Tracking Index fund investments on Trustnet

EthicsGradient

rolfknudsen said:

Thank you both for your quick replies! @eskbanker you understood correctly.
It is a very basic question but I am back checking on my invested pension which I believe has hugely under performed and the discrepancy is huge so I need to check I am looking at things the right way.

To check, I have taken the index fund list with the percentage allocations, calculated the amount invested for each fund and applied their specific return percentage to each of them. My investments has run for 5 years.

the SIPP I am in states a 30% return over 5 years and I have calculated it should be have ben 125% so worry I have looked at things the wrong way, hence my question.

I suspect you're misunderstanding what this fund is. It is not an "index fund", as your thread title says; it is an active fund. Its aim is to "provide an average annual net return greater than the MSCI® All Country World Index (GBP)" and "deliver an income equivalent of at least 125% of the income return of the Index", which I suspect is where your "125%" has come from. This does not mean the figures given in the OP; it would mean, for instance, that if the income from the MSCI World Index were 2% each year, the fund aims for at least 2.5% (it is an "income" fund). 

Comparing this fund with an ETF tracking the MSCI All Country World Index
Chart Tool | Trustnet
over 5 years the Aviva fund has had a net return of 86.3% compared to 74.3% for the ETF, so they've met that goal. Whether the income goal has been met is harder to see, but if you're in the "Acc" version anyway, you don't seem to be worrying about that.

rolfknudsen

Ok, was off by a good amount when I recalculated my spreadsheet and filled in the percentages from today, so please reset and view the following. The funds list is a 100% correct. As is the start lumpsump of £79.900 and the return has been a little over 17% over 5y leaving £93.722 in the account today.

Looking at the actual fund returns over the last 5y it should have been a 77% gain.

This is not a perfect table as there are two funds the has only run for 3y, but even without these it should have been 52%. I am looking into what funds I was in, but please focus on the math and if I read the revenue per fund correctly on Trustnet (screen shot in first post). I am aware the funds I would have been in the previous two years could have made a massive loss explaining the discrepancy, but this is not the case. Will update...

eskbanker

Who is the SIPP with and how do you pay your fees, i.e. are they paid separately?

Does the SIPP provider have a breakdown of the portfolio, that would allow you to track how many units of each fund you bought and hold?

MX5huggy

Is this a fund of funds then? Because depending on the aims of the fund it would not have held those funds in those percentages 5 years ago, we know its added 2 funds in the 5 years what did it sell to buy those 2 funds? 

jimjames

rolfknudsen said:

Ok, was off by a good amount when I recalculated my spreadsheet and filled in the percentages from today, so please reset and view the following. The funds list is a 100% correct. As is the start lumpsump of £79.900 and the return has been a little over 17% over 5y leaving £93.722 in the account today.

Looking at the actual fund returns over the last 5y it should have been a 77% gain.

This is not a perfect table as there are two funds the has only run for 3y, but even without these it should have been 52%. I am looking into what funds I was in, but please focus on the math and if I read the revenue per fund correctly on Trustnet (screen shot in first post). I am aware the funds I would have been in the previous two years could have made a massive loss explaining the discrepancy, but this is not the case. Will update...

Can you explain what you are trying to achieve? You mentioned a fund but now you've posted a table with other funds as well? What relevance are they to the fund you posted and the return from that? If you're now trying to calculate returns by adding up the averages for each then that's not going to give the result.

if you want to focus on math then please can you give the calculations to understand what you are looking for.

dunstonh

Income units with income reinvested will typically show a lower return in the figures because the reinvestment of the distribution increases the amount invested in that fund.    Hence the percentage will be declared lower.   However, it will be the same return as the chart as long as you are buying the same units.

rolfknudsen

@jimjames This is a group of funds a financial advisor have invested some of my pension in. I have had nothing to do with the choice of this other than the standard risk level choice, but I am not happy with the 17% return on this over 5 years.

When I looked through the performance of the individual funds in the product it looked off compared to the return they are giving me, and I cannot get a clear explanation from them.

I am here because I A. want to know if I am reading the fund charts correctly and B. to see if my table makes sense. So my thread started with that one specific question and have now ballooned a bit. 

I greatly appreciate the input.

rolfknudsen

@dunstonh will the true value/return then show on exit?
And if so, does this mean I am in the dark in terms of product performance until exit? That the numbers I am being shown have only little meaning?

MX5huggy

You don’t seem to have anything that would change in value on exit. 

What do you mean by some of your pension? Where’s the rest have they been rebalancing between the 2 bits? This seems to be 100% equity most pensions have a mix of assets, you would have to have told a Financial Advisor you were very happy with high risk to set up such a set of funds for you. 

EthicsGradient

rolfknudsen said:

@jimjames This is a group of funds a financial advisor have invested some of my pension in. I have had nothing to do with the choice of this other than the standard risk level choice, but I am not happy with the 17% return on this over 5 years.

When I looked through the performance of the individual funds in the product it looked off compared to the return they are giving me, and I cannot get a clear explanation from them.

I am here because I A. want to know if I am reading the fund charts correctly and B. to see if my table makes sense. So my thread started with that one specific question and have now ballooned a bit. 

I greatly appreciate the input.

Your "current balance held" column seems to be the percentage for the "balance paid in", not the "GBP 5 yr" column (which I think you're saying you've worked out by applying the 5 year returns from Trustnet for each - or from a 3 year figure when that's all that's available - by the way,  Royal London Global Equity Select M Acc does have 5 year figures on Trustnet). 

Are you saying that in December 2019, the exact amount under "balance paid in lump sum" was invested in each of those funds, and has remained there with no additions or withdrawals since - apart from the "GQG Partners US Equity" entry - which only has Trustnet figures from March 2021, so can have only been invested then - was that amount kept in cash for some reason, and then invested when that became available? (If so, that's very odd).