about whether the "simpler" Primary fund is better than what they call a portfolio. Will have to ponder how to figure that out.

Cheers for the useful replies.

dunstonh

Darn, I don't have much insight from this thread about whether the "simpler" Primary fund is better than what they call a portfolio. Will have to ponder how to figure that out.

Its not a fund. Primary i the name they gave to their cut down fund range offering (copy and paste below):

Primary Investment Service – applied if you have access to a range of funds provided by Legal & General only. - 0.31%
Standard Platform Service – applied if you have access to the full range of funds from different fund managers. - 0.39%

So, yes its simpler and its a bit cheaper but not better as you will only have access to L&G funds. If all you want is L&G funds then I guess its ok.

However, you are still paying more for L&G funds than you would via the whole of market version with other providers.

One positive is that Nationwide will no longer be using the (N) tagged expensive funds. They are now using class C (superclean). However, here is an example if you used the L&G Mixed investment 0-35% Fund via them:

0.34% - for L&G fund charge
0.31% - platform charge
0.40% - Nationwide charge

That is crazy pricing considering it is not a full advice service but a directed service. You can buy the same L&G funds cheaper elsewhere on a DIY basis or via an IFA on full advice service. That 0.4% Nationwide charge is the killer.

bostonerimus

zebra wrote: »

I'm not a good one for DIY on so many confusing investment products: MEH. I spent ages trying to understand ETFs once -- what a waste of time. Barclays were clueless when I asked. My husband does a lot of stock buying which is enough in one family. We made a good profit on BP shares after Deep Horizon, mind, that was my astute call.

It pains me to say it, but I think you would benefit from some IFA advice. There might be some issues here. Do you know what your spouse is doing with the share trading?....that can be very risky. You have mentioned various funds bought over the years and are now being pushed towards L&G funds by Nationwide with little understanding of what you're buying or how much it will cost you. L&G funds are ok, but why are you buying them, and which ones will you buy? You need to do a full financial inventory, come up with a strategic plan and get your husband away from the stock trading site.

bigadaj

dunstonh wrote: »

Its not a fund. Primary i the name they gave to their cut down fund range offering (copy and paste below):

Primary Investment Service – applied if you have access to a range of funds provided by Legal & General only. - 0.31%
Standard Platform Service – applied if you have access to the full range of funds from different fund managers. - 0.39%

So, yes its simpler and its a bit cheaper but not better as you will only have access to L&G funds. If all you want is L&G funds then I guess its ok.

However, you are still paying more for L&G funds than you would via the whole of market version with other providers.

One positive is that Nationwide will no longer be using the (N) tagged expensive funds. They are now using class C (superclean). However, here is an example if you used the L&G Mixed investment 0-35% Fund via them:

0.34% - for L&G fund charge
0.31% - platform charge
0.40% - Nationwide charge

That is crazy pricing considering it is not a full advice service but a directed service. You can buy the same L&G funds cheaper elsewhere on a DIY basis or via an IFA on full advice service. That 0.4% Nationwide charge is the killer.

It's certainly expensive and poor but as an ifa could you really say the 0.4% charge is expensive?

The OP seeme to have invested £25k, so an ifa would typically want 3% set up and 1% ongoing, even then would many want to deal with someone on the basis of £750 upfront and £250-£300 a year ongoing?

The adviser has to make money but surely the sums involved here are just to small to benefit from advice.

A_T

dunstonh wrote: »

Nationwide do not monitor it. Nationwide have nothing to do with it apart from selling it to you.

This is true. I had some difficulty transferring a S&S ISA from "Nationwide". When I contacted them I was effectively told it was really nothing to do with them and I should contact Legal & General.

Alexland

All looks very expensive and I struggle to understand why people tie up their investments with high street banks when there are such superior and simpler options with Vanguard who will do platform and VLS fund for 0.37pc total.

I wouldn't invest too much time trying to determine which bad high street choice is better or least worse.

Apodemus

zebra wrote: »

Appropriate to my situation Q: NWide have done repeat long consultations about risk levels and financial planning (covers things like debt, pensions, retirement, other investments, income, future spending plans etc.). So if I couldn't think thru all that myself, they try to prompt me to.

Sounds like a marketing questionnaire to me! My bank sometimes asks similar questions, but it is all about product push, rather than financial advice.

dunstonh

It's certainly expensive and poor but as an ifa could you really say the 0.4% charge is expensive?

Yes. Because Nationwide Primary funds is not a full advice service. Its a self directed service. You could compare it to robo-advice options.

The OP seeme to have invested £25k, so an ifa would typically want 3% set up and 1% ongoing, even then would many want to deal with someone on the basis of £750 upfront and £250-£300 a year ongoing?

The OP doesnt need ongoing servicing. They have said they just want someone every 3-5 years. So, transactional is better. So, there would be no 1% p.a. IFA charge (and no 0.4% nationwide charge) but perhaps a £250-£500 charge every 3-5 years. As the OP likes L&G funds, the IFA could use L&G directly and cut out the cost of the platform (superclean share class is not available direct but its cheaper than platform plus superclean)

The adviser has to make money but surely the sums involved here are just to small to benefit from advice.

It could easily be cheaper. Certainly would be if the value was higher. However, the big problem would be finding an IFA willing to deal with someone with that sort of amount. You would be looking for a new IFA or trainee (although what the op wants is so basic, trainee is not a problem). Most IFAs are not going to be interested.

Another consideration is that the OP bought the investment pre-RDR. So, at purchase, it was bundled funds using the expensive (N) L&G funds. It is post RDR now and the Nationwide process is different. It has been dumbed down but they are still charging on an ongoing amount that is 0.1% lower than what they were on the pre-RDR stuff. However, the platform cost is more than 0.1% difference.

This is where robo-advice solutions are likely best in this scenario.