Should I use Aegon or Hargreaves Lansdown

Albermarle

Just to reinforce previous comments, with an example;

If you pick a standard medium risk Aegon branded fund that has say 60% equities and 40% bonds, it will perform very similar to a HL branded fund also containing 60% equities and 40% bonds.

If you pick a more growth orientated Aegon fund that has say 85% equities and 15% bonds, and compare it to a HL branded cautious fund containing say 30% equities and 70% bonds, it will perform differently. Exactly how differently will depend on market conditions.

So whether it is a Aegon or HL fund is not the important point. It is the type of fund you pick.

Although an Aegon or HL branded fund will probably have higher charges than a standard multi asset fund containing a mixture of equities and bonds, like Vanguard Lifestrategy or HSBC global strategy funds ( both available on many platforms).

poseidon1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82100610#Comment_82100610

I agree, buying a specific share holding for a high ' secure' yield is at the very top end of risk, and its where unit trusts such as the one I utilised with Aegon can mitigate the risk within a basket of professionally managed shares and bonds.

However, I also made speculative 'income' shareholding purchases in BAT ( 7% paid quarterly) and Ashmore Group (10% paid half yearly). Ashmore is also a speculative indirect play on the Emerging markets where it is active as a specialist fund manager. Although both have paid off with significant (unexpected) capital growth spurts ( profits withdrawn), definitely do not reccomend direct share investments for income or gains for passive investors.

CautiousMrG

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82100547#Comment_82100547

Thank you, that is really helpful advice

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82100610#Comment_82100610

That is a fair assumption to make. Someone who picks investments for a living ought to outperform us amateurs.

That assumption may or may not be fair, but where is the evidence? Amateurs often pick investments that are unsuitable for them, but that is another matter. There is some evidence that people who buy managed funds get poor returns, not only because of the high costs, but also because they chase past performance and end up buying high and selling low as a result. That does not apply to someone who buys a tracker and sits on it.

DRS1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82100765#Comment_82100765

Assumptions are not always based on evidence. In fact usually they are not.

However if a professional doesn't outperform an amateur then how long will he stay a professional?

I wasn't actually advocating for active funds over passive - I was thinking more of the possible advantage of using an IFA or similar to pick your investment portfolio for you versus doing it yourself. Buying a tracker and sitting on it may be fine if you won't need the money for another 30 or 40 years but you may want your investments to do a different job when you are 62 (and have ill health).

I don't know what the OP wants from this money - for all I know a purchased life annuity may be a better choice*.

*Sorry OP that is just an off the cuff left field thought not a serious suggestion.

GeoffTF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82100861#Comment_82100861

However if a professional doesn't outperform an amateur then how long will he stay a professional?

Active fund managers are turned over. That is the business model. Fund management groups typically set up several funds with different fund managers. Some do better than others by chance. The fund management group then advertises the fund that has been the luckiest and closes down the others. The process rolls on. The lucky fund managers are retained and the unlucky ones are fired.

The critical point here is that the fund managers who perform well in one time period are no more likely to perform well in the next time period than those who did badly. The results are indistinguishable from chance.

What about advisors or discretionary managers? Why should they do better than the active fund managers? Do they publish their results? There is no evidence that they do any better than the active fund managers.

As I have said, your investments have to be suitable. An advisor should be able to help you to choose suitable investments, but he cannot pick investments that will outperform in risk adjusted terms with a greater than chance rate of success. An advisor may also earn his fee by advising you to do nothing.

CautiousMrG

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82100861#Comment_82100861

Thank you for your input. Just to add that unlikely though of course not impossible that I may be around for 30-40 years! However, bearing in mind I'm partially disabled with some mobility issues and have decided to retire at 62. I'm looking at getting some sort of return after 5 years, whether it be dividends for example or selling part of the fund/shares to help supplement my annual expenditure. At that time I'll also be eligible for my pensions, which also include a couple of private pensions. The cumulative pension pot is around £350k at the moment.

I have enough cash to cover my expenses for at least the next 10 years, though of course will be eating into those savings as time goes on. Hence just looking to invest some of that cash into a fund that hopefully might give me a better return than just keeping it in various savings plans that are currently giving me 4 - 4.5% interest rate returns,,,if that makes sense?

DRS1

5 years is sort of the minimum period for looking at investment over savings.

It doesn't sound like you are looking for an income portfolio so do look at passive tracker investments. There are threads on here about whether global trackers are too exposed to the US or technology shares at the moment. You could read them to see if you want to veer away from something like ACWI or VWRP.

If you did go to an IFA you may find they take a look at all your finances and maybe give you advice on what pots to draw from when. There is some sense for example in taking money in the form of taxable income while you have the personal allowance available Only you will know if there is a period from 62 to SPA when you would otherwise not make use of all your personal allowance.