Active and an IFA beats passive, the reasons why.

nun

Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
4,872
I recently came across this argument for active vs passive funds....what do you think?

Pensioners are missing out on best annuity deals – FCA | Money | The Guardian

What do you think the TER's are on a suite of actively managed funds? Not trackers, as they guarantee you underperform the market...
In addition, do you, or any other self investor understand the principle of "Capacity for Loss", "Attitude to Risk", Correlation of asset classes, Economic and political impact on markets, and not just Equity markets....?
This doesn't take into account understanding legislative changes, being able to undertake extensive research into providers, funds, DFM's and so on.
I use a Financial Planner, and the fees that are paid can be settled in a myriad of ways, however, with the tax planning, cash-flow modelling, investment reviews, security of knowledge that an extensive research and analysis facility behind them, amongst other points mentioned above have proven to be incredibly worthwhile, and that key word, "value for money".....
There are other areas that are covered of course, too extensive to mention here, but I think you can get the general idea ! Well, assuming you aren't thick, myopic or even both?!
 
It's an annuity sales pitch. It compares one type of annuity against another type. It's also full of "make believe" and bemoans the plight of "regular" pension annuitants.
 
Back
Top Bottom