The Lemon Fool

I currently have a large holding (within a SIPP) of this ETF. AIUI the ongoing charge is 0.20

I’d like to lower the cost but remain with a world ETF. I may be comparing apples and pears but I’ve looked at VWRP (which I hope is the Vanguard equivalent) but it seems to have a slightly higher charge rate of 0.22

Should I be looking at others (please make suggestions) or should I leave well enough alone? I’d be happy to move, all else being ok, if the saving were about 0.10

Best wishes,

Steve

Steveam wrote:I currently have a large holding (within a SIPP) of this ETF. AIUI the ongoing charge is 0.20

I’d like to lower the cost but remain with a world ETF. I may be comparing apples and pears but I’ve looked at VWRP (which I hope is the Vanguard equivalent) but it seems to have a slightly higher charge rate of 0.22

Should I be looking at others (please make suggestions) or should I leave well enough alone? I’d be happy to move, all else being ok, if the saving were about 0.10

Best wishes,

Steve

I made my own pick'n'mix global etf with a handful of vanguard bits to cover Europe, USA, Japan, Asia ex japan and emerging markets, you can drop the fee below 0.2 with the rght srt of weightings.
Vanguard do FTSE Developed World UCITS ETF (VHVG) for 0.12 and VFEG for emerging markets. A balance of about 90:10 matches the global VWRP for much lower costs.

Look here https://monevator.com/low-cost-index-trackers/

The HSBC All World Index Fund is the cheapest at OCF 0.13%. If it must be an ETF then the Invesco FTSE All World ETF is 0.15%.

As mentioned the HSBC All World at .13%, an OEIC,
or Invesco All World ETF FWRG.L an ETF at .15%

Or Developed World ETF's at .12%
SWLD.L
VEVE.L / VHVG.L

and finally Amundi PRIW.L at .05%

Throw in a side of Emerging Markets and you have an equiavalent of an All World, using 9 parts PRIW.L and 1 Part say VFEG.L for a little under .07%

Hariseldon58 wrote:and finally Amundi PRIW.L at .05%

Throw in a side of Emerging Markets and you have an equiavalent of an All World, using 9 parts PRIW.L and 1 Part say VFEG.L for a little under .07%

Good find, Amundi not on my radar and that's a fair ol' saving.

kempiejon wrote:
Good find, Amundi not on my radar and that's a fair ol' saving.

It is indeed. I'd check how happy you are with the index it is tracking - https://www.solactive.com/indices/gbs/? ... omposition .

That's not an immediate criticism, as I haven't poured over it, but I've never heard of it before.

genou wrote:That's not an immediate criticism, as I haven't poured over it, but I've never heard of it before.

A quick squizz on the Amundi site, 68% US, big 7 take up nigh 20%, yield 1.6% tracks a little ahead of the global Vanguard offering I hold.
https://www.amundietf.co.uk/en/professi ... 1681043599
Interesting.

In addition to those charges, check up on broker charges for holding them.

OEICS will be different to ETFs, perhaps.

Amundi has €2 trillion assets under management. What concerns me is the small market cap of PRIW. It clearly is not economic, and I wonder about the quoted history with (I expect) very little invested in the fund. Amundi also offers a dirt cheap emerging markets tracker too.

Arborbridge wrote:In addition to those charges, check up on broker charges for holding them.

OEICS will be different to ETFs, perhaps.

The Amundi PRIW.L is in fact an ETF.
I thought it might be so cheap because it was synthetic, but it's replicated, so I guess the reason why it can be so cheap is not having to pay to follow the MSCI index. Amundi have another developed world global ETF under the Lyxor (Soc gen) brand, following the MSCI index, but ongoing charges are 0.12%

torata

I note from the Key Information Document that PRIW tracks the large and mid cap whole world (23 countries) index.

torata wrote:The Amundi PRIW.L is in fact an ETF.
I thought it might be so cheap because it was synthetic, but it's replicated, so I guess the reason why it can be so cheap is not having to pay to follow the MSCI index. Amundi have another developed world global ETF under the Lyxor (Soc gen) brand, following the MSCI index, but ongoing charges are 0.12%

I expect the Solactive index is cheaper than the MSCI one. Nonetheless, I expect that PRIW is cheap mostly because it is small and there fore does not have high costs and Amundi are trying to build it up. I expect that they will increase the price later on.

richfool wrote:I note from the Key Information Document that PRIW tracks the large and mid cap whole world (23 countries) index.

It is not an "all world" tracker. It is a "world" tracker, i.e. it tracks the developed world only:

Solactive GBS Developed Markets Large & Mid Cap USD Index is an equity index representative of the large and mid-cap markets across 23 developed countries.

https://www.fundslibrary.co.uk/FundsLib ... f3zmu0&r=1

In my original post mentioning PRIW I suggested a "side of" emerging markets exposure to provide an All World exposure, this ETF is cheap because it uses a much less expensive Index, they want market share. The ETF is just under One Billion dollars under management and often these ETFs are effectively smaller parts of an Umbrella fund. Amundi is a large asset manager and the performance is fine compared to the other more well known ETFs that I mentioned, for diversity I hold all of these.

Its an interesting alternative and if it becomes more popular then it might well bring prices down among its competitors.

torata wrote:

Arborbridge wrote:In addition to those charges, check up on broker charges for holding them.

OEICS will be different to ETFs, perhaps.

The Amundi PRIW.L is in fact an ETF.

torata

I've asked A J Bell the question about charges, and had a factually correct, but completely useless, reply. So I've asked the question in a different way: I do wonder if they employ an AI bot.
The point is that charges for "ETFs" have a maximum charge per month, whereas OEICs do not - there is no maximum.

If one looks at the overview page of various ETFs that will say that they are an "ETF". Fine - so there's a maximum amount in charges per month, brilliant. But I accidentally looked at a different page the other day and there it says: "Legal Structure: OEIC"

So it's an ETF if you look in one place, and an OEIC if you look in a different place. So, to me that makes the position on charge ambiguous. If they are saying "this is an ETF but we are going to charge it like an OEIC" then their wording is at the very least confusing.

Arb

AJ Ball have PRIW as ETF here https://www.ajbell.co.uk/market-research/LSE:PRIW so I guess that's be one's evidence if an increased charge hit? Yesterday I saw a reference to another market probably European. I might have tracked the page down to FT where it was described as an SICAV. New term for me, "What is a SICAV Fund? This is the European (offshore) version of an 'OEIC'." So not an ETF an UCITS?
https://markets.ft.com/data/etfs/tearsh ... 1W:GER:EUR

I'm not sure if I am minded to swap VWRP for PRIW plus something emerging but the lower cost looks worth confirming. What others have said about a smaller fund and prices possibility of them rising in the future are risks as is that of being wound up or merged if unprofitable, that happened to an xTrackers ETF I had.

Arborbridge wrote:I've asked A J Bell the question about charges, and had a factually correct, but completely useless, reply. So I've asked the question in a different way: I do wonder if they employ an AI bot.
The point is that charges for "ETFs" have a maximum charge per month, whereas OEICs do not - there is no maximum.

If one looks at the overview page of various ETFs that will say that they are an "ETF". Fine - so there's a maximum amount in charges per month, brilliant. But I accidentally looked at a different page the other day and there it says: "Legal Structure: OEIC"

So it's an ETF if you look in one place, and an OEIC if you look in a different place. So, to me that makes the position on charge ambiguous. If they are saying "this is an ETF but we are going to charge it like an OEIC" then their wording is at the very least confusing.

If AJB's documentation is inconsistent, raise the issue with them. PRIW is an ETF.

kempiejon wrote:"What is a SICAV Fund? This is the European (offshore) version of an 'OEIC'." So not an ETF an UCITS?
https://markets.ft.com/data/etfs/tearsh ... 1W:GER:EUR

Yes it is an ETF, as the FT states at the top of the page. ETFs trade as closed funds (like ITs) for retail investors, but as open ended funds (like OEICs) for authorised participants:

https://www.blackrock.com/au/intermedia ... ket-makers

GeoffF100 wrote:

kempiejon wrote:"What is a SICAV Fund? This is the European (offshore) version of an 'OEIC'." So not an ETF an UCITS?
https://markets.ft.com/data/etfs/tearsh ... 1W:GER:EUR

Yes it is an ETF, as the FT states at the top of the page. ETFs trade as closed funds (like ITs) for retail investors, but as open ended funds (like OEICs) for authorised participants:

https://www.blackrock.com/au/intermedia ... ket-makers

PRIW is an ETF under the SICAV regime, so I am pretty sure that's OK. But only Bell can answer for the Vanguard ETFs which say "Legal Status: Oeic". It could be they are saying they take the Vanguard funds as ETFs even though the underlying fund is an OEIC. Or it could be they are saying that because it is an ETF with the same structure as an OEIC, they will trigger their charges as though it were an OEIC.

I never knew there were such things as ETFs that weren't ETFs. How is that even possible?

PS not sure, but I don't think whether it is UCITS or SICAV makes any difference in this particular matter.

GeoffF100 wrote:Yes it is an ETF, as the FT states at the top of the page. ETFs trade as closed funds (like ITs) for retail investors, but as open ended funds (like OEICs) for authorised participants:

https://www.blackrock.com/au/intermedia ... ket-makers

OK. Thanks for the clarification. Now as Arb said how will AJB teat them, I guess that's to be taken up with them on this specific example, which as I said I'm not minded to switch to. Not especially.