What are your annual costs?

UncleK

Vanguard 0.14%, passive of course.
I think people can all too easily shrug off small percentages and forget the power of compound interest..........that is working against them!

aroominyork

One of the reasons I ditched my IFA about seven years ago was needing to pay about 2% pa: 1% for them and 1% for fund managers. When justifying their fees they talked importantly about 'meetings', their quarterly review of their in-house fund choices (cautious, adventurous etc.). OH and I now pay about 0.03% in platform charges (ii.co.uk, ISA+SIPP+GIA x 2) and 0.36% across our portfolios in fund charges - more passive than active, and some nominal gilts.

flaneurs_lobster

I've got ~£100k sitting in drawdown with Standard Life (split across their SL Active Retirement 1/2/3 Funds).

Says in this here app they are charging me 0.898% (incl. 0.5% discount).

Starting to sound like that's rather high.

george4064

Here are my back of envelope calculations, will be able to properly calculate when I'm on my laptop.

For my ISA i probably pay about 0.3% pa ongoing charges (OCF) for the underlying investments and 0.04% pa platform fee.

Pension, for my current employer pot a all in fee of c 0.23% pa. My old employer pension pot is c 0.03% pa all in.

dunstonh

Just seen someone in another thread claiming that costs of 1.78% per annum from St James Place are somehow reasonable. Personally, I think that is nonsense and would consider such levels verging on exploitative. But that does beg the question: what is reasonable? How much do typical people actually pay?

SJP use managed funds.   So, by default, 100% managed funds will be more expensive than 100% index funds.

Advisers are required to disclose charges including IC and TC.   I don't think any of the responses on this thread have included IC and TC.   IC is nearly always zero but TC isnt.

If we take the typical managed fund OCF of 0.7% and adviser charge of 0.5% and assume TC of 0.1% then that leaves a provider charge of around 0.48%.     That is only a little more expensive than HL.   However, quite a bit more than a more typical 0.1x% charging platform.

So, the fact its circa 0.03% more than HL, which is the UK's biggest DIY platform and possibly cheaper than someone using HL with HL own brand funds means it isn't nonsense.

If they were paying 1.78% for non-advised and index trackers then that is a different matter.

vacheron

My pensions consist of 1x SIPP and a 2x group personal pensions, one of which is SalSac and currently active
I also have a deferred DB which is left well alone!

The 3 DC schemes vary from 0.28% to 0.53% (including OCF's) I've recently moved the SIPP which consists of a single OEIC which has an OCF of 0.18% from HL to II to reduce the platform fees from 0.45 to around 0.1%.

I also transfer out the majority of my Salsac company pension to my SIPP each time it reaches a decent amount to benefit from the short term salsac / company contribution benefits, but long term from the lower fees.  

On average, these passive funds have returned approximately 20% in the last 12 months for an average 0.32% charge. Meanwhile a friend transferred to an actively managed advisor last year who has managed to return her the princely sum of 6.18% (with fees of 2.74%). Resulting 12 month gain of 3.38% 

noclaf

I am a bit lazy with granular calcs but overall my fees are 'reasonable':
LISA - AjBell capped fees for ETF's and all invested into VEVE (0.12%)
SIPP+S&SISA - Fidelity = £90 capped platform fees for ETF's using SWDA and SWLD as my 'core' 0.20% and 0.12% respectively. However I have made changes to allocations over the last few years so additional trading fees would of been incurred.

Work pension across 4 funds; one is a JPM UK smaller co fund so relatively pricey, rest range from 0.15% to 0.462% for a HSBC Sharia fund...which IMO justifies the additional fees based on performance.

Linton

vacheron said:

My pensions consist of 1x SIPP and a 2x group personal pensions, one of which is SalSac and currently active
I also have a deferred DB which is left well alone!

The 3 DC schemes vary from 0.28% to 0.53% (including OCF's) I've recently moved the SIPP which consists of a single OEIC which has an OCF of 0.18% from HL to II to reduce the platform fees from 0.45 to around 0.1%.

I also transfer out the majority of my Salsac company pension to my SIPP each time it reaches a decent amount to benefit from the short term salsac / company contribution benefits, but long term from the lower fees.  

On average, these passive funds have returned approximately 20% in the last 12 months for an average 0.32% charge. Meanwhile a friend transferred to an actively managed advisor last year who has managed to return her the princely sum of 6.18% (with fees of 2.74%). Resulting 12 month gain of 3.38% 

I think you will find that you and your friend were holding very different underlying investments with very different levels of risk.  What a fund invests in is far more important in determining outcome than the level of charges.

Alexland

Most of my investments are in my SIPP and workplace pensions where the cost for each is around 0.14% total in particular benefiting from Fidelity's platform fee cap which works out at under 0.02% of account valuation and VEVE at 0.12%. I hold my bonds in the workplace pension where it is free to rebalance.

Due to cashback deals I have a few S&S ISAs and in particular am paying II each month but the incentive is more than the cost over the minimum period I intend to hold the account. Next year I will consolidate into my iWeb account or maybe take up the ISA transfer incentive from Fidelity as I am already paying their capped fee although it feels like too high a proportion of my assets on one platform.

The LISA is my most expensive account where the AJ Bell capped fee and trades are around 0.10% of account valuation and I hold SWDA which at 0.20% is not cheap but big, liquid and performs well so a small luxury I afford myself.

vacheron

Linton said:

vacheron said:

My pensions consist of 1x SIPP and a 2x group personal pensions, one of which is SalSac and currently active
I also have a deferred DB which is left well alone!

The 3 DC schemes vary from 0.28% to 0.53% (including OCF's) I've recently moved the SIPP which consists of a single OEIC which has an OCF of 0.18% from HL to II to reduce the platform fees from 0.45 to around 0.1%.

I also transfer out the majority of my Salsac company pension to my SIPP each time it reaches a decent amount to benefit from the short term salsac / company contribution benefits, but long term from the lower fees.  

On average, these passive funds have returned approximately 20% in the last 12 months for an average 0.32% charge. Meanwhile a friend transferred to an actively managed advisor last year who has managed to return her the princely sum of 6.18% (with fees of 2.74%). Resulting 12 month gain of 3.38% 

I think you will find that you and your friend were holding very different underlying investments with very different levels of risk.  What a fund invests in is far more important in determining outcome than the level of charges.

True. and I should clarify that these were a mixture of advisor and fund fees (the funds they selected for her when she engaged them just over 12 months ago) but we are both very similar in terms of age, financal position, family situation, attitude to risk and return expectations so I have no idea how they managed to come up with something at 10x the fees which has 3x underperformed my three "off the shelf", and in some cases "default" pension portfolios with 80/20-70/30 asset splits. 

From looking at the investments they picked for her, it looks almost like the goal was to make the portfolio (and by definitaion the advisor) "look" clever and complicated, possibly in order to justify the fees. But then I can be cynical like this, but I can't help feeling that the results the have delivered speak for themselves.