What's wrong with vanguard lifestrategy?

enthusiasticsaver

65% of my portfolio and 40% of my husbands is with Vanguard LS60. The UK bias (around 25%) doesn't bother us. We both have income portfolios across Artemis monthly distribution and Premier multi asset income and they both have around 20-25% UK bias. For every investor who likes the Vanguard lifestrategy funds there is one who prefers active funds, ones that have less of a home bias, include property. It is an individual choice in the same way people choose cars, white goods or bank accounts. Nothing inherently wrong with it if it matches your risk profile and fits within your overall investment strategy.

funguy

Alexland wrote: »

Across all my investments I am roughly 70% equities with some UK bias, 10% corporate bonds, 10% government bonds and 10% cash. So a similar level of cash to the L&G MI risk managed fund series. Probably equivilent to 'VLS75' level of market exposure. I am not making any big swings in allocation as a result of my view on market fundamentals.

Thank you - I will probably look to balance my VLS80 with VLS60 to bring my exposure down to a similar level too. :beer:

Alexland

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Seems to me if you are allocating based on "market fundamentals" then where's the logic in using passive investments, since you'll be chopping and changing all the time so might as well go all in on managed and specialist funds ?

Mostly cost and spreading eggs - my two pensions run at an average fund+platform cost of 0.31% (one a bit higher, one a bit lower) and there are no trade costs or time out the market for switching trackers in my workplace pension.

Otherwise I would prefer to stick it all in the L&G MI 6 (a bit less equities and a bit more 'other') but that fund is unavailable in either of my schemes and the fund fee alone is 0.31% without paying the platform costs. I have no idea on if the L&G returns would be any different to my returns in future but doing it myself is enabling me to spread my risk across 2 platforms and multiple fund managers and keep charges low.

Alex.

Alexland

funguy wrote: »

Thank you - I will probably look to balance my VLS80 with VLS60 to bring my exposure down to a similar level too. :beer:

Please don't do what some random on the Internet thinks - do what you think is right for your volatility tolerance, interpretation of the theory and history, view of the market and intended investment period.

funguy

Alexland wrote: »

Please don't do what some random on the Internet thinks - do what you think is right for your volatility tolerance, interpretation of the theory and history, view of the market and intended investment period.

Sorry i didnt phrase that right - it was what i was planning to do anyway - i just meant you had a similar train of thought.

bowlhead99

Alexland wrote: »

TheShape wrote: »

I've decided to go with HL for my LISA. The Blackrock fund appears to have a charge of 0.10% with HL.

B]Thank you[/B] that's new information to me - looks like HL have negotiated a discount. I agree that's very attractive .

Alexland wrote: »

Otherwise I would prefer to stick it all in the L&G MI 6 (a bit less equities and a bit more 'other') but that fund is unavailable in either of my schemes and the fund fee alone is 0.31% without paying the platform costs. I have no idea on if the L&G returns would be any different to my returns in future but doing it myself is enabling me to spread my risk across 2 platforms and multiple fund managers and keep charges low.

FWIW, HL have been offering the various denominations of Blackrock Consensus with a discount for some years now, my dad has it as some padding in his ISA with them.

It's one of the few at HL that has a healthy discount rate but doesn't make it into their marketing "wealth 150+" list, presumably on the basis that having an all in one product for such a low price highlighted in a prominent part of their website would distract customers away from paying higher management fee percentages to buy active single sector funds, and devalue the proposition that HL's high platform charges are worth it because of all the 'research' they offer 'for free'. [/cynic mode]

Still, the discounts at HL are quite important because of the size of their fees for the fund platform. If you can get Consensus for 0.1% that's still 0.55% in total at HL including platform fee with no throttling / scaling back until you have over £250k with them. Whereas at other percentage-based places such as Cavendish, Charles Stanley Direct, AJ Bell Youinvest you can afford (say) 0.25% for platform/custody and then 0.25-0.3% for the management fees with any of V Lifestrategy, BR Consensus, L&G Multi Index, HSBC Global strategy etc for same ballpark total cost.

Alexland

bowlhead99 wrote: »

Still, the discounts at HL are quite important because of the size of their fees for the fund platform. If you can get Consensus for 0.1% that's still 0.55% in total at HL including platform fee with no throttling / scaling back until you have over £250k with them. Whereas at other percentage-based places such as Cavendish, Charles Stanley Direct, AJ Bell Youinvest you can afford (say) 0.25% for platform/custody and then 0.25-0.3% for the management fees with any of V Lifestrategy, BR Consensus, L&G Multi Index, HSBC Global strategy etc for same ballpark total cost.

Thanks but unfortunately for those of us in the LISA market we don't have as much choice as the ISA market so end up paying higher fees - our 'cheap' choices are basically Nutmeg (0.45% + 0.17%), HL (0.45% + 0.10% Blackrock) or AJB (0.25% + £1.50 trade costs + >=0.19% HSBC GS, 0.22% VLS or a global tracker) for now.

Once we get enough years of £4k +£1k bonus contributions we can move onto ETFs where the AJB and HL costs are capped and if we can keep the number of trades down it starts getting very cheap.

mr_munchem

Alexland wrote: »

Thanks but unfortunately for those of us in the LISA market we don't have as much choice as the ISA market so end up paying higher fees - our 'cheap' choices are basically Nutmeg (0.45% + 0.17%), HL (0.45% + 0.10% Blackrock) or AJB (0.25% + £1.50 trade costs + >=0.19% HSBC GS or 0.22% VLS) for now.

And HL cap at £45 a year too I believe? I'll personally be starting my S&S Lisa after my mortgage offer is here with HL and might consider the discounted Blackrock!
It's good to see some younger people investing; I feel like I'm the only 20 year old that does!

ColdIron

mr_munchem wrote: »

And HL cap at £45 a year too I believe?

For Investment Trusts, company shares, ETFs etc, but not for funds such as those being discussed,

bowlhead99

Alexland wrote: »

Thanks but unfortunately for those of us in the LISA market we don't have as much choice as the ISA market.

Yes I had forgotten you were talking about LISA, sorry. AJB would generally be a decent bet (with their 0.25% plus £6 a year assuming you split your £4k allowance across four quarterly purchases); but if you already have lots of other money with AJB and want to sample others' services (or are worried about platform risk) then I suppose HL is better than Nutmeg from the perspective that you can select the fund manager of your choice rather than hope that Nutmeg's allocations are good.

Still, fees are not everything. Good luck with it all (and to OP)!