We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 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!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Change to lifestrategy funds
safe_hands2
Posts: 189 Forumite
I've had an email from Vanguard with the following information:
"We’re updating the classification of the LifeStrategy funds from ‘UK UCITS’ to ‘Non-UCITS Retail Schemes’ (or NURS).
Our LifeStrategy funds are ‘funds of funds’, which means they mostly invest in other funds – specifically, those managed by Vanguard. As the LifeStrategy funds grow, they may approach the maximum limit they can hold in another fund. This limit does not apply to NURS, so by changing the LifeStrategy funds’ structure, they can continue to invest in the underlying Vanguard funds in line with their current investment strategies. This means costs can be kept low, bringing value to investors."
This doesn't sound like anything to worry about, but as I don't really understand what it means, can anyone explain if there's any implications on my investment please?
"We’re updating the classification of the LifeStrategy funds from ‘UK UCITS’ to ‘Non-UCITS Retail Schemes’ (or NURS).
Our LifeStrategy funds are ‘funds of funds’, which means they mostly invest in other funds – specifically, those managed by Vanguard. As the LifeStrategy funds grow, they may approach the maximum limit they can hold in another fund. This limit does not apply to NURS, so by changing the LifeStrategy funds’ structure, they can continue to invest in the underlying Vanguard funds in line with their current investment strategies. This means costs can be kept low, bringing value to investors."
This doesn't sound like anything to worry about, but as I don't really understand what it means, can anyone explain if there's any implications on my investment please?
2
Comments
-
Just sounds like a change to make sure they are compliant with regulation, no changes to the way the money is invested. Especially since as they say VLS funds only invest in Vanguard funds anyway.
As you might have guessed I'm no more clued up about what it means than you are
Doesn't sound like anything to worry about though. Maybe someone more clued up than us will comment at some point. 0 -
This doesn't sound like anything to worry about, but as I don't really understand what it means, can anyone explain if there's any implications on my investment please?No issues. UCITS has more restrictions than NURS.
NURS can involve assets with less consumer protection, but just because it can doesn't mean it will.
It is not a concern.
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.6 -
Yes nothing to worry about in itself. Vanguard Lifestrategy funds contain Vanguard funds and there are rules about the type and percentages of those constituent funds. What you should watch out for is any change in the rules about what and how much the fund buys.And so we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.2
-
Thanks everyone.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards