Downsides to PRSA with Standard Life
- Thread starter PensionAdvic
- Start date
- Status
Dave Vanian
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,328
I agree. Some of his contributions to Askaboutmoney have been very helpful. But refusing to answer questions on charges on his product and then deleting his posts isn't helpful to this particular thread.
On reflection, maybe @Marc is right to compare the performance of an index fund with the gross (rather than the net) return of the index it is attempting to track, even if that is not the industry convention. After all, withholding taxes reduce the return to investors.
So, the difference in annualised performance of the Vanguard Global Stock Index Fund Institutional Plus EUR Acc compared to the gross return of the MSCI World Index over the 3 years to 31 July 2021 was 0.61%. That's 0.7% better than the 1.31% difference in annualised performance of the Standard Life Vanguard fund compared to the gross return of the MSCI World Index over the same period.
However, a difference of 0.7% is still nowhere near enough to make up for the cost of the PRSA wrapper plus advisory costs associated with Marc's unbundled offering.
So, the difference in annualised performance of the Vanguard Global Stock Index Fund Institutional Plus EUR Acc compared to the gross return of the MSCI World Index over the 3 years to 31 July 2021 was 0.61%. That's 0.7% better than the 1.31% difference in annualised performance of the Standard Life Vanguard fund compared to the gross return of the MSCI World Index over the same period.
However, a difference of 0.7% is still nowhere near enough to make up for the cost of the PRSA wrapper plus advisory costs associated with Marc's unbundled offering.
So do I - his posts are always thought-provoking.
I'm not sure I understand the question. Could you re-phrase?
I thought we already ascertained that they track two different indexes? So comparing them like this doesn't allow us to reason about performance difference from the two investment wrapper routes.
Imo, We need to compare SL to ideally a vg ETF that tracks the same index.
I also appreciate your posts Marc, but I don't think your habit of deleting / editing posts serves you or the community well.
I was following the thread and I didn't understand why you are finding it impossible to debate (or what).
My line of interest way about SL costs vs a low cost ETF which I think is an interesting and relevant topic to debate
No, both funds track the MSCI World Index.
To go bring this back to basics & clarify a few points:
- Is this the [broken link removed] from Standard Life?
- The total cost to the average punter is 1.31% for transfers over 100k, based on past performance?
- The total cost is 1.56% (i.e. +0.25% + 1.31%) for anything under that?
- Anyone can open a PRSA by contacting SL directly?
No, 1.31% is the annualised difference in return of the SL/Vanguard fund (which I assume reflected their standard AMC of 0.90%), compared to the gross total return (concept explained in an earlier post) of the index (MSCI World) it purports to track for the three year period to 31 July 2021.
I appreciate this thread has become very difficult, probably impossible, to follow now that @Marc has deleted/edited his previous posts.
The bottom line is that the SL/Vanguard offering is probably as good as it gets for PRSA transfers over €100k.
If you plan to add more thought aren't the charges higher?
What about Davy and buying a vanguard ETF direct?
If it was possible to access this unbundled product without incurring advisory and/or investment managements costs, then I would agree with yesterday's reformulation of your original response.
But that's obviously of academic interest to the OP.
Gordon Gekko
Registered User
- Messages
- 7,847
Are there any other kind of posts?
Dave Vanian
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,328
Yes - I'd welcome any posts that seek to inform readers here, by making information available freely. Marc does that in other threads and I hope he continues doing that.
In this particular thread, he posted a comparison between his own product and the Standard Life / Vanguard product claiming that his product was better. But he showed the Standard Life charges including sales commission and left out the sales commission on his own product. That makes the comparison invalid on the basis of charges. This was challenged by me and others and instead of clarifying or correcting his posts, he simply deleted them and replaced them with rather sulky-looking comments about not being able to debate here, which effectively destroyed most of the entire thread by rendering it virtually impossible to read or follow. I still think that this was a rather petulant and unhelpful thing to do. That said, it's just one thread. I repeat that I'd be happy to see more constructive and helpful contributions from Marc in the future, like the helpful and informative posts he has made before.
- Status