Should I have different funds?

Cruixer

ColdIron said:

Cruixer said:

Thanks for this recommendation. Unfortunately this fund does not appear to be available on Iweb.

It is available. Look in the Funds Centre. There are 5 portfolios. This is the Balanced one
https://www.markets.iweb-sharedealing.co.uk/funds-centre/fund-supermarket/detail/GB00B76WP695

Thanks for this.

I had looked in the funds centre, and searched for HSBC Global Strategy and HSBC Global, and it doesn't come up, which is strange, because I can see it in the link you provided although still can't find it by searching! 

Expotter

ColdIron said:

Cruixer said:

dealyboy said:

Hello @Cruixer ...

To go back to your original question, you might want to explore HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic (Acc or Inc) as an alternative to VLS80, available on all good platforms.

It is a multi asset actively managed fund that operates without the UK bias with a predominantly risk-on weighting to achieve results in a 10 year time frame. Costs and performance are similar to VLS but that is not guaranteed of course.

Have a look at the factsheets and you will see that HSBC Global Strategy funds take a different approach to Vanguard LS ... https://www.trustnet.com/factsheets/o/g1hh/hsbc-global-strategy-dynamic-portfolio-c-acc

Thanks for this recommendation. Unfortunately this fund does not appear to be available on Iweb.

It is available. Look in the Funds Centre. There are 5 portfolios. This is the Balanced one
https://www.markets.iweb-sharedealing.co.uk/funds-centre/fund-supermarket/detail/GB00B76WP695

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this fund more akin to a Vanguard lifestrategy 60 with a bias towards the US rather than the UK?
https://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/funds/snapshot/snapshot.aspx?id=F00000OOBL&tab=3

ColdIron

Cruixer said:

ColdIron said:

Cruixer said:

Thanks for this recommendation. Unfortunately this fund does not appear to be available on Iweb.

It is available. Look in the Funds Centre. There are 5 portfolios. This is the Balanced one
https://www.markets.iweb-sharedealing.co.uk/funds-centre/fund-supermarket/detail/GB00B76WP695

Thanks for this.

I had looked in the funds centre, and searched for HSBC Global Strategy and HSBC Global, and it doesn't come up, which is strange, because I can see it in the link you provided although still can't find it by searching! 

IWeb's search function is, well, idiosyncratic at best. If you choose 'HSBC Gbl Asset Mgt' in the Fund Provider drop down you can see the available funds

Might be of interest
https://www.hsbc.co.uk/investments/products/hsbc-global-strategy-portfolios/

ColdIron

Expotter said:

ColdIron said:

Cruixer said:

dealyboy said:

Hello @Cruixer ...

To go back to your original question, you might want to explore HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic (Acc or Inc) as an alternative to VLS80, available on all good platforms.

It is a multi asset actively managed fund that operates without the UK bias with a predominantly risk-on weighting to achieve results in a 10 year time frame. Costs and performance are similar to VLS but that is not guaranteed of course.

Have a look at the factsheets and you will see that HSBC Global Strategy funds take a different approach to Vanguard LS ... https://www.trustnet.com/factsheets/o/g1hh/hsbc-global-strategy-dynamic-portfolio-c-acc

Thanks for this recommendation. Unfortunately this fund does not appear to be available on Iweb.

It is available. Look in the Funds Centre. There are 5 portfolios. This is the Balanced one
https://www.markets.iweb-sharedealing.co.uk/funds-centre/fund-supermarket/detail/GB00B76WP695

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this fund more akin to a Vanguard lifestrategy 60 with a bias towards the US rather than the UK?
https://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/funds/snapshot/snapshot.aspx?id=F00000OOBL&tab=3

You are probably right, I just chose the middle one for illustration. The Dynamic portfolio may be closer to VLS80

Cruixer

Thanks all for your replies, it has been very useful.

I ended up comparing 5 funds, the HSBC Global Strategy one recommended by dealyboy, 3 I took from the moneyweek top 10 and the vanguard one I already have, more for reference than anything, as I had already decided I would buy a different fund this time.

It wasn't very easy to do comparisons on Iweb but I found the FT tool better for this - https://markets.ft.com/data/funds/uk/compare

HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic ...	Fundsmith Equity I Acc	Fidelity Index World Fund P Accumulati...	HSBC FTSE All-World Index Fund ...	Vanguard LifeStrategy 80%

I understood from Albermarle that fundsmith is a managed fund, the fund manager trying to beat the markets, but comparing the 1, 3 and 5 year returns it didn't seem like it was consistently better than the other share based options, but with much higher fees.

While I am veering towards the HSBC Global Strategy Dynamic as a similar option to my LF80, I am also considering the HSBC FTSE All-World Index Fund as an alternative. 20% of the £80k I have already invested is bonds through the LF80, so it might be worth the slightly higher risk on a share only tracker in the hope of a slightly higher return. I don't expect I will be looking to cash this in for at least 10 years, so hopefully that should be enough to even off the bumps.

Thanks again for all the help.

Albermarle

fundsmith is a managed fund, the fund manager trying to beat the markets, but comparing the 1, 3 and 5 year returns it didn't seem like it was consistently better than the other share based options, but with much higher fees.

Investment returns are quoted after fees are deducted.

Expotter

Here's a link to a video about picking funds you might find useful ( I did anyway) by James Shack

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16bauiT1F20

gm0

OP - I am probably one of the more vocal deliberate "hedgers" here.

I apply platform, fund manager, investment strategy hedging i.e. more than one approach is used for everything I do.

On portions of the pot.  Captured by the principle in my investment statment "not all eggs in any one basket". 

I don't trust myself as a novice amateur - portfolio design and fund selection and monitoring. 
And I don't trust any of them not to screw up at some point. 
I am unconvinced government will have my back on a timely basis. 
History does not suggest this is the case.
The rest is details

So I use more than one pension provider platform
And when I hold assets - even global developed equities passively - I use more than one fund management house and chunk it up.  It costs the same.
My portfolio has more than one design philosophy at work to the extent it adds to and tilts away from a simple global passive

There is a small premium in £ to be paid for this - I hold the cheapest things (that I want) per fees structure per platform, fund charges are equal, so it's the 2nd capped platform fee - £45 pa for me.  And there is added complexity in that there are multiple logins and multiple pots and at rebalancing. 

This is the insurance premium for "half" the pot to be inside and half outside any single problem with one of the actors. Assuming they are not using the exact same IT applications or infrastructure - and the problem is down in there - you can't cover every eventuality.

How much of my pot or income is affected by a major unexpected issue happening is halved. 
The probablity of being with an affected provider has risen by using two. 
Both mainstream.

Legal perspective:

Protection can be 100% (insured funds - often found in occupational pensions)

Or 85k value (SIPP platform consumer protection)

In fact the SIPP fund investments should be held separately and properly at registrars - so you *should* get 100% anyway and the 85k isn't a real limit.

Neither protection approach - the insured fund and trust deed one or SIPP has been fully tested with a large scale major failure.  Lawsuits and delays can be expected.  Attempts during smaller SIPP platform failure have been made to get investors to pay insolvency costs (where a platform had illiquid and offshore stuff harder to sort out). But that fee earning gambit failed last time.

So you will (most likely) get your money back.  
So the approach described above is mitigating the IMPACT of a very low probability risk where even if it does happen to you - after a delay - it turns out OK in the end.

You can expect in a high profile failure there to be an access delay, IT issues etc. going on for months - while it is moved somewhere else and everybody involved in the failure shovels blame and liability and sues one another.  And consumers raise a zillion complaints which then need processing. 

So if this is all your income or all your investments that is something to consider rather than the theoretical legal protection.

I choose to mitigate the risk impact and accept the complexity.  Many others take the opposite view that it's fine and simplicity is golden.  Neither approach is "wrong".

Cruixer

Albermarle said:

fundsmith is a managed fund, the fund manager trying to beat the markets, but comparing the 1, 3 and 5 year returns it didn't seem like it was consistently better than the other share based options, but with much higher fees.

Investment returns are quoted after fees are deducted.

I thought that was probably the case, but what I meant was, why pay higher fees if the outcome is not much different. It seems like the higher fees might present a higher cost risk in the event that the fund doesn't outperform the market.

GeoffTF

More to the point perhaps: "Vanguard LifeStrategy Funds Explained | The only fund you will ever need":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGQ9KyQq8Jw