We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 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!
Vanguard Life Strategy 100% fund
Options
Comments
-
GeoffTF said:dunstonh said:Actively managed funds charge more the VLS, and usually have less diversified portfolios.No they don't. Take the HSBC GS range. Cheaper than VLS but slightly more active.
Although with VLS's decision to go underweight in some areas and overweight in others and remain rigid in the equity split are active decsions.
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.4 -
dunstonh said:GeoffTF said:dunstonh said:Actively managed funds charge more the VLS, and usually have less diversified portfolios.No they don't. Take the HSBC GS range. Cheaper than VLS but slightly more active.
Although with VLS's decision to go underweight in some areas and overweight in others and remain rigid in the equity split are active decsions.
https://www.hl.co.uk/funds/fund-discounts,-prices--and--factsheets/search-results/h/hsbc-global-strategy-balanced-portfolio-c-accumulation
1 -
The Vanguard OCFs are a little higher. It is not possible to compare the transaction costs, because there is no mandate for a common method of calculation. Nonetheless, volatility can change very quickly, so HSBC GS will probably have higher transaction costs.The lack of a common calculation method is a major flaw with TCs. However, currently, the MiFIDII reporting shows HSBC has lower TCs.Vanguard has a better reputation than HSBC. You pays your money and you takes your pick.That is a matter of opinion.
HSBC were offering trackers in the UK long before Vanguard came to the UK (mid 90s on UT/OEICs for HSBC vs 2009 for VG)
Most HSBC trackers are cheaper than equivalent Vanguard trackers (e.g. US equity is 0.06% for HSBC but 0.10% for VG
Most HSBC trackers outperform their Vanguard equivalent (pretty much by the margin of the charges difference (since vanguard launch, US is 664.62% for HSBC and 654.77% for Vanguard).
Vanguard are more successful in getting the internet brigade to use them than HSBC are. There is a cult behind Vanguard. That is noticeable by how hard some try to make out that they are the only game in town.
In the scheme of things, those differences are minuscule but it does show that internet opinion and reality don't always align.
In my own portfolio, I have HSBC, Vanguard, Fidelity & iShares trackers. I do not pray at the church of Vanguard.
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.7 -
dunstonh said:The Vanguard OCFs are a little higher. It is not possible to compare the transaction costs, because there is no mandate for a common method of calculation. Nonetheless, volatility can change very quickly, so HSBC GS will probably have higher transaction costs.The lack of a common calculation method is a major flaw with TCs. However, currently, the MiFIDII reporting shows HSBC has lower TCs.Vanguard has a better reputation than HSBC. You pays your money and you takes your pick.That is a matter of opinion.
HSBC were offering trackers in the UK long before Vanguard came to the UK (mid 90s on UT/OEICs for HSBC vs 2009 for VG)
Most HSBC trackers are cheaper than equivalent Vanguard trackers (e.g. US equity is 0.06% for HSBC but 0.10% for VG
Most HSBC trackers outperform their Vanguard equivalent (pretty much by the margin of the charges difference (since vanguard launch, US is 664.62% for HSBC and 654.77% for Vanguard -also indicates).
Vanguard are more successful in getting the internet brigade to use them than HSBC are. There is a cult behind Vanguard. That is noticeable by how hard some try to make out that they are the only game in town.
In the scheme of things, those differences are minuscule but it does show that internet opinion and reality don't always align.
In my own portfolio, I have HSBC, Vanguard, Fidelity & iShares trackers. I do not pray at the church of Vanguard.1 -
GeoffTF said:Many people see HSBC as serial miss-sellers and money launderers. Vanguard is clean on both of counts.6
-
Many people see HSBC as serial miss-sellers and money launderers. Vanguard is clean on both of counts.its worth noting that Vanguard have been fined multiple times for breaches by regulators. For example,
Finra fined Vanguard $350,000 in 2015 for reporting failures.
BaFin fined 290,000 euros in 2021 for breach of regulations.
In March 2021, it was reported that a Vanguard compliance manager altered and fabricated documents to a regulator seeking information about the firms "contingency plan for responding to system outages."
All the big companies get fined periodically for breaches. You would be hard pushed to find a single global financial company that hasn't had regulatory action at some point. Where you employ staff, it is inevitable that a staff member will let you down at some point.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.4 -
eskbanker said:GeoffTF said:Many people see HSBC as serial miss-sellers and money launderers. Vanguard is clean on both of counts.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/1071801/has-vanguard-lost-its-way
1 -
dunstonh said:GeoffTF said:dunstonh said:Actively managed funds charge more the VLS, and usually have less diversified portfolios.No they don't. Take the HSBC GS range. Cheaper than VLS but slightly more active.
Although with VLS's decision to go underweight in some areas and overweight in others and remain rigid in the equity split are active decsions.
They are clearly very similar, intended to fill the same gap in the market, behave similarly, are widely acknowledged as alternatives/competitors/substitutes... Yet you seem to be asserting they are entirely different?
Anyway, I don't use any multi-asset/funds of funds myself, nor do I "pray at the church of Vanguard" (ad hominem and straw manning in a single comment!) and I appreciate that retail investors have a variety of choice and this forum to help inform that choice.
0 -
GeoffTF said:dunstonh said:The Vanguard OCFs are a little higher. It is not possible to compare the transaction costs, because there is no mandate for a common method of calculation. Nonetheless, volatility can change very quickly, so HSBC GS will probably have higher transaction costs.The lack of a common calculation method is a major flaw with TCs. However, currently, the MiFIDII reporting shows HSBC has lower TCs.Vanguard has a better reputation than HSBC. You pays your money and you takes your pick.That is a matter of opinion.
HSBC were offering trackers in the UK long before Vanguard came to the UK (mid 90s on UT/OEICs for HSBC vs 2009 for VG)
Most HSBC trackers are cheaper than equivalent Vanguard trackers (e.g. US equity is 0.06% for HSBC but 0.10% for VG
Most HSBC trackers outperform their Vanguard equivalent (pretty much by the margin of the charges difference (since vanguard launch, US is 664.62% for HSBC and 654.77% for Vanguard -also indicates).
Vanguard are more successful in getting the internet brigade to use them than HSBC are. There is a cult behind Vanguard. That is noticeable by how hard some try to make out that they are the only game in town.
In the scheme of things, those differences are minuscule but it does show that internet opinion and reality don't always align.
In my own portfolio, I have HSBC, Vanguard, Fidelity & iShares trackers. I do not pray at the church of Vanguard.0 -
Thrugelmir said:GeoffTF said:dunstonh said:The Vanguard OCFs are a little higher. It is not possible to compare the transaction costs, because there is no mandate for a common method of calculation. Nonetheless, volatility can change very quickly, so HSBC GS will probably have higher transaction costs.The lack of a common calculation method is a major flaw with TCs. However, currently, the MiFIDII reporting shows HSBC has lower TCs.Vanguard has a better reputation than HSBC. You pays your money and you takes your pick.That is a matter of opinion.
HSBC were offering trackers in the UK long before Vanguard came to the UK (mid 90s on UT/OEICs for HSBC vs 2009 for VG)
Most HSBC trackers are cheaper than equivalent Vanguard trackers (e.g. US equity is 0.06% for HSBC but 0.10% for VG
Most HSBC trackers outperform their Vanguard equivalent (pretty much by the margin of the charges difference (since vanguard launch, US is 664.62% for HSBC and 654.77% for Vanguard -also indicates).
Vanguard are more successful in getting the internet brigade to use them than HSBC are. There is a cult behind Vanguard. That is noticeable by how hard some try to make out that they are the only game in town.
In the scheme of things, those differences are minuscule but it does show that internet opinion and reality don't always align.
In my own portfolio, I have HSBC, Vanguard, Fidelity & iShares trackers. I do not pray at the church of Vanguard.
4
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards