Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Alexland
    • By Alexland 30th Dec 17, 2:39 PM
    • 2,601Posts
    • 1,981Thanks
    Alexland
    VLS not on Halifax SD?
    • #1
    • 30th Dec 17, 2:39 PM
    VLS not on Halifax SD? 30th Dec 17 at 2:39 PM
    Hi,

    This has stumped me. A while ago I performed an in-specie transfer of VLS units to Halifax SD. I have so far avoided trading but today I had a look and noticed that VLS series is not in the list of funds available to trade despite them offering the similar VTR series. As such when I click on my holding to sell their interface tells me that the fund code is not recognised so it looks like I cannot sell online?

    So given they don't support L&G MI either it looks like the only low cost multi asset funds available on Halifax SD are the HSBC Global Strategy series?

    Alex.
    Last edited by Alexland; 30-12-2017 at 5:52 PM.
Page 2
    • Audaxer
    • By Audaxer 12th Jan 18, 10:23 PM
    • 1,086 Posts
    • 637 Thanks
    Audaxer
    HSBC GS Balanced only has 167m of assets so I now own circa 0.1% of the whole fund.
    Originally posted by Alexland
    That is some amount of money you are confident of leaving with Halifax SD in the same fund. I guess I shouldn't be too anxious of just going over the 50k limit.

    I'm sure you said a few weeks ago that you thought the HSBC Global Strategy funds had too much US equity?

    I think the HSBC GS Balanced sits quite nicely alongside the VLS60, so thinking of upping my investment in HSBC so I've got roughly the same amount in VLS and HSBC. The returns graph for both funds are almost identical for the last 5 years, but who knows which one would do better in an equity crash - maybe the VLS which is automatically rebalanced by buying more equities at falling prices to keep to the 60%, or maybe the HSBC fund would fare better being actively managed.
    Last edited by Audaxer; 12-01-2018 at 10:26 PM.
    • Alexland
    • By Alexland 12th Jan 18, 11:38 PM
    • 2,601 Posts
    • 1,981 Thanks
    Alexland
    That is some amount of money you are confident of leaving with Halifax SD in the same fund. I guess I shouldn't be too anxious of just going over the 50k limit.
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    I agree about spreading eggs across baskets but rather than rigidly sticking to the 50k limit it's a judgement about what proportion of your overall wealth you can afford to risk to get low fees. I have a similar sized workplace pension and lots of years employment ahead to build one or two more.

    I'm sure you said a few weeks ago that you thought the HSBC Global Strategy funds had too much US equity?
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    Yes. That's my view if was your only investment - but about the same US exposure as VLS if you removed the additional 20% UK bias and redistributed the remaining 80% across 100% of the fund. I like some UK bias so I am holding a UK equities fund in my workplace scheme. I am trying to get the asset allocation right, with the lowest fees, across all my accounts rather than in each account.

    I think the HSBC GS Balanced sits quite nicely alongside the VLS60, so thinking of upping my investment in HSBC so I've got roughly the same amount in VLS and HSBC. The returns graph for both funds are almost identical for the last 5 years, but who knows which one would do better in an equity crash - maybe the VLS which is automatically rebalanced by buying more equities at falling prices to keep to the 60%, or maybe the HSBC fund would fare better being actively managed.
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    Well if you held both in equal proportions you would have a smaller circa 15% UK weighting. VLS prefers government bonds and HSBC prefers corporate bonds you would be sitting on the fence there too.

    Alex.
    Last edited by Alexland; 13-01-2018 at 6:47 AM.
    • ValiantSon
    • By ValiantSon 13th Jan 18, 7:29 AM
    • 2,047 Posts
    • 1,895 Thanks
    ValiantSon
    That is some amount of money you are confident of leaving with Halifax SD in the same fund. I guess I shouldn't be too anxious of just going over the 50k limit.
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    The 50,000 protection is only of use in instances of corporate fraud or negligence, so it is incredibly unlikely that it would be called upon. It isn't like the 85,000 on retail deposits. In the latter instance you are a creditor, in the former you are not. The chances are that should there be fraud because of an unscrupulous employee the institution would actually cover you anyway because a) most would likely feel morally obligated to do so, and b) the reputational damage of not doing so could be devastating to their business.

    If you insist on keeping all investments below 50,000 then, as your investments grow, you are going to start running out of platforms to use! You will also incur considerable extra and unnecessary cost.
    • Audaxer
    • By Audaxer 13th Jan 18, 9:39 AM
    • 1,086 Posts
    • 637 Thanks
    Audaxer
    The 50,000 protection is only of use in instances of corporate fraud or negligence, so it is incredibly unlikely that it would be called upon. It isn't like the 85,000 on retail deposits. In the latter instance you are a creditor, in the former you are not. The chances are that should there be fraud because of an unscrupulous employee the institution would actually cover you anyway because a) most would likely feel morally obligated to do so, and b) the reputational damage of not doing so could be devastating to their business.
    Originally posted by ValiantSon
    I agree the risk is very low, but it's still a risk. I'm not sure they would feel morally obliged to compensate you, and if it was just a few investors that lost funds through the fraud, I'm not sure that it would get the publicity that would do them reputational damage.
    • ValiantSon
    • By ValiantSon 13th Jan 18, 9:54 AM
    • 2,047 Posts
    • 1,895 Thanks
    ValiantSon
    I agree the risk is very low, but it's still a risk. I'm not sure they would feel morally obliged to compensate you, and if it was just a few investors that lost funds through the fraud, I'm not sure that it would get the publicity that would do them reputational damage.
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    There are, undoubtedly, many businesses that would not feel a moral obligation, but I think the majority would. Furthermore, legal action could be taken against the company to recover losses and they are unlikely to want to have to go down that route.

    Any fraud is likely to involve a large number of customers (unless the fraudster is a complete idiot). The spread of impact, therefore, is almost certainly something that would gain media attention (and it is well within the power of individuals to generate attention). The reputational damage is a significant risk.
    • Audaxer
    • By Audaxer 13th Jan 18, 8:07 PM
    • 1,086 Posts
    • 637 Thanks
    Audaxer
    Well if you held both in equal proportions you would have a smaller circa 15% UK weighting. VLS prefers government bonds and HSBC prefers corporate bonds you would be sitting on the fence there too.
    Originally posted by Alexland
    That's true, which I think is beneficial and diversifies further rather than having all my eggs in the one basket.
    • Alexland
    • By Alexland 13th Jan 18, 8:39 PM
    • 2,601 Posts
    • 1,981 Thanks
    Alexland
    That's true, which I think is beneficial and diversifies further rather than having all my eggs in the one basket.
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    Yes but 50:50 split between VLS60 and GS Balanced is more than 1 notch above the risk scale than your current VLS40. With the higher equity exposure and corporate bonds GS Balanced is somewhere near VLS70 (if it existed) on the risk scale. So your 50:50 split would give somewhere near a VLS65 risk - about 25% higher than VLS40.
    • Audaxer
    • By Audaxer 13th Jan 18, 11:12 PM
    • 1,086 Posts
    • 637 Thanks
    Audaxer
    Yes but 50:50 split between VLS60 and GS Balanced is more than 1 notch above the risk scale than your current VLS40. With the higher equity exposure and corporate bonds GS Balanced is somewhere near VLS70 (if it existed) on the risk scale. So your 50:50 split would give somewhere near a VLS65 risk - about 25% higher than VLS40.
    Originally posted by Alexland
    I currently have both VLS40 and VLS60 - with double the amount in VLS60. My wife has HSBC GS Bal, a smaller amount still. The VLS40 was my first purchase and I think I was a bit over cautious, so was thinking we should go 60% equities, and rather than put it all in VLS60, thought maybe best to split half and half between VLS and HSBC, and would just be over 60%.

    I'm surprised you consider HSBC GS Bal much higher risk than VLS60, but you might be right with the corporate bonds. However the fact that the allocation is managed and more flexible than VLS might mean it's less of a risk and may drop less than the VLS60 in an equity crash and recover quicker?
    • Alexland
    • By Alexland 13th Jan 18, 11:39 PM
    • 2,601 Posts
    • 1,981 Thanks
    Alexland
    Yes HSBC GS Balanced seems to be between VLS60 and VLS80. It had 63% equities and the bonds carry greater correlation with equities and potential return.

    I agree the VLS40 sounds very cautious but we are at different stages of life and I know you are very cautious about the FSCS limits - although 50k is also the value at which the Halifax SIPP charges double from 90 to 180 per year which I guess you are keen to avoid.

    I don't get the feeling that Jane Davies takes a very active approach and from what I read online she had a fairly static asset allocation and sees the HSBC Open Funds series as solutions. Definitely no stock picking going on.

    Alex
    Last edited by Alexland; 13-01-2018 at 11:51 PM.
    • Thrugelmir
    • By Thrugelmir 13th Jan 18, 11:53 PM
    • 58,979 Posts
    • 52,304 Thanks
    Thrugelmir
    The withdrawl of the the funds, well at least the availbility to trade online. With selling only available by phone. Is most likely down to MiFID 2. With the more onerous regulatory requirements seems as if there's been a considerable shake up.
    Financial disasters happen when the last person who can remember what went wrong last time has left the building.
    • Audaxer
    • By Audaxer 14th Jan 18, 9:40 AM
    • 1,086 Posts
    • 637 Thanks
    Audaxer
    The withdrawl of the the funds, well at least the availbility to trade online. With selling only available by phone. Is most likely down to MiFID 2. With the more onerous regulatory requirements seems as if there's been a considerable shake up.
    Originally posted by Thrugelmir
    I think the fact that the VLS funds were not available to buy or sell for short periods was more down to a fault in the HSD website.
    • Audaxer
    • By Audaxer 14th Jan 18, 9:55 AM
    • 1,086 Posts
    • 637 Thanks
    Audaxer
    Yes HSBC GS Balanced seems to be between VLS60 and VLS80. It had 63% equities and the bonds carry greater correlation with equities and potential return.
    Originally posted by Alexland
    I'm surprised then that the HSBC GS Balanced performance has had more or less the same performance as the VLS60 over the past 5 years. As they have slightly more equities and higher performing bonds I would have thought the HSBC performance would exceed the VLS60 in a bull market.
    I agree the VLS40 sounds very cautious but we are at different stages of life and I know you are very cautious about the FSCS limits - although 50k is also the value at which the Halifax SIPP charges double from 90 to 180 per year which I guess you are keen to avoid.
    I didn't know that, but the SIPPs we have are not with Halifax, just our S&S ISAs.
    I don't get the feeling that Jane Davies takes a very active approach and from what I read online she had a fairly static asset allocation and sees the HSBC Open Funds series as solutions. Definitely no stock picking going on.
    Maybe it's just the Corporate Bond part of the fund that is actively managed and that the fund's equity allocations remain the same.
    • Alexland
    • By Alexland 14th Jan 18, 10:52 AM
    • 2,601 Posts
    • 1,981 Thanks
    Alexland
    I'm surprised then that the HSBC GS Balanced performance has had more or less the same performance as the VLS60 over the past 5 years. As they have slightly more equities and higher performing bonds I would have thought the HSBC performance would exceed the VLS60 in a bull market.
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    Although the 5 year annualised returns are similar at 9.7% the HSBC GS Balanced has done better on the 1 and 3 year annualised returns. The main difference seems to be in 2013 when VLS60 did about 1.5% better for some reason.

    Maybe it's just the Corporate Bond part of the fund that is actively managed and that the fund's equity allocations remain the same.
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    There is more information about the HSBC Tactical Asset Allocation 'TAA' in the fund brochure:

    http://www.assetmanagement.hsbc.com/uk/attachments/advisers/fund-range/hsbc_global_strategy_portfolios_brochure.pdf
    Last edited by Alexland; 14-01-2018 at 10:55 AM.
    • Audaxer
    • By Audaxer 14th Jan 18, 4:31 PM
    • 1,086 Posts
    • 637 Thanks
    Audaxer
    There is more information about the HSBC Tactical Asset Allocation 'TAA' in the fund brochure:

    http://www.assetmanagement.hsbc.com/uk/attachments/advisers/fund-range/hsbc_global_strategy_portfolios_brochure.pdf
    Originally posted by Alexland
    That's interesting - I hadn't seen that brochure before. They look to be well managed funds, and you would think if they have the Strategic Asset Allocations right and manage the Tactical Asset Allocations like they say they do, you would think it would do well to minimise losses in an equity crash.
    • Alexland
    • By Alexland 14th Jan 18, 4:41 PM
    • 2,601 Posts
    • 1,981 Thanks
    Alexland
    That's interesting - I hadn't seen that brochure before. They look to be well managed funds, and you would think if they have the Strategic Asset Allocations right and manage the Tactical Asset Allocations like they say they do, you would think it would do well to minimise losses in an equity crash.
    Originally posted by Audaxer
    Maybe but they have to respect the investors appetite for taking risk for potential return. It all gets a bit layered when applying your own TAA and SAA ontop of the multi asset fund's decisions. Still the more we understand these things the more confident we are when we see movements. What I really don't like is unexpected movements that don't match my understanding of the underlying market movements.

    Alex.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

91Posts Today

2,284Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Ah these care free days of watching #ENG score 5 goals in the first half of a World Cup match. It reminds me of... Never.

  • Then it should be. It's not some accident. It's deliberate grappling https://t.co/UxVTuUSNio

  • Penalty yes but time someone was sent off for these wrestling moves #WorldCup

  • Follow Martin