Vanguard direct to customer offering confirmed
Comments
-
Since they're funds of funds they obviously can't commit to dividend percentages in advance but for historical figures just compare the Acc versus Inc performances for each version, as the variance between these equates to the dividends paid out....bowlesbargain wrote: »I want to move my ISA, I want to get a decent divided how do I check the Vanguard units to see which pay the higher divided. I can see how you pick a trust ie 60/40, 20/80 etc but I cannot find anywhere to say what the divided rate is I am looking for between 4 and 5%0 -
How successful have you been in picking passive funds that consistently beat their market index, without using funds with active strategies like stock lending on top of their passive core? If you ever managed it, were you unhappy with the tracking error or did you regard it as desirable?trying to pick the 1 in 10 funds that beat the market...
In the active world it's relatively easy and you start in the same way as you might start in the passive world: by eliminating the consistent under-performers. In the passive world that means eliminating expensive funds like those from Vanguard or the even more expensive one percent chargers. Eliminating the ones that exploit tied in buyers or inertia - many pension funds - also helps. Then avoid biasing the study by ignoring the things that are normally done by those paying attention to active funds, like leaving when the human manager changes or by pretending that lots of money was in the junk funds that were closed after people left them or never bothered with in the first place because they were dogs just like a two percent charging FTSE tracker would be.
The SPIVA scorecard you quoted from is useless as a comparison tool because of its built in bias, which comes from ignoring the things that matter in active fund selection and only keeping the things which matter to passive selection. Nobody should be surprised that a firm which makes its money by selling the right for trackers to use its indexes would produce a measuring tool with built in bias. You might try looking for a SPIVP scorecard though. S&P probably don't provide one but to get you started just put 100 in the percentage of passive funds underperforming their benchmark boxes.
Also interesting that HL's platform is cheaper than Vanguard's, for unwrapped ETFs, with a 0% platform charge.0 -
There's no limit on the number of cash (except HTB), S&S or IF ISAs that can be opened in each tax year. If you want a few hundred, no problem.So, could I open a S&S account with Vanguard instead. I know you are only allowed one S&S account in a single tax year, but am guessing it only kicks in once I transfer funds
The limit is only one of each type that has money newly subscribed (paid in) in the current tax year. If you want to transfer any of the current year subscription to the same type you must transfer it all. You're right that you have no restriction from the Charles Stanley account because you hadn't subscribed money to it yet.
Of the few hundred that you could open, all but one of each type would need to have either only past year money via a transfer or no money at all in them.0 -
There's no reason to lose any ISA allowance, just sell then ISA transfer the cash. If you have both past and current year money you might be able to arrange to pick whichever of the two you want for the transfer.cashbackproblems wrote: »luckily my holdings in Vanguard with HL are relatively small e.g. 10k and I realise I lose the ISA allowance for this year but I wont be able to use the full 20k anyway.. so makes sense to just sell cash out and buy back in. I already have opened my account so process wont take more than few days.0 -
has anyone started their transfer from HL yet?
I am wondering what approach HL will take on this. Do you guys think they will reduce their fees within a matter of weeks or not?
They've just announced some pretty impressive performance stats !
In its latest trading statement released today, HL reported net new business of £3.3bn during the four-month period under review, and year to date this rose to £5.6bn.
AUA increased by 10% from £70bn to £77bn in the four months to 30 April, while total net revenue was £131m. The group said this was a result of net new business, higher market levels and strong share dealing volumes.
This makes year to date net revenue £316m, 17% higher than the same time in 2016 ...0 -
Could you provide a source for these figures?
Could you please provide the source of this information?I seem to manage it regularly. As do many other investors in the UK. Mainly as they are not blinkered to the passive bias that some people like you have. Where passive is best, it should be used. Where managed is best, it should be used.
....70pc of actively managed European funds beating the best European tracker over 10 years. Among Asia funds, 55pc of active portfolios beat the best tracker over a decade, while the figure for the UK was 52pc.
Forty-eight per cent of global funds with human managers outperformed the best passive fund over 10 years, compared with 38pc of Japanese funds. In last place were active US funds, only a third of which managed to beat the top tracker.
Overall, 50pc of active funds beat tracker funds over the past decade. The figures are net of fund charges (and remember this includes the charges back from the bundled days and not unbundled world we live in now. These are UK domiciled funds priced in GBP.0 -
Hi... Look on Trustnet for the Vanguard management group and you will then see the relative yield for the trusts you mention plus others in the group. Obviously, there are no guarantees for the ongoing yield.bowlesbargain wrote: »I want to move my ISA, I want to get a decent divided how do I check the Vanguard units to see which pay the higher divided. I can see how you pick a trust ie 60/40, 20/80 etc but I cannot find anywhere to say what the divided rate is I am looking for between 4 and 5%Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
Why bother catching it on the way down?
The Trump slump is happening.
Ideally, the crash bottoms out in 2018, as my religion says, praise be to the rule of 8, and sterling recovers to GBP1:USD1.5 , so if I buy a world fund, I get more for my money.
As it happens, my bits and pieces pensions from twenty years ago are all With Profit, so supposedly will not go down in value if I transfer out during a crash. So, let it all crash, then transfer to a Vanguard SIPP in 2018. I know, Market Value Adjustment, sneaky slippery snakes.0 -
Based on clues in post 82, I worked out it is from this Telegraph article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/funds/11512441/Do-trackers-beat-active-funds-Our-new-analysis-has-the-answer.htmlCould please provide the source of this information?
Trouble is, you really need to look at long term performance, to eliminate most of the random fluctuation. But if you look at 10 year performance, both active and passive funds had much higher fees than they do now, so the results may not be a good indication of what will happen going forward. Another flaw with the Telegraph data is that it does not account for funds that discontinued during the period. These will tend to be the underperformers.
I'm coming to the view that the core issue on passives vs actives is whether you believe you (or your adviser) can pick, in advance, the active funds that will outperform. Clearly some will outperform passives, though what proportion will do so is still debatable. Clearly, most people who pick a range of actives will end up with some that outperform, which may convince them that picking the winners is easy. Whether they are taking a balanced view of their overall success is something only they can judge.koru0 -
[QUOTE=koru;72566248_I'm_coming_to_the_view_that_the_core_issue_on_passives_vs_actives_is_whether_you_believe_you_(or_your_adviser)_can_pick,_in_advance,_the_active_funds_that_will_outperform._Clearly_some_will_outperform_passives,_though_what_proportion_will_do_so_is_still_debatable._Clearly,_most_people_who_pick_a_range_of_actives_will_end_up_with_some_that_outperform,_which_may_convince_them_that_picking_the_winners_is_easy._Whether_they_are_taking_a_balanced_view_of_their_overall_success_is_something_only_they_can_judge.[/QUOTE]
I think that's about right, its a very personal choice/opinion. I mix passive with active funds in my investment portfolio and nothing has convinced me to change this philosophy and invest solely in passive funds.
I have only been investing for about 18 years but in that time I personally have been more than happy with my active funds so I won't be changing my strategy. I am also pleased with my two passive funds and will retain them in my portfolio as well.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards