DC to drawdown

shinytop

SonOf wrote: »

HSBC GS balanced is a cracking fund. Well diversified. It is actually an unfettered fund of funds but has a high quantity of HSBC trackers at the moment as HSBC trackers are some of the best going at the moment.

The diversification is fine. For anyone under £100k, this is a perfect fund.

At the risk of hijacking this thread, would it necessarily become less suitable for larger amounts? Is it the value itself or what the fund is likely to be used for (e.g. the entirety of a retirement pot, top up to a DB, etc.)? My thoughts are if I'm going to have a multi-asset fund with a certain risk profile, why not let HSBC, with all its resources, decide what's in it?

bostonerimus

shinytop wrote: »

At the risk of hijacking this thread, would it necessarily become less suitable for larger amounts? Is it the value itself or what the fund is likely to be used for (e.g. the entirety of a retirement pot, top up to a DB, etc.)? My thoughts are if I'm going to have a multi-asset fund with a certain risk profile, why not let HSBC, with all its resources, decide what's in it?

I agree. If he HSBC fund meets your asset allocation requirements why not use it. It's not an "income fund" so you'd have to take a total return approach and also include a cash buffer.

SonOf

Based on the OPs post's I would worry about their perceived knowledge and skills in investing.

Yes. That would be my concern too. Saying you are experienced is one thing but the adviser would be testing that by asking questions. If the responses indicate knowledge is not what they say it is, then it would put the adviser on guard. This is of particular concern if its a DB transfer where the person wants to do their own investments.

At the risk of hijacking this thread, would it necessarily become less suitable for larger amounts?

It wouldnt become less suitable. However, larger investors often look for something more.

[Deleted User]

I don’t like the fund’s “dynamic asset allocation” approach and I can see one wanting a little more control and flexibility but nothing’s wrong with HSBC’s global portfolios’ diversification. In fact, it’s hard to imagine anything that is better diversified.

The fund is also cost efficient @19 bp OCF. The IFA recommendation of the fund is reasonable but I really struggle to see how he can justify 0.65% fee to advise “do nothing” annually.

cloud_dog

Nothing to stop them going with the IFA for the first year and then just transfer to another PP/SIPP; consider the additional one years 0.65% as part of the cost of achieving what they want to achieve. I'm unsure the OP is as aware of investing as they believe they are but, it is their choice.

Victor_Meldrew

Deleted_User wrote: »

The fund is also cost efficient @19 bp OCF. The IFA recommendation of the fund is reasonable but I really struggle to see how he can justify 0.65% fee to advise “do nothing” annually.

It would cost me £2.4k in first year and according to their own calculations £46.2k over 20 years! If I didn't use the IFA and invested in the HSBC fund I would be this amount better off. That is a scandalous amount of money for advice?

For those that think I am not a good investor, well maybe I'm not, just experienced (If anyone knows for certain which funds/shares will outperform in the future please drop me a line!). But without IFA charges I'd say I stand a good chance of beating their advice. I didn't say the HSBC was a bad investment (and it may be one I'd invest a percentage in), I meant it wasn't diversified enough to put all the pension in one fund regardless of how diversified that fund is - what happens if HSBC have problems? It's certainly happened before. Wouldn't you want to be invested in a range of managers?

Victor_Meldrew

shinytop wrote: »

My thoughts are if I'm going to have a multi-asset fund with a certain risk profile, why not let HSBC, with all its resources, decide what's in it?

Sorry didn't read that right. Ignore this.

bostonerimus

Victor_Meldrew wrote: »

. Wouldn't you want to be invested in a range of managers?

No, and I'm not. The vast majority of my money is with Vanguard.

You should set up your portfolio with asset allocation in mind, that could come from a single multi-asset fund, a few index trackers, some active funds or a mix of all those. You would not want to invest everything in a single actively managed fund with little diversity as that would expose you to too much market risk, Woodford is a good example of the negative effects of that and Fundsmith is an example of that working out well - so far. Still neither would be good to hold as the only fund in a portfolio. But HSBC Global is a big diverse fund of funds and so there's no problem in having it as your only fund. There's also no chance of you losing money if HSBC goes broke as your shares are held in trust for you and the fund is a separate legal entity from HSBC. Also if your platform goes broke your mutual funds are still ok.

[Deleted User]

Does the 0.65% include the Platform fee?
How is it broken down?

Victor_Meldrew

Deleted_User wrote: »

Does the 0.65% include the Platform fee?
How is it broken down?

Annual management = 0.24%
Platform fee = 0.19%
IFA fee = 0.65%
Total 1.08%

There are also further charges
Annual Income drawdown = £129 +vat
Income withdrawal setup = £100+vat
Annual Admin charge = £184 (not sure this applies - woolly definition)