Maximum to hold in a single fund?

Aged

eskbanker said:

Aged said:
The platform I use is Quilter, which I understood to be one of the best.

PS when I inherited the pension(s), it was recommended by the FA that it would be 'better' for everything to be consolidated on one platform.

But terms like 'better' and 'best' are objectively meaningless in a vacuum, i.e. they need to be measured by some sort of criteria?

Lowest cost, most responsive service, scale of product range, financial stability, technology offerings, etc, for platform comparison, and for comparing one versus multiple platforms there'd need to be a proper assessment of pros and cons, in the context of one's own financial circumstances - what did you understand these to be at the time?

The platform was the one that was recommended by the IFA whom I was paying for advice at the time.

Aged

masonic said:

Aged said:

masonic said:

Failing to split over investment platforms is comparatively a lot more risky. If you want to keep things as simple as possible, holding the same Vanguard index fund, but spreading between investment platforms would be the optimal solution.

 I take your point - food for thought, thanks. The platform I use is Quilter, which I understood to be one of the best.

Oh. That's the old Old Mutual Wealth Management. It is a large provider, so it has that in its favour. I believe it runs on the FNZ software platform, like several other major providers. Loss making after tax in its most recent set of accounts (small after tax profit the previous year), which is a surprise given I understand it is quite expensive. I don't know much else about it other than observing that when the name pops up in these parts it is often around people complaining about and trying to reclaim fees for advice they don't feel they received.

Yes, it was Old Mutual when I started. I don't pay them for advice. I've checked out costs from time to time and I don't believe them to be much more expensive than if I transferred to someone else.

eskbanker

Aged said:

eskbanker said:

Aged said:
The platform I use is Quilter, which I understood to be one of the best.

PS when I inherited the pension(s), it was recommended by the FA that it would be 'better' for everything to be consolidated on one platform.

But terms like 'better' and 'best' are objectively meaningless in a vacuum, i.e. they need to be measured by some sort of criteria?

Lowest cost, most responsive service, scale of product range, financial stability, technology offerings, etc, for platform comparison, and for comparing one versus multiple platforms there'd need to be a proper assessment of pros and cons, in the context of one's own financial circumstances - what did you understand these to be at the time?

The platform was the one that was recommended by the IFA whom I was paying for advice at the time.

Of course, but when paying for expert advice, most wouldn't accept 'because I said so' as a rationale for a choice in a competitive market, and even if doing so at the time, that's not necessarily valid at a later stage.

Out of curiosity, if you're cautious, why are you no longer using FAs when trying to identify how to invest?

Aged

eskbanker said:

Aged said:

eskbanker said:

Aged said:
The platform I use is Quilter, which I understood to be one of the best.

PS when I inherited the pension(s), it was recommended by the FA that it would be 'better' for everything to be consolidated on one platform.

But terms like 'better' and 'best' are objectively meaningless in a vacuum, i.e. they need to be measured by some sort of criteria?

Lowest cost, most responsive service, scale of product range, financial stability, technology offerings, etc, for platform comparison, and for comparing one versus multiple platforms there'd need to be a proper assessment of pros and cons, in the context of one's own financial circumstances - what did you understand these to be at the time?

The platform was the one that was recommended by the IFA whom I was paying for advice at the time.

Of course, but when paying for expert advice, most wouldn't accept 'because I said so' as a rationale for a choice in a competitive market, and even if doing so at the time, that's not necessarily valid at a later stage.

Out of curiosity, if you're cautious, why are you no longer using FAs when trying to identify how to invest?

The decision was taken at a time when my terminally ill husband and I were extremely vulnerable, and we naively thought that under the circumstances, an FA would be recommending what was in our best interests. I am no longer using FAs because more than one let us/me down badly. I try to do the best I can by myself.

Aged

I'm asking Admin to close down this thread now. Thanks to all who genuinely tried to help.

eskbanker

Aged said:

eskbanker said:

Aged said:

eskbanker said:

Aged said:
The platform I use is Quilter, which I understood to be one of the best.

PS when I inherited the pension(s), it was recommended by the FA that it would be 'better' for everything to be consolidated on one platform.

But terms like 'better' and 'best' are objectively meaningless in a vacuum, i.e. they need to be measured by some sort of criteria?

Lowest cost, most responsive service, scale of product range, financial stability, technology offerings, etc, for platform comparison, and for comparing one versus multiple platforms there'd need to be a proper assessment of pros and cons, in the context of one's own financial circumstances - what did you understand these to be at the time?

The platform was the one that was recommended by the IFA whom I was paying for advice at the time.

Of course, but when paying for expert advice, most wouldn't accept 'because I said so' as a rationale for a choice in a competitive market, and even if doing so at the time, that's not necessarily valid at a later stage.

Out of curiosity, if you're cautious, why are you no longer using FAs when trying to identify how to invest?

The decision was taken at a time when my terminally ill husband and I were extremely vulnerable, and we naively thought that under the circumstances, an FA would be recommending what was in our best interests. I am no longer using FAs because more than one let us/me down badly. I try to do the best I can by myself.

FAs obviously should make recommendations in the client's best interests, but if you've been badly burned on multiple occasions then I can see why you'd be sceptical or cynical.  Conversely, if you don't have much faith in the quality of their recommendations then that's even less reason to continue to comply with them, so endorses the idea that it might be worth revisiting platform choice and/or whether consolidation is best for you, rather than sticking to what you were told, especially if the rationale wasn't explained.

Aged said:

I'm asking Admin to close down this thread now. Thanks to all who genuinely tried to help.

I don't know if you're suggesting that some of us aren't genuinely trying to help but I don't believe that to be true - for the avoidance of doubt I'm not criticising you but aiming to help you make better decisions!

dunstonh

I take your point - food for thought, thanks. The platform I use is Quilter, which I understood to be one of the best.

Quilter runs on FNZ software.    As do Aviva, Aberdeen. Scottish Widows and many others.  
No single platform is best in all areas.    So, it can depend on what you are looking for.

The platform was the one that was recommended by the IFA whom I was paying for advice at the time.

I had a lot of clients on it back in the day.     Indeed, going back to its earliest form, I had one of the first clients on the Selestia platform (later bought by Skandia, which was bought by Old Mutual Wealth, who then didn't want to be in the UK any more and sold its bits off - which is when it became Quilter).

There was also a period when Old Mutual Wealth was one of the lowest cost platforms in the UK with a fixed annual fee irrespective of fund size.  This was 15 years ago (still available to existing plans set up pre 2013 who havent moved to unbundled basis)

Quilter is expensive much of the time now (still cheaper than HL but double the cost of IFA alternatives).  However, they are known to give out pricing deals for firms that place a lot of business with them.

Quilter also has some niche options.  I needed to place a disqualifying pension credit case not too long back, and Quilter was one of the few that would offer their product for that.   

The key thing though it to remember that financial products do not stand still. What is best one year may not be for long.

The decision was taken at a time when my terminally ill husband and I were extremely vulnerable, and we naively thought that under the circumstances, an FA would be recommending what was in our best interests. I am no longer using FAs because more than one let us/me down badly. I try to do the best I can by myself.

FAs cannot give you best advice.  They should still give suitable advice but it will be restricted.  They are restricted by product range and funds.  i.e. if they are restricted to the Quilter platform (which has its own salesforce and did in the OMW days) then that is all they can offer.  This is why you frequently see on here that the choice should be IFA or DIY and never FA.

artyboy

Aged said:

eskbanker said:

Aged said:

I tend to be a bit nervous about having 'too much' in one fund and would prefer to split an investment between similar funds to spread the (what I perceive to be) risk over different fund providers. Is there a rule of thumb for this ie a maximum that it's recommended to hold in one fund? Please be kind - I'm super cautious by nature and I've had some pretty condescending comments when I've mentioned this before, but I'd like to know the answer to this serious question please.

Perhaps worth clarifying what you do perceive the risk to be - obviously if you're looking for similar funds to track the same index that you're already invested in, then the underlying assets will be the same, or close to it, so your eggs would still ultimately be in the same baskets, and that would presumably imply that you see the risk in terms of fund manager viability rather than the funds themselves?

As above, there isn't a definitive answer to your question, but would you perhaps feel more secure if no more than x% of your portfolio is held by any individual fund manager?  Clearly some fund managers have substantially higher assets under management than others, so they're not all equal, and some will be more profitable than others, so you could refine a methodology to prioritise larger and more sustainable companies?

Or you could choose to hold no more than y% out of any given fund, so, for example, that Vanguard ex-UK one is about £18bn, so even if you held, say, £180K in it, you'd still only have a 0.001% share of it, whereas other funds will be significantly smaller (or larger)....

Example - if I had a sum of £1 million that I wanted to invest in say UK equities, I would want to spread it over similar funds with more than one fund provider, because to put it all in the one fund with the one provider would seem to me to be unwise. Don't ask me why, it just seems more sensible. It's what FAs would do too, isn't it (in my experience)?

Highly regarded investment companies and funds are definitely my preference.

Well I've got a similar ballpark number in CSH2 right now, albeit held across a number of different platforms. So each to their own in terms of what is sensible or risk acceptable...

chiang_mai

My rule is no more than 20% of my assets in a single fund. The bigger issue I find is deciding the maximum number of funds, which depends on your ability and willingness to put in time and effort managing them. A dozen managed funds is about the maximum for me.