• The post you are reporting:
   
  It is indeed very interesting and this is something that I have a professional interest in.
  
  NEST is a very badly flawed scheme. It has only one virtue - its cheap, though not as cheap as originally intended. It is clear that this scheme will encourage a lot of 'misbuying' and is a potential millstone around the necks of small employers.
  
  For me the big problem arises simply because it is cheap. It offers a limited investment choice - a range of 'retirement date funds' of limited ambition and 5 others, a Sharia Fund, an Ethical Fund, a couple of gilt/cash based options and one mixed asset with higher volatility. I have little faith in any of them to actually achieve a good return and this may be a scandal waiting to happen.
  
  To many in the media are obsessed with charges and compare like for like schemes on charges using the same illustrative performance. The big flaw there is that the cheap scheme has to actually perform and in the real world that is not easy. That said, yes - there are a lot of much higher charged schemes that are very poor in performance as well. So while cheap does not necessarily mean better, expensive does not necessarily mean better either. This make a real dilemma for anyone who wants to gain value from a pension or any investment.
  
  Value is a combination of performance related to charges related to the risks the investment takes. Does an investment justify its charges by achieving additional performance relative to the risks taken? That is always the big question and it is never an easy one to answer. Put simply, you want gain more bang for your buck but without exposing yourself too much to the explosion.
  
  My own choice for my own pension (and ISA) is to avoid cheap funds/stakeholder pensions. I do not like trackers and I believe firmly in good active management whether by active stockpicking funds or through active assets allocations. My own portfolio is somewhat aggressive and is much higher in volatility risk than I would ever recommend to a client - well the vast majority anyway.... To me cheap does not do the job at hand. Most active funds though (I have 114000 of them on my database of all types...) are either dudd or mediocre and fail to justify their charges - that is where knowledge comes in. I have 307 identified that I consider to be 'superior' in their sectors to the herd.
  
  In my case I earn by providing a service and getting any underlying investment to work hard relative to the risks taken. There are never any guarantees in that but, well, let us just say that I do not do too badly....
  
  WOOOPS - I had better add - none of what I said above should be considered as advice to invest. It is important to obtain professional advice and know the risks of any investment that you undertake. Investments go down as well as up and pensions should be regarded as a long term investment.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason