Hoe many Platforms for a 7 figure portfolio?

[Dod101]

Indeed. But how do we define a ‘good one’?

Dod

Large, profitable, well capitalised. I've gone for Hargreaves Lansdown.

OK I guess we could all say that. So we probably have HL, II and who else? Not sure I would place too much reliance on a bank owned one if you read Gillian Tett in the Weekend FT. Maybe AJBell is as good as it gets.

Dod

[Lootman]

Large, profitable, well capitalised. I've gone for Hargreaves Lansdown.

OK I guess we could all say that. So we probably have HL, II and who else? Not sure I would place too much reliance on a bank owned one if you read Gillian Tett in the Weekend FT. Maybe AJBell is as good as it gets.

Fidelity, Vanguard and Schwab are all US securities firms that meet those criteria and have a presence in the UK.

The ideal would be if JP Morgan offered UK securities dealing but to my knowledge they do not, unless anyone knows differently.

[scrumpyjack]

I too prefer one which is not part of a bank. UK stockbroking would be a tiny part of their operations and their other financial activities increase risk. I was at one point a client of Barclays Stockbrokers and they were not good, to put it mildly. They used to be a leading company in stockbroking but I suppose management was focussed elsewhere and wasn't really interested. They let HL take their business away.

[wanderer]

I always think of any household name being a good bet. Halifax, Barclays, Nat West.... If any of those had a problem the government would have to step in and bail things out in order to avoid a broader crisis of confidence in the banks.

I feel much less confident that the same could be said for HL, II or AJ Bell - most people on the Clapham Omnibus have never heard of them.

That means I think investments are safer in Lloyd's or Halifax wrappers than they are as an AJ Bell account, even though the underlying platform is the same....

Edited to add: the biggest risk - I reckon - is either an inside job or a cyber attack. In either case I think the "household name" serves a beneficial purpose and will make the "victims" seem much closer to the man on the street. I think the same man on the street probably couldn't give a toss if clients of a company called ii or abrdn lost money. One he's never heard of and the other he's never heard of and can't figure out how to pronounce it either.

[mc2fool]

I always think of any household name being a good bet. Halifax, Barclays, Nat West.... If any of those had a problem the government would have to step in and bail things out in order to avoid a broader crisis of confidence in the banks.

Yes, I agree. Being part of a too-big-to-fail group has its advantages.

That means I think investments are safer in Lloyd's or Halifax wrappers than they are as an AJ Bell account, even though the underlying platform is the same....

AJ Bell is totally separate. But as for Lloyds and Halifax....

"The Lloyds Bank Direct Investments Service is operated by Halifax Share Dealing Limited." https://www.lloydsbank.com/investing.html

I think the same man on the street probably couldn't give a toss if clients of a company called ii or abrdn lost money. One he's never heard of and the other he's never heard of and can't figure out how to pronounce it either.

"ii: an abrdn business." https://www.ii.co.uk/

[Steveam]

4 brokers …

1 x SIPP
1 x ISA & general trading account
2 x general trading account

I often have holdings across several brokers (both protected and unprotected). Year by year I move assets to the ISA but it will take forever.

Best wishes,

Steve

[Wuffle]

If you were really paranoid about this sort of thing - I am not - it may be worth noting that the 'high risk' version of both The Peoples Pension and NEST are both dead ringers for Vanguard 80/20 on a total return basis.
I have ended up auto enrolled in both along with a HL SIPP of my own choice.
Not the natural home for 7 figure portfolios but I can assure you that the animals that I work with in a grim warehouse will make the French revolution look like an infant school picnic if you take the money off them.

W.

[tjh290633]

I have commented on the past of the problems associated with having investments split between a PEP and an ISA with the same broker, when it was not possible to amalgamate them. I would definitely recommend a single account for one forms of investment, be it ISA or SIPP.

Recently I have found the transfer of Jump Holdings to HL and of Alliance Trust Savings to II to be not without problems. F&C Investment Managers peregrination via BMO to Columbia Threadneedle has also been troublesome. I should add that these are designated accounts for grandchildren, approaching or past their majority, and in theory getting investments transferred into their own accounts should work easily. Sale of a broker ought to be simple for the investor caught up, but it is not.

Having said all that, I have a couple of ISAs with fund managers dating back to the 1990s, one with M&G and the other originally with Eagle Star, but now run by Columbia Threadneedle. and my wife fas one with yet another fund manager which has been through several manifestations, from Newton to JP Morgan.

My recommendation is for one account for each type of investment. I think that size is of little relevance. Changes of ownership of the broker or fund manager can be a pain.

TJH

[XFool]

I have commented on the past of the problems associated with having investments split between a PEP and an ISA with the same broker, when it was not possible to amalgamate them. I would definitely recommend a single account for one forms of investment, be it ISA or SIPP.

Could you please briefly recapitulate these problems, or point us to your past comments. I'm not sure what the disadvantages are though one advantage I can see would be if someone wanted to move a certified holding into one in their ISA.

[tjh290633]

I have commented on the past of the problems associated with having investments split between a PEP and an ISA with the same broker, when it was not possible to amalgamate them. I would definitely recommend a single account for one forms of investment, be it ISA or SIPP.

Could you please briefly recapitulate these problems, or point us to your past comments. I'm not sure what the disadvantages are though one advantage I can see would be if someone wanted to move a certified holding into one in their ISA.

Simple. Money was always in the wrong place. I did not duplicate holdings to avoid problems. Had I done, it would have been very difficult to reinvest in the right place. Remember it was not possible to move money from a PEP to an ISA or vice versa. It was great relief when sense prevailed and they could be amalgamated. Remember that you can only subscribe to one share ISA in one financial year.

TJH

[pkparks]

Hello,

I'm currently working with two platforms for ISAs and one for SIPP. My HYP is not quite equally split between the 2 ISA platforms. I've tried to avoid holding the same share on both ISA platforms. Makes it easier for me to track.

I am still subscribing annual allowance to the smaller ISA platform each year. It should reach the value of the other ISA around the time I plan to retire. At that point I may start paying the Tax-Free cash lump sum from my SIPP into a third ISA platform.

Best,

[Walkeia]

Personally I believe two for any sized portfolio suffices