Career Change

bottleandahalf

Hi folks.
Just a quick query for some of the financially qualified.
I'm due to start an MSc in Global Investment Management next year - at 40. My undergrad degree was in Social Policy and Criminology. I eventually want to work towards an IFA; but plan to work towards a paraplanner in the first instance to gain experience and the skills required.
My main query is whether I should do the actual MSc which will have a work placement with 1 of the investment/ accountancy firms/ banks in Belfast at a cost of £6100. Or should I study independently towards Certificate in Paraplanning with CII which works out about £1200, or even the DipFA with LIBF at £800?
I don't want to fork out £6100 if I can independently study at a lower cost but do realise that it could be hard to gain employment without the work experience the placement would give me.
Thanks

dunstonh

I eventually want to work towards an IFA;

May be better to focus on the qualifications an IFA will need then. That will take a few years and the MSc isnt really going to help you much. You could find yourself getting towards 50 and not there.

We have just taken on a young paraplanner to train from scratch and they are on a 5 year plan to get trained and qualified. So, I would get your skates on that side of things. If you like doing exams, then there are always the chartered level qualifications after.

HappyHarry

I'll second what dunstonh says above. There seems little point in studying for an MSc which isn't the required qualification to be an IFA.

Though paraplanning is often seen as a route to becoming an IFA, they are different roles, and a slightly different set of skills is required. There is nothing wrong with becoming a paraplanner first, and you will get a good grounding in the basics, but it isn't a necessary step.

The CII Diploma in Regulated Financial Planning is the most popular qualification set for new advisers, with the LIBF DipFA being the second most popular. The CII route tends to be more technical, and 'book-based', the LIBF route tends to be more about putting concepts into practice (in my opinion). Either will provide the necessary qualification level.

bottleandahalf

Thanks a million for the replies Dunstonh and Harry, I really appreciate it.
As I have no experience in working in the financial field as of yet, will it still be OK to go ahead and start on the chartered route without the experience the masters will give me?
I'm thinking of trying to get experience in financial administration through agencies and entry level administration work to get me started but financial work is scarce around my local area.

dunstonh

If you go down the CII route (which is who I use) then dont get the publications in ebook form. I am doing a further qualification at the moment and this is my first ebook (the others being paper) and its horrendous.

I thought the ability to read it on an Ipad and add comments and save bookmarks etc would be great. However, I found it made me tired quicker, the pages were not well formatted and the study updates couldnt be inserted to replace pages. I will be back to paper study books for the next one.

that maybe an individual learning style but remember that the study books on each subject are usually hundreds of pages and Sometimes into the thousand. You are going to spend a lot of time in them so get them in the format that works for you.

HappyHarry

dunstonh wrote: »

If you go down the CII route (which is who I use) then dont get the publications in ebook form. I am doing a further qualification at the moment and this is my first ebook (the others being paper) and its horrendous.

I thought the ability to read it on an Ipad and add comments and save bookmarks etc would be great. However, I found it made me tired quicker, the pages were not well formatted and the study updates couldnt be inserted to replace pages. I will be back to paper study books for the next one.

that maybe an individual learning style but remember that the study books on each subject are usually hundreds of pages and Sometimes into the thousand. You are going to spend a lot of time in them so get them in the format that works for you.

Seconded. So much easier with a book.

Mind you, that may just be an age thing

bottleandahalf

I prefer the books too as find it easier to highlight etc. Usually turn off blue light on tablet when reading for long spells.

I have decided to take on the MSc and see where that takes me. It is pretty intensive so I will be able to cover a lot of areas and decide upon which area to specialise in then.

IFA seems to be a lot of client facing work and communicating ideas and advice, so will take me a while to work on those skills if indeed I still want to pursue this path after the MSc.

I have started the IOC from CISI on the advice from my tutor to build a basic foundation before I start my studies in September.

Alexland

The client facing work might reduce if the Robos continue to develop?

https://www.ftadviser.com/your-industry/2018/05/17/wealth-wizards-developing-talking-robo-adviser/

Alex

dunstonh

Alexland wrote: »

The client facing work might reduce if the Robos continue to develop?

https://www.ftadviser.com/your-industry/2018/05/17/wealth-wizards-developing-talking-robo-adviser/

Alex

If you look at the cost of robo-advice, it is generally the same as full advice as far as ongoing costs are concerned. I did a case last week with 0.34% ongoing charges (all in) with a £500 fee. That compares with Nutmeg charging 1.05% p.a. with no initial fee.

Its only the initial that is cheaper but at three times the annual cost, the roboadvice option will be more expensive within a number of years.

Robo-advice doesnt give full consumer protection and still requires consumers to choose. Its a bit of a misname really. Guided investment may be better.

General trend is that robo-advice is picking up the small stuff that IFAs dont want (or cant afford to service any more). Larger investors are not gaining much at all or anything from robo-advice.

Malthusian

Alexland wrote: »

The client facing work might reduce if the Robos continue to develop?

Entirely the opposite. Today's robo-sales clients are the next decade's IFA clients. Once they have built up a sufficiently large fund in their robo-sales account, they will want to start getting full advice, for largely the same cost as they are paying the robo-floggers.

As DunstonH says, robo-sales outfits are getting the clients for whom it isn't cost-effective (for either side) to use an IFA. They aren't competing with IFAs. Not very well anyway.

Alexland

I agree the current generation of Robos are not going to make much dent in the IFA business but with investment (the technology already exists) it should be possible to deliver mass market advice tailored for a greater range of personal circumstances at a low cost.