Iweb or Interactive Investor ?? - Range of Funds

purple_rose

Can anyone with a few years of experience dealing with platforms advise which platform is better when it comes to the range of funds available? Iweb or II?



Or put another way, are there any deficiencies in the range of funds available on Iweb.
eg. can't find the fund your looking for, only expensive classes, or, Initial charges on funds that don't exist on II.


Iam comparing these 2 platforms because iam looking for a flat fee provider and these seem to be the best.



Many thanks!

BLB53

If you know which funds you want to invest in, would it not be possible to search for them on the two platforms to see if they are available?

purple_rose

Yes it would but i want to have the best choice of funds ( in the future) and avoider higher spreads and loading fees etc and the fund list is slightly flexible to the platform chosen.

ColdIron

Modern funds (OEICs) do not have a price spread, some older funds (unit trusts) may have one but it will be the same regardless of the platform you choose. If by loading fees you mean an Initial Charge, they are almost unheard of these days. If you want the best choice of funds then you could look at Hargreaves Lansdown as they will have thousands of funds that you don't or won't want but you may pay a price for it

I don't use iWeb or ii but anecdotally iWeb would appear to have a slightly more limited range. However most people would decide what funds they want, or might want, first and then choose the platform with a charging structure that suits the sums involved and dealing frequency. Customer support and reliability also have a value

These should give you somewhere to start
https://www.ii.co.uk/funds/
https://www.markets.iweb-sharedealing.co.uk/funds-centre/fund-supermarket/

purple_rose

ColdIron wrote: »

Modern funds (OEICs) do not have a price spread, some older funds (unit trusts) may have one but it will be the same regardless of the platform you choose. If by loading fees you mean an Initial Charge, they are almost unheard of these days. If you want the best choice of funds then you could look at Hargreaves Lansdown as they will have thousands of funds that you don't or won't want but you may pay a price for it

I don't use iWeb or ii but anecdotally iWeb would appear to have a slightly more limited range. However most people would decide what funds they want, or might want, first and then choose the platform with a charging structure that suits the sums involved and dealing frequency. Customer support and reliability also have a value

These should give you somewhere to start
https://www.ii.co.uk/funds/
https://www.markets.iweb-sharedealing.co.uk/funds-centre/fund-supermarket/

On Spreads i was talking about ETF's - my miscommunication.


I would be interested to know what most peoples process is in terms of choosing funds (the detailed research) once they have decided the portfolio allocation generically.

dunstonh

I would be interested to know what most peoples process is in terms of choosing funds (the detailed research) once they have decided the portfolio allocation generically.

Beta vs Benchmark Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Beta vs Sector Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Historic Value at Risk Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Historic Value at Risk vs Benchmark Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Historic Value at Risk vs Sector Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Max Drawdown Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Max Drawdown vs Benchmark Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Max Drawdown vs Sector Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Volatility Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Volatility vs Benchmark Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Volatility vs Sector Risk 1, 3 & 5 Years
Alpha Manager Change Performance Once a year
Alpha vs Benchmark Performance 1, 3 & 5 Years
Alpha vs Sector Performance 1, 3 & 5 Years
Bottom Quartile Performance Measured over previous four quarters
Crown Rating Change Performance Twice a year
Return Performance 1, 3 & 5 Years
Return vs Benchmark Performance 1, 3 & 5 Years
Return vs Sector Performance 1, 3 & 5 Years
rSquared vs Benchmark Behaviour 1, 3 & 5 Years
rSquared vs Sector Behaviour 1, 3 & 5 Years
Tracking Error vs Benchmark Behaviour 1, 3 & 5 Years
Tracking Error vs Sector Behaviour 1, 3 & 5 Years
Asset Inflows/Outflows Structure As provided by provider
Benchmark Change Structure Constantly monitored
Group Change Structure Constantly monitored
Manager Change Structure Constantly monitored
Sector Change Structure Constantly monitored
TER Change Structure Constantly monitored

Weightings that fall within a target volatility range overall. Weightings provided by an actuary.
Funds that have at least 85% Asset weighting the chosen area.

(some of the above may not apply to all areas)

The calculations in the governance tool are re-run and examined at least once a week. Major issues are flagged up as red and minor ones as yellow. All new issues are recorded in the governance log. The issues are then distributed to the relevant analyst responsible for the monitoring of each particular fund.

An appropriate investigation is undertaken on each fund. This may include greater quantitative analysis of the fund or reviewing logs of previous meetings with the fund manager to see if they had forewarned of the change. If no explanation is readily available, the fund management group will be contacted to explain the anomaly. Once the investigation is completed, the analyst will summarise their findings. If they are still concerned by a fund, it is communicated to the head of research.

During the course of their investigations, the fund analysts may identify funds they believe will need careful monitoring. These funds will be added to the internal watch-list. It will be the analysts’ responsibility to regularly monitor such funds until they are happy the original issue is resolved. If they have immediate concerns regarding the continued suitability of the fund, it will be assigned the status of “critical” and escalated to the highest level.

The investment committee is involved in the governance process if the analysts identify a critical issue with a fund. At this point, based on the governance tool and the analysts’ findings, the committee’s members will need to make a decision on the fund’s continued participation in the Approved List. If they are not satisfied, they can remove it from the list.

....well you did ask

purple_rose

Wow. thanks.

So i assume is these are metrics a fund looks at when analysing its own fund ( including a fund of funds).

What governance tools are available for a every day joe to do this sort of analysis? (more interested in the free ones if there are any)

What does the below mean?
- Weightings that fall within a target volatility range overall.
- Weightings provided by an actuary.
- Funds that have at least 85% Asset weighting the chosen area.


For the metrics where its - X vs Y (e.g.Historic Value at Risk vs Sector Risk) - i guess it gives a ratio. Is there any guidance on what a good/bad ratio number is for all those metrics?


I didn't see the P/E ratio in there is it covered somewhere?

bearshare

Shame that Past performance is not a guide to future performance,, isn't it?

purple_rose

bearshare wrote: »

Shame that Past performance is not a guide to future performance,, isn't it?

Yes i see your point. So whats your method/process..?

aroominyork

Back to the OP's original question, when recently leaving HL I looked at iWeb and II funds and found II much better - iWeb seemed a bit pick and mix.

purple_rose

aroominyork wrote: »

Back to the OP's original question, when recently leaving HL I looked at iWeb and II funds and found II much better - iWeb seemed a bit pick and mix.

Theres been technical problems with the research>fund page and the research>etf's page (not just the research site) for the last few days and reading general comments about the IT situation there at the moment doesn't really fill me with confidence they have the new system fixed yet. Otherwise they would be the first choice.