What AMC for pension ?

C_Mababejive

Im just wondering ,,and being no expert in such matters...i assume there is a link between total value of pot and the AMC from an IFA.

For a pot of circa 750k ,what would be a reasonable AMC or within what band? Is it possible to pay too little ?

Brynsam

The provider is the one who levies the AMC.

An IFA charges for advice - which can either be on an 'as needed' basis or as an ongoing percentage. Depends how much advice you need/want and what you agree with the IFA.

dunstonh

.i assume there is a link between total value of pot and the AMC from an IFA.

Since 2013, new business had no link between the adviser charge and what the provider charges (bar some special terms that may be possible but would apply at provider level and not adviser level).

For a pot of circa 750k ,what would be a reasonable AMC or within what band? Is it possible to pay too little ?

Its not that simple. If you want a passive portfolio it will be cheaper. If you want a hybrid portfolio then it will be a little more expensive. If you want fully active then more expensive still. I prefer hybrid but some people prefer passive or fully active. So, there is no right or wrong as long as it matches what you want.

I set up a pension at 0.34% all in today. i set up one last week at 1.7% all in. Different people, different investing styles and needs. The IFA should tailer to your needs (and not the other way around)

zagfles

C_Mababejive wrote: »

Im just wondering ,,and being no expert in such matters...i assume there is a link between total value of pot and the AMC from an IFA.

For a pot of circa 750k ,what would be a reasonable AMC or within what band? Is it possible to pay too little ?

Usually somewhere around 0.1-0.2% for passive and 0.5-0.7% for actively managed, though it will vary a lot. If you use an IFA, advice charges are on top, believe 0.5% is typical.

C_Mababejive

Yes, the reason why i ask is that i know of a good number of people now who have all signed up with the same IFA and the gossip is that he charges 1%,presumably this is all in and includes his annual input. So if they are all individuals,i wonder why they are all paying the same? Maybe its just because they are all the same type of people i,e employees /married/with family...

dunstonh

C_Mababejive wrote: »

Yes, the reason why i ask is that i know of a good number of people now who have all signed up with the same IFA and the gossip is that he charges 1%,presumably this is all in and includes his annual input. So if they are all individuals,i wonder why they are all paying the same? Maybe its just because they are all the same type of people i,e employees /married/with family...

IFAs are required to have published charges. So, you would expect consistency.

1% has increasingly become common for smaller investors. 0.5% is still dominant for larger amounts.

C_Mababejive

dunstonh wrote: »

IFAs are required to have published charges. So, you would expect consistency.

1% has increasingly become common for smaller investors. 0.5% is still dominant for larger amounts.

Thanks, i guess the obvious question is at what level one might expect a 0.5% charge to kick in and are intermediate stages common i.e 0.75..etc

dunstonh

C_Mababejive wrote: »

Thanks, i guess the obvious question is at what level one might expect a 0.5% charge to kick in and are intermediate stages common i.e 0.75..etc

Every firm is free to set its own pricing. There will be cheap ones and expensive ones.

Each firm will have its target market. Costs will vary. Some firms will be near capacity and their charges will reflect that. Others will be looking for business and price to attract it. It is similar to most businesses.