We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Risk with having high portfolio % with one provider?
Options
Shocking_Blue
Posts: 322 Forumite
Dear all,
Currently have around 45% of my portfolio with VLS. Am considering putting some £ into Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (GBP) | VWRL, which would bump it up to 60% of portfolio in Vanguard funds. Just wondering if there is any risk or reason against having such a % with one provider.
Thanks in advance.
1
Comments
-
I think it depends how large your portfolio is. If your portfolio is up to say £100k I would say okay to have most of it with one large provider, but if significantly more than that I would personally wouldn't have it all with the one provider or on one platform.3
-
With a smaller fund manager I would be cautious about exceeding £85k by too much, but if Vanguard goes belly-up then we will be experiencing a global cataclysm akin to WWIII.
Our portfolios are split across two platforms in order to access cash should either experience a system melt-down, but I have around 70% of my portfolio invested with Vanguard (well in excess of the protected £85k). I accept the tiny risk for the sake of simplicity of management.
2 -
My wife and I have virtually all our investments (apart from some savings and BTL's) with HL, what is the risk? Is it that if they went under, investments would be safe, but they might be an access issue until some other company is appointed to administer the investments?Audaxer said:I think it depends how large your portfolio is. If your portfolio is up to say £100k I would say okay to have most of it with one large provider, but if significantly more than that I would personally wouldn't have it all with the one provider or on one platform.Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one birdThe only time Chuck Norris was wrong was when he thought he had made a mistakeChuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".I've started running again, after several injuries had forced me to stop1 -
Is IWeb considered a "large" provider? My portfolio there is worth almost 100K.
It is a concern I have considered before but don't really want loads of platforms to manage. I have HL aswell but nowhere near as much.1 -
Iweb is owned by Halifax who are owned by Lloyds Bank. So I guess it is one of the safest platforms around.DennisTenus said:Is IWeb considered a "large" provider? My portfolio there is worth almost 100K.
It is a concern I have considered before but don't really want loads of platforms to manage. I have HL aswell but nowhere near as much.0 -
Currently have around 45% of my portfolio with VLS. Am considering putting some £ into Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (GBP) | VWRL, which would bump it up to 60% of portfolio in Vanguard funds. Just wondering if there is any risk or reason against having such a % with one provider.
ETFs get no FSCS protection. VLS gets you £85k per fund house.
Worrying about risk with one provider whilst using ETFs is largely pointless. You are using ETFs.
Is IWeb considered a "large" provider? My portfolio there is worth almost 100K.No, Iweb is not a large provider with only £3.1bn under management. However, it is part of Lloyds Banking Group.
£100k is not a large portfolio in platform terms.
I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.3 -
I was considering buying more in IWeb or even transferring from HL due to their charges. Is this not advisable due to the size of my portfolio there?
So each Fund has 85K protection?0 -
This has been discussed dozens of time in thiss forum. The £85K cover is pretty irrelevent for mainstream platforms and mainstream funds, particularly ETFs, as it is difficult to think of a realistic circumstance where it would come into effect. With banks when you deposit your money you are in effect lending the money to the bank. All you own is a promise from the bank to pay it back on request. That promise may not be worth anything if the bank goes bust.DennisTenus said:I was considering buying more in IWeb or even transferring from HL due to their charges. Is this not advisable due to the size of my portfolio there?
So each Fund has 85K protection?
Investments are very different, they stay legally in your ownership. The platform and fund manager just have the right to manage them on your behalf within their remit. They cannot be used to pay their debts.
Most (all) larger investors in this forum, including me, are happy to hold nX£100Ks on a single platform.5 -
More likely to suffer a 100% loss in an investment, due to fraud i.e. Wirecard.0
-
So each Fund has 85K protection?
£85k per fund house. not fund. And no FSCS protection on ETFs.
I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.2
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards