≡ Menu
Weekend Reading logo

What caught my eye this week.

Welcome back and Happy New Year! I hope you got just what you wanted for Christmas, and that you continue to get what you want for the rest of the year.

Well, just so long as what you want includes a sufficiently severe enough case of investing obsession to keep you coming back to Monevator throughout 2025.

Of course if you’re reading this article – and it’s not because you were sloppily Googling for old Mr Motivator videos to kickstart your fitness goals – then you’re probably already a bit of an investing nerd.

And that makes you unusual. Indeed I can’t remember a time when most people were less interested in shares.

If I allude to Monevator when meeting new people then I usually get more questions about crypto, side hustles, or buy-to-let than anything about the stock market.

In contrast, 20 years ago there were investing programmes on daytime TV and realms of coverage in the business pages.

That’s mostly all gone – and TikTok videos about YOLO-ing into MicroStrategy shares are a poor substitute.

A land of unbelievers

To the extent that this all reflects a sober move towards passive investing, I can hardly complain.

I might be a stock picking nutter but that’s not what I believe most people should do.

And while my co-blogger The Accumulator can bore for Blighty on the 4% rule – seriously, don’t get trapped with him in the kitchen at a party  – index fund investing is largely set-and-forget. There’s not much to make a TV show about.

However I don’t believe the eerie quiet really reflects a nation secretly growing rich on their global trackers.

The Financial Times just published data from Abrdn (sadly that’s not a typo) showing Britons have the ‘lowest appetite’ in the G7 when it comes to stock market investing:

Okay, we are doing well for investing in pensions. So perhaps there is a bit of slow and steady compounding in retirement accounts crowding out the enthusiasm for shares I recall from the past.

Moreover, the FT explains the sky-high US allocation to directly owning equities partly reflects that it has so many more very wealthy people. In contrast those of moderate means prefer to invest in housing.

Not that the US becoming so much richer than us is a comfort. But it is another story.

Spread the word

However you interpret this data, I think it’s a shame so few directly invest in equities.

Investing in the stock market made me financially independent in 20-odd years without a rockstar income.

And while there was certainly plenty of hard saving and a bit of luck (or even – cough – skill) in the mix, I still believe snowballing your way to financial freedom via the stock market is an aspiration open to everyone, not just the rich.

If you do too then let’s spread the word to more of our countrymen and women in 2025.

I’ll do my bit with this website. But how will you get your friends and family to tune in?

Besides regularly sending them Monevator articles, I mean.

Let us know in the comments, and have a great weekend – and a great year.

p.s. A quick thanks after dozens of new Monevator members signed up following my Christmas post. I’m a bit flummoxed as to why this call to action did so well, to be honest. But my hunch is the stream of generous comments from existing members played a part. Social proof is a powerful force and reading so many people saying nice things probably reassured a few more into joining us. So thank you!

[continue reading…]

{ 33 comments }

Amateur activist [Members]

Monevator Moguls logo

You weren’t rewarded for contrarianism in 2024.

If you decided in January that enthusiasm for A.I.-related companies looked frothy, US indices seemed stretched, and that as inflation eased and rates normalised we’d surely see a rotation into something – anything – other than the same half-dozen and a bit tech behemoths that drove returns in 2023, then woe betide you for having ideas above your station.

This article can be read by selected Monevator members. Please see our membership plans and consider joining! Already a member? Sign in here.
{ 19 comments }

Weekend reading: Merry Christmas everyone

Weekend Reading logo

What caught my eye this week.

I can’t deny the Monevator Christmas party is always a little awkward, but I look forward to it every year.

It’s the anonymity that makes it tricky. Not just keeping our identities secret from the waiting staff, but also from each other.

Finumus doesn’t want anybody to know who he really is, you see. But when you land your private helicopter in the pub garden it’s a bit of a giveaway.

Meanwhile my false beard always gets covered in gravy.

Secret Santa adds to the surreal air, but again it’s easy to guess who gave what.

Did I really need The Accumulator’s slightly musky Chillbreaker now the cost-of-living crisis is over?

And while Squirrel accepted her framed stock certificate of a triple-levered uranium ETF – blatantly from Finumus – with good grace, TA groaned as he unwrapped a copy of One Up On Wall Street.

“Every bloody year…” he complained, warding off Peter Lynch’s stock-picking classic with a copy of Tim Hale’s Smart Money – which he carries with him everywhere to shun temptation, like a Holy cross.

Lynch’s book flew back through the air at me – it’s not easy to duck when you’re sporting a three-foot long beard – and I packed it away for next year.

(Stay hungry, stay frugal!)

Then there are the gatecrashers.

It’s nice enough when Lars shows his face for old time’s sake. And it’s heartening to see The Greybeard grown fat on his equity income trust dividends after all these years.

But is that not Ermine in the corner? Plotting something with a bright-looking fellow on a dusty old Sinclair computer?

When the whole of yesteryear’s Team Monevator turns up expecting brandy and mince pies, I’m afraid to say we sneak out the back door and escape via that waiting chopper.

Monevator membership revenues are going quite well, but we’re not running another Studio 54 here!

Thank you, thank you

Talking of membership, a huge thanks to the many readers who now support this site with a few quid every month. It’s made a big difference.

I was reading Ed Zitron this week on how the Internet, media, and just using a computer has been progressively ruined over the past decade, and I thought again that I’d probably have turned off Monevator if enough people hadn’t signed up to support our work.

Zitron writes:

As every single platform we use is desperate to juice growth from every user, everything we interact with is hyper-monetized through plugins, advertising, microtransactions and other things that constantly gnaw at the user experience.

We load websites expecting them to be broken, especially on mobile, because every single website has to have 15+ different ad trackers, video ads that cover large chunks of the screen, all while demanding our email or for us to let them send us notifications.

I know – of course we do some of this ourselves.

We show ads to non-members on the website, and I prompt new visitors to sign-up to read us by email. We (sparingly) use affiliate links. And some of this involves the same tracking stuff we’re all exposed to on every other site on the Internet, apart from possibly Wikipedia.

I suppose a few people may consider us adding a membership tier to be part of this ‘making everything worse’.

Well I don’t.

I love the membership tier and the purity of email.

Some dwindling number of diehards will never accept that creating digital products and destinations for years on end has to be paid for somehow.

But for the rest of us I prefer a model where we directly pay for things.

I do it myself with other websites and newsletters. Though I accept the costs add up, and there is a limit.

If you are of the grumpier persuasion, you’d probably be surprised at everything I turn down.

Paid-for links to crypto, currency exchange, and loan sites. (We never sell links). Well-known companies asking us to create stealthy articles to promote their products. Lucrative guest posts by SEO firms. The long trails of clickbait ads that even old-line newspaper sites have at the end of every article these days.

Again, you might say you’re looking at an advert next to these words on our website right now.

All I can say is that this is the thin end of a very thick wedge. And I fight to stay at the right end.

We’re still standing, yeah yeah yeah

Zitron’s article turned a bit hyperbolic but I agree with most of it.

However where I disagree is his broad brush claim that media sites have done all this ‘enshittification’ for vast growth and profits.

In fact they’ve usually made endless compromises and degraded the experience to near-unusable levels either because they are desperate not to go bust or because they already went bust and the new owner is squeezing out whatever juice is left in the brand. The big platforms have sucked all the air and money out of the Internet, and everyone else is left to starve.

We’re spoiled in the UK. We have the BBC and (whatever you think of the politics) The Guardian, two of the least-polluted free media sites left standing.

But countless others have gone dark, or else it would have been better had they done so.

As for independent blogs, maybe 95% of those I’ve linked to in the UK are no longer around.

Honestly, I’m sometimes tempted to turn Monevator into a subscription-only newsletter and switch off the lights, too. It’s a better experience for readers and better for us. No more fighting spam each day!

But we still get so many emails from new people thanking us for helping them take their first steps in investing, or from older hands for keeping them on the straight and narrow.

I’ve collected several hundred of these. That folder is probably the crowning achievement of my working life.

Perhaps I should have tried harder to achieve more, I guess, but anyway I’m loathe to turn off the site while we’re making a difference – however much Google is trying to kill us and others off with its endless algorithm changes.

So again, if you’re signed up as a Monevator member then thank you!

You make it possible for us to continue to keep 99% of the 2,000-plus articles we’ve written free to read. A portion of your subscription covers the 30 minutes or more I spend every day keeping Monevator clear of toxic links, racist and sexist comments, and bit rot.

Hopefully you’re enjoying the extra member content too, of course!

We’re able to go deeper in the member-only articles, especially with my active ones. And it’s very nice not to worry about search engines with them.

Don’t forget you can browse all our Mavens and Moguls posts in their archives. There’s quite a few now!

The weakest link

On the opposite tack, a few members have asked me to paywall more content.

Really – I was surprised too, but I guess it reflects a desire not to be taken advantage of.

Personally I feel we have the right balance with our investing-related content, but there is a chance that I will eventually make the Weekend Reading links a members-only affair.

Doing these links is a service to our regular readers. Nobody stumbles across them via search.

And Weekend Reading is the reading list I’d love to see each week if I wasn’t creating it myself. It takes eight to ten hours to compile each one (much of which consists of reading and rejecting articles you never see links to) but it is a labour of love.

However its roots lie in that better Internet of 20 years ago.

Back then we used to do ‘blog carnivals’ where blogs would link to each other to spread their traffic and credibility around.

Yet besides one or two honourable exceptions – thank you Simple Living in Somerset and Abnormal Returns – almost nobody links freely now.

I’ve included hundreds of links to certain blogs and had at most a couple back to us over two decades. More often zero.

I get it’s harder because we’re a British site and we can be kind of nerdy. But we do have some articles that are universally worthy of linking to.

Even worse, Google probably penalises us nowadays for doing what used to be the right thing and highlighting the best of the web via these links.

It’s so rare to do this now that it’s potentially become an indicator of a spammy link farm.

Ho hum. A halfway house would be to keep the Weekend Reading list free but for email subscribers only. So again, subscribe to the free emails if you haven’t.

Finally, if you’re a member but you’re not getting the emails you expect to see, then please do drop me a line via a reply to this email (ideally) or via the contact form link top-right (risk of getting stuck in spam.)

The system is not perfect, but I can always sort out problems. Ditto if you have log-in issues. (Deleting your cookies usually does the trick).

The best readers on the Web

Okay, that’s a lot in the weeds for a busy Christmas weekend.

I try not to solicit membership too often but the reality is some people churn away (et tu Maven?) so we have to keep topping up.

TLDR: please everyone sign-up as members and then we can stay classy indefinitely.

Beyond that, thanks for reading us for another year.

With all the competition from cat and dog TikToks and belaboured YouTube videos where someone reads out their Vanguard statement for 20 minutes for 100,000 views, we do not take our audience for granted.

Nor, for that matter, the many wonderful readers who add so much value in our comments.

If Monevator still has a USP in today’s universally indexing-friendly age, it’s surely in the quality of the discussions that take place beneath so many of our articles.

Happy new year

Right, that’s us almost done for 2024. I’ll have my Moguls missive out for December but otherwise we’re taking a break until the first Saturday of the new year.

So cheers, Merry Christmas – and see you in 2025!

(Now grab the other end of this cracker TA…)

[continue reading…]

{ 81 comments }
Vanguard price rise: what’s the impact and what are the alternatives? post image

It looks like Vanguard is no longer the undisputed consumer champion of old. Vanguard’s USP has been waning for a while but the recent announcement of a £4 per month minimum charge for DIY investment services has put the tin lid on it. (Note: this price rise does not apply to Junior ISAs.)

Previously, Vanguard’s DIY investors paid a 0.15% platform fee calculated on their account balance. That made Vanguard excellent value for beginners, young investors, and anyone who can’t afford to put much away. 

But from 31 January 2025, customers will pay £48 annually for portfolios worth less than £32,000.1

This is a huge change. 

How Vanguard’s price rise affects small portfolio owners

Anyone with a £1,000 portfolio will pay £48 in charges or 4.8% of their account balance.

Previously they would have paid £1.50.

The numbers may not seem large until you consider that global equities post an average annual return of around 8%2.

At that rate, most of the example investor’s return will be consumed by fees. Precisely the fate that Vanguard’s founder, John Bogle, worked to help people avoid.

As Vanguard itself says, quoting Bogle:

Investors need to understand not only the magic of compounding long-term returns, but the tyranny of compounding costs; costs that ultimately overwhelm that magic.

Very true. And while all brokers are grappling with their own rising costs, an informed investor surveying the options will find that several other platforms are now more competitive than Vanguard for small portfolios.

Costly consequences

Vanguard’s £48 minimum means the platform is now only worth considering once you’ve amassed at least £19,200 in an ISA / GIA or £13,700 in a SIPP. (See below for our alternative picks).

You can sense-check your own numbers using the method we’ve previously outlined: How to work out which platform is cheapest for you

Do that and if your portfolio is worth well over £32,000 then you may be left wondering what all the fuss is about. You won’t see any fee hike at that level.

On the other hand…

Vanguard alternatives for small portfolios

Disclosure: Links to platforms may be affiliate links, where we may earn a small commission. It doesn’t affect the price you pay nor how we judge the brokers. This article is not personal financial advice. Your capital is at risk when you invest.

The best Vanguard alternative right now is InvestEngine. InvestEngine’s platform charges and dealing fees are precisely zero for all account types including SIPPs.

InvestEngine hasn’t previously enabled SIPP transfers. But it’s now making an exception for Vanguard customers. 

If you’re wondering how InvestEngine can afford to offer its services for free, here’s its own explanationBut please read our zero commission broker article, too.

InvestEngine is covered by the standard £85,000 FSCS investor compensation scheme

Unlike Vanguard, InvestEngine is an ETF-only platform. I don’t think that’s a barrier though as ETFs are now cheaper than funds for many asset classes. And InvestEngine offers plenty of options, including non-Vanguard providers. 

Another zero-fee alternative is Prosper.

Prosper is every bit as cheap InvestEngine. Again, you can read its own explanation on how it makes money.

Prosper is an app-only investing service, offering a limited number of index funds and ETFs – though Vanguard products are prominent. The range may be small but it has the main asset classes covered, and typically includes a competitive index tracker in each category.

Prosper also includes a SIPP in its account line-up, alongside an ISA and GIA as usual.

The firm itself is relatively new. But it is protected by the FSCS scheme.

Cheapest Vanguard alternatives if you prefer better known brands

These options are worth considering because they couple free fund trading with a low percentage platform fee:

Close Brothers:

  • Pros: 0.25% platform fee, zero dealing fee on funds. 
  • Cons: Expensive SIPP. 

HSBC Global Investment Centre:

  • Pros: 0.25% platform fee, zero dealing fee on funds. 
  • Cons: Restricted number of non-HSBC index funds. No SIPP. 

Fidelity:

  • Pros: Cheap SIPP so long as you invest monthly – 0.35% platform fee, zero dealing fee on funds. 
  • Cons: £90 minimum annual charge if you don’t invest monthly. Applies to accounts worth less than £25,000.

Santander Investment Hub

  • Pros: Cheap SIPP – 0.35% platform fee, zero dealing fee on funds. The same price as Fidelity but no penalty for failing to invest every month. 
  • Cons: Bad Trustpilot reviews albeit from a limited pool.

Dodl by AJ Bell:

  • Pros: Dodl by AJ Bell is cheaper than the rest except InvestEngine and Prosper – but only once your portfolio passes the £4,800 mark. 
  • Cons: Highly restricted fund and ETF list. £12 minimum annual account charge. 

Any other contenders?

There are a few more zero commission trading apps available but they don’t occupy the same space as Vanguard. While such firms offer ETFs, they’re primarily focussed on trading and speculating on high-risk assets.

Still, you can check many of them out via our broker comparison table.

Transfer day

There aren’t any exit charges to pay if you’d like to transfer your account away from Vanguard. 

Transferring is simple enough though it may take a few weeks. 

If your new broker doesn’t offer a Vanguard product then your investment will be sold to cash and the money moved over instead.  

Here’s Vanguard’s page on transferring out

These pieces explain what to watch out for:

What a pity

This isn’t John Bogle’s Vanguard anymore.

A fee cut on its index funds is vanishingly rare these days. Over the past several years, the company focused more on adding higher-fee active funds to its roster. Now it’s squeezing small investors. 

Under Bogle, Vanguard changed the face of the investment industry through its relentless pursuit of a simple proposition: If it’s good for our customers, it’s good for us.

In so doing, it forced its competitors to become more like Vanguard – to the benefit of millions of people.

Now though Vanguard is starting to look more like everyone else. 

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

  1. Account balances above that threshold are charged at 0.15% as before, with annual fees maxing out at £375. []
  2. Approximate historical annualised return, unadjusted for inflation []
{ 157 comments }