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

HL Investment Fund Spread 5.77%

24

Comments

  • Audaxer
    Audaxer Posts: 3,552 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    honey_pot wrote: »
    As such on the performance of the fund in the last few years i will be lucky to make my money back within a year.
    The HL site shows that the performance of the fund over the last 2 years had gains of 17.18% and 9.07%. So I would stick with the fund now that you've bought it as it still seems a good addition to a portfolio and hold long term despite the buy/sell spread.
  • Tom99
    Tom99 Posts: 5,371 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Second Anniversary
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Assuming the 5.77% spread gives a profit to the fund over its actual costs, does that profit go into the fund's value or is it kept as extra income by the fund managers on top of normal charges?[/FONT]
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]If the profit goes back into the fund valuation then if you keep the fund for long enough you will benefit from others buying and selling in the future because the unit price will be topped up by this profit.[/FONT]
  • george4064
    george4064 Posts: 2,950 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    Tom99 wrote: »
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Assuming the 5.77% spread gives a profit to the fund over its actual costs, does that profit go into the fund's value or is it kept as extra income by the fund managers on top of normal charges?[/FONT]
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]If the profit goes back into the fund valuation then if you keep the fund for long enough you will benefit from others buying and selling in the future because the unit price will be topped up by this profit.[/FONT]

    It’s not profit. In simplistic terms, 5% of it is to cover stand duty land tax and the other 0.77% is to cover other costs of buying a commercial property.
    "If you aren’t willing to own a stock for ten years, don’t even think about owning it for ten minutes” Warren Buffett

    Save £12k in 2025 - #024 £1,450 / £15,000 (9%)
  • Alexland
    Alexland Posts: 10,561 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    I'd be slightly ashamed to make a complaint that I hadn't read the information before placing the trade. The good news is that you now own what you wanted to own. Whenever I have bought real life property then after paying stamp duty and solicitors fees I have always been about 5% down. That's life.
  • bostonerimus
    bostonerimus Posts: 5,617 Forumite
    Sixth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Caveat Emptor and K.I.S.S
    “So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
  • Tom99
    Tom99 Posts: 5,371 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Second Anniversary
    george4064 wrote: »
    It’s not profit. In simplistic terms, 5% of it is to cover stand duty land tax and the other 0.77% is to cover other costs of buying a commercial property.


    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I can understand that being the case if there was only ever new investment in the fund.[/FONT]
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]However if, for example, the same number of units were sold as bought then there would be no change in the stock of commercial property owned and therefore no 5% stamp duty to pay.[/FONT]
  • le_loup
    le_loup Posts: 4,047 Forumite
    So, if I bought some shares at a different time when a property purchase was imminent, you would be happy for me to pay on your behalf?I think you need to do a bit more research on collective investments.
    And, of course, if you don't like the terms, don't buy.
  • Malthusian
    Malthusian Posts: 11,055 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    Tom99 wrote: »
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I can understand that being the case if there was only ever new investment in the fund.[/FONT]
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]However if, for example, the same number of units were sold as bought then there would be no change in the stock of commercial property owned and therefore no 5% stamp duty to pay.[/FONT]

    How do you work that out? The Government doesn't give you the stamp duty back when you sell a property.
  • Tom99
    Tom99 Posts: 5,371 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Second Anniversary
    Malthusian wrote: »
    How do you work that out? The Government doesn't give you the stamp duty back when you sell a property.


    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]If say £10,000 flows into the fund but also £10,000 is withdrawn there will be no new investment in commercial property and hence no new stamp duty incurred.[/FONT]
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]However there is still a 5.77% spread and since the admin cost ought to be minimal maybe some of that 5.77% spread ends up as profit for the fund.[/FONT]
  • bowlhead99
    bowlhead99 Posts: 12,295 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Post of the Month
    Tom99 wrote: »
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]If say £10,000 flows into the fund but also £10,000 is withdrawn there will be no new investment in commercial property and hence no new stamp duty incurred.[/FONT]
    [FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]However there is still a 5.77% spread and since the admin cost ought to be minimal maybe some of that 5.77% spread ends up as profit for the fund.[/FONT]

    To the extent that the 5.7% exceeds the actual costs of administering the subscription and redemption process including the round-trip buy and sell, you are right, it is kind of a 'profit', or rather, it will cover more costs than the fund actually incurs as the investors churn, because some of the investor redemption money is covered by investor subscription proceeds and vice versa, without there needing to be why underlying asset sales.

    Some funds may have the flexibility to offer swing pricing, moving the official price from a bid basis to an offer basis from time to time depending on the direction of net fund flows. Others may publish and stick to a system that has a spread between buy and sell which they enforce to make sure that joiners and leavers are discouraged from being short termist and flighty. They want to avoid liquidity issues in what is a very illiquid asset class, resulting in them both carrying a large proportion of cash and operating a spread that discourages leaving the fund on a whim .
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 353.7K Banking & Borrowing
  • 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 455.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 246.8K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 603.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 178.2K Life & Family
  • 260.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.