Another (but different) DB Transfer Topic

BritishInvestor

JohnTbye said:

Thanks for the comments, you sum up the situation pretty well. I am not experienced although my advisor and I are fully aligned that I am looking for low risk. My proposal was to focus on low risk and lower cost options .
Appreciate if you could expand on the comments regarding the Pru funds to help me understand.
I have no plans to change investments every month but would like to keep options open to avoid continued investment in poorly performing funds.
 Again, I agree my experience is limited but I have also carried out enough investigations to understand that there are many dogs out there.

"although my advisor and I are fully aligned that I am looking for low risk"
The biggest risk in retirement can be running out of money, for which the traditional perception of "low risk" (investments with low volatility) might not be the optimal choice. Your adviser should be able to tell you how much "risk" you need to take as well as establish how much "risk" you are happy taking.
Education in this area is a key adviser role IMO. 

AnotherJoe

JohnTbye said:

Thanks for the comments, you sum up the situation pretty well. I am not experienced although my advisor and I are fully aligned that I am looking for low risk.

Well why on Earth do you think you can anticipate crashes better than professionals? (who, as it happens, can't) 

JohnTbye

To be clear, the plan is still to work alongside my advisor and agree on funds.
My questions were more to get comments from others more qualified than me on the strategy of going forward with Pru against other lower cost competitors. I am aware that there are many variables here regarding funds and future performance.

[Deleted User]

Which Pru fund has been earmarked by your IFA  for you, JohnTbye?

AnotherJoe

JohnTbye said:

To be clear, the plan is still to work alongside my advisor and agree on funds.
My questions were more to get comments from others more qualified than me on the strategy of going forward with Pru against other lower cost competitors. I am aware that there are many variables here regarding funds and future performance.

You aren't stuck with the Pru indefinitely. It may be necessary to go with them initially to make your adviser comfortable with the idea of you moving because if it's  clear from the outset you just want to go all cash then his recommendation may be different. 

After a while if you come up witha better idea you can discuss that with your adviser. But given your apparent predilection to run for the hills and sell everything the first time you read a headline there's a dip coming, I'd imagine it's a very cautious fund. Which comes with a trade off. Cake and eat it springs to mind, don't expect a managed fund aimed at cautious individuals at the same price as a self selected one with no particular risk rating and no management.  

ukdw

Pru is not the only traditional provider available. Worth asking your advisor if there are any other cheaper traditional advisor managed options - like for example Royal London. 

Also whilst in theory having an ongoing advisor costs a fair bit of money, my understanding (based on listening to podcasts like Maven Advisor and Meaningful Money) is that one of their most important jobs is protecting clients from reacting to market movements or press predictions. 

BritishInvestor

ukdw said:

Pru is not the only traditional provider available. Worth asking your advisor if there are any other cheaper traditional advisor managed options - like for example Royal London. 

Also whilst in theory having an ongoing advisor costs a fair bit of money, my understanding (based on listening to podcasts like Maven Advisor and Meaningful Money) is that one of their most important jobs is protecting clients from reacting to market movements or press predictions. 

Very true. And in addition, it's about creating a robust financial plan rather than focus on funds - something which Pete and Andy are very hot on.

dunstonh

Pru is not the only traditional provider available. Worth asking your advisor if there are any other cheaper traditional advisor managed options - like for example Royal London. 

The only real reason for using the Pru is to utilise the Prufund.   Royal London do not have a fund that is comparable to the Pru fund.

Appreciate if you could expand on the comments regarding the Pru funds to help me understand.

Which versions of the Prufund are being recommended?      

What you are discussing on this thread is important information the adviser needs to be aware of.  If you feel the prufund is inappropriate then your adviser needs to know this and why you think it.  The best adviser-client relationships are when communication is good.

Marcon

Yet another poster who thinks strangers with next to no knowledge of their situation, attitude to risk, etc are somehow going to come up with better-informed responses than an adviser who has (at least one would hope) got all relevant facts at their fingertips...

Albermarle

Marcon said:

Yet another poster who thinks strangers with next to no knowledge of their situation, attitude to risk, etc are somehow going to come up with better-informed responses than an adviser who has (at least one would hope) got all relevant facts at their fingertips...

We often say to posters that even if you employ an IFA , it is better to have some knowledge yourself , to get the most out of the relationship or to avoid being blinded by science. To this end we provide pointers, weblinks etc .
On the other side ( like here ) somebody has already engaged an IFA and paying them but asks detailed questions on here instead of, or in addition to,  asking their IFA, who actually knows the details of their situation.  Sort of checking up if their IFA's suggestions are valid. 

It's a fine line between the two.