What caught my eye this week.
A flood of articles this week highlighted how people are abandoning Hargreaves Lansdown in favour of other – presumably cheaper – platforms.
I wasn’t surprised to hear it, going by comments from readers on our latest broker update and the broker comparison table.
Hargreaves’ fee rejig – effective from 1 March – was the firm’s first for donkey’s years. The headline platform charge was cut, and there are lower trading costs for ETFs, shares, investment trusts, and gilts. But total fee caps will rise, along with trading costs for funds.
Whether this leaves Hargreaves cheaper or dearer for you depends on how you invest.
Yes, I said it: cheaper! Potentially.
Virtually all Monevator readers who’ve commented have said they’ll see their costs rise. But calculations show Hargreaves Lansdown will be cheaper for me if I continue to trade as I have in the past.
That’s because I invest (too) actively, of course.
Most Monevator readers are much more passively invested – and they were cannily taking advantage of quirks in Hargreaves’ old fee structure to keep their costs low.
See how they run
The big articles covering the alleged exodus – from The Financial Times, The Telegraph, and The Daily Mail – are paywalled.
But this extract from the FT gives the gist:
Investment site AJ Bell said it had seen “a big spike in applications from HL customers” following the adjustment. In a typical month, AJ Bell receives inbound transfers in the high hundreds of millions of pounds from other platforms and on a normal day 10-15 per cent of this would be from HL. However, on the day after HL’s announcement this jumped to 50 per cent.
Another platform, IG, said that as of Wednesday last week, inbound transfer requests from HL had reached 94 per cent of 2025’s total volume. The mean transfer value rose from £95,000 last year to £280,000 in the same period since the fee changes, it added.
Freetrade said its average daily transfer in requests had increased threefold since January 22, compared with the average total in all of December 2025, with Hargreaves one of the leading sources.
For its part, Hargreaves said its new fees would either be the same or lower for eight out of ten customers.
The company also told the FT that almost half the transfer requests it’s seen since it revealed the new fees were from the 400,000 or so customers set to pay more from March.
Flights of fancy
I imagine all these stories were driven by data being doled out by Hargreaves Lansdown’s rivals.
Nothing like kicking a competitor when they’re down!
However I wonder if these other platforms will regret their schadenfreude someday?
I’m not here to bat for Hargreaves Lansdown – or its new-ish private equity owners. At the last count Hargreaves was host to over £150bn in assets under administration. The Bristol-based behemoth can take care of itself.
But it is interesting – and to a great extent heartening – to see how footloose at least some of its millions of customers can be.
Go back 20 years and you would have assumed the bulk of its vast pool of client money was effectively locked up. Not through any de facto gating, but through inertia, the hassle factor, and very little regulatory drive to make it easier for customers to transfer elsewhere.
For a significant cohort of customers today, though, that’s clearly not the case.
We’re ready and able to move our money in order to keep more of it for ourselves. So platforms cannot get too greedy.
Hence I wonder whether the platforms now so happy to be chosen by Hargreaves Lansdown’s fleeing customers will just be the evacuation zones of tomorrow.
No enshittification, Sherlock
Either way, our willingness to move our money should be a good defence against what’s now called enshittification – essentially when a dominant supplier first crushes the competition with a superior offering, but once secure jacks up fees and degrades its service to boost its profits.
There are just too many competing investing platforms around to allow this currently. And more are being launched each year.
Indeed if the AI-fear-driven sell-off in wealth management firms this week is any guide, the competitive pressures will only grow.
Bad news if you’re a private equity firm that bought a giant platform for cashflow, maybe…
…but good news for small and nimble private investors like us!
Wondering whether you should switch?
- Our recent platform update post highlighted the better offerings
- See our broker table for a summary of all the contenders
Have a great weekend.
From Monevator
Buffer ETFs: a strange tale of loss aversion – Monevator [Members]
Investing for the next generation: when control trumps taxes – Monevator
From the archive-ator: Adrift in the vastness on the way to FIRE – Monevator
News
UK economy grew by worse-than-expected 0.1% in final quarter of 2025 – Sky
Housing market showing ‘tentative’ signs of recovery, says RICS – Guardian
Plans to tax cash in shares ISAs to be watered down, platforms expect [Paywall] – FT
Nationwide becomes first mortgage lender to allow e-signatures – Nationwide
£9.9bn takeover of Schroders’ ends decades-long London listing – Yahoo Finance
Attempts to modernise NS&I has been a ‘full-spectrum disaster’, MPs find – Guardian
Is a four-day working week to good to be true? – BBC
Average income tax by UK area – MoneyWeek
Would you pay £7.50 for a pint of Guinness? – BBC
Dual nationals to be denied entry to UK from 25 Feb without British passport – Guardian
America’s $1tn AI gamble – Apricitas Economics
Products and services
Disclosure: Links to platforms may be affiliate links, where we may earn a commission. This article is not personal financial advice. When investing, your capital is at risk and you may get back less than invested. With commission-free brokers other fees may apply. See terms and fees. Past performance doesn’t guarantee future results.
Nationwide cuts mortgage rates, offers two-year fixes at 3.5% – What Mortgage
First-time buyers see widest low-deposit mortgage choice since 2008 – Guardian
Can you get a mortgage worth six-times your salary? – Which
Get up to £1,500 cashback when you transfer your cash and/or investments to Charles Stanley Direct through this affiliate link. Terms apply – Charles Stanley
Lifetime ISAs explained: get a 25% bonus – Be Clever With Your Cash
Mapped: your home’s flood risk, now and in the future – This Is Money
Free days out with MoneySuperMarket app – Be Clever With Your Cash
Get up to £3,000 cashback when you open or switch to an Interactive Investor SIPP. Terms and fees apply, affiliate link – Interactive Investor
New ‘Buy Now, Pay Later’ rules coming in July – Which
The best dummy accounts for bank switching – Be Clever With Your Cash
Homes for sale for less than £300,000, in pictures – Guardian
Comment and opinion
Talking about Your Perfect Portfolio with Cullen Roche – Humble Dollar
Should today’s 50-year olds expect to get the State pension? – This Is Money
Buying the dip is for losers – Money Changes Everything
Why the feel-good wealth effect from real estate beats stocks – Financial Samurai
Thieves don’t need much to access your financial accounts – Oblivious Investor
The big AI-driven job swap – Guardian
Markets are now a beauty contest on steroids – A Wealth of Common Sense
Five money questions every couple should ask – Morningstar
Why consensus fails – Of Dollars and Data
Swapping a six-figure income and a flat in Holborn to teach in Suffolk – Standard
There actually is a free lunch – The Net Worthwhile Weekly
Will your retirement go as planned? – White Coat Investor
The beautiful chart that busts three myths about this stock market – Morningstar
Naughty corner: Active antics
Why hedge funds got better while private equity just got bigger – Verdad
The rise of Wise – Fiscal.ai
Ponzicity – The Alt View
The bezzle and the bull market – Novel Investor
Bitcoin’s 50% collapse exposes two crypto industry myths – Larry Swedroe
Kindle book bargains
The Wealth Ladder by Nick Maggiulli – £0.99 on Kindle
How to Work Without Losing Your Mind by Cate Sevilla – £0.99 on Kindle
Million Dollar Weekend by Noah Kagan – £0.99 on Kindle
The Retirement Handbook by Ted Heybridge – £0.99 on Kindle
Or pick up one of the all-time great investing classics – Monevator shop
Environmental factors
Are wetter winters and frequent flooding here to stay? – BBC
The hellish ‘hothouse Earth’ scenario is getting closer, scientists say… – Guardian
…as Trump revokes landmark EPA climate change ruling – BBC
Why this sustainability expert decided against a heat pump – Which
Seaweed could replace single-use plastics in medicine… – BBC
…meanwhile its drastic spread threatens marine life and fishing – The Conversation
Seahorses, seals, and sharks spotted in the Thames – Ian Visits
Robot overlord roundup
Radiology is a case study on why AI won’t replace human workers – CTV
Should we worry about how this AI just passed the ‘vending machine test’? – Sky
AI doesn’t replace work. It intensifies it – Harvard Business Review
The unsettling rise of AI real estate slop – The Atlantic [h/t Abnormal Returns]
It seems Moltbook was just performance art by humans – Forbes
Chatbots post ‘dangerous risk’ when giving medical advice – BBC
AI-generated text is overwhelming institutions – The Conversation
Not at the dinner table
The pessimist who became a prophet – FT [h/t Abnormal Returns]
We don’t need, and couldn’t afford, a Universal Basic Income – David Smith
There’s no such thing as tech: ten years later – Anil Dash
No, AI doesn’t justify lower interest rates – Paul Krugman
The real reason ICE agents wear masks – The Atlantic
Off our beat
26 ways to be a better thinker – Ryan Holiday
Write for yourself, and wisdom will follow – More To That
The cruel treatment of prisoners in the American civil war – The Atlantic
Daily caffeine could reduce your risk of developing dementia – Science Alert
Eleven interesting ideas – Derek Thompson
The workplace wasn’t designed for humans, and it shows – The Conversation
End game play – Will Manidis via X
Here’s 21 of the most beautiful gardens in the world – Homes & Gardens
And finally…
“I’d tell men and women in their mid-twenties not to settle for a job or a profession or even a career. Seek a calling. Even if you don’t know what that means, seek it. If you’re following your calling, the fatigue will be easier to bear, the disappointments will be fuel, the highs will be like nothing you’ve ever felt.”
– Phil Knight, Shoe Dog
Like these links? Subscribe to get them every Saturday. Note this article includes affiliate links, such as from Amazon and Interactive Investor.
There was an article (and podcast) from The Economist about hedging a potential AI bubble crash. For a hedging strategy, they suggest diversifying into low volatility, “quality” stocks:
“the best diversifiers were mostly filtered baskets of stocks, such as the S&P 500 ‘low volatility’ subindex”
Could be an interesting topic for Monevator to consider low-volatility indexes, alongside the usual hedging debate of gold/bonds/cryoto.
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2026/02/08/how-to-hedge-a-bubble-ai-edition?utm_campaign=a.io&utm_medium=audio.podcast.np&utm_source=theintelligence&utm_content=discovery.content.anonymous.tr_shownotes_na-na_article&utm_term=sa.l
I noticed that ig.com have a very tempting offer of up to £3,000 cashback for transferring to them. Perhaps even if HL hadn’t put up their charges, this may tempt some people.
It’s not the price rise that’s the problem with HL. It’s the private equity buyout. The rule with private equity is simple. If PE is involved it’s good for private equity. Everybody else (employees, customers) gets the shaft. Bigly.
As for the calvinist berk Phil Knight, FFS, work really isn’t the only rewarding thing you can do with your life
Yeah, Phil. Ever slept destitute on a park bench, because that’s the most likely outcome of your suggestion? Many are called, few are chosen. xkcd never stop buying lottery tickets applies
Saving me fifty quid a year, but then I don’t have ISAs or other trading with HL. ETFs only in a SIPP are now about £150/ year and trading charges are lower.
I have had an ISA and SIPP with Hargreaves Lansdown for several years, both large enough that I pay the current capped fees of £45 and £200 p.a. respectively. For the investments themselves, the money market funds attract a 0.45% ad valorem annual fee, and there is nothing to pay for my investment trust and company shares. I only make a handful of trades a year, mostly rebalancing between existing holdings.
The new fee structure replaces the 0.45% charge for funds with a 0.35% charge across funds and shares both. I assumed this would have me paying more. However, the charge on shares is still capped, so my ISA charge will go up from £45 to £150, and the SIPP charge will drop from £200 to £150. With the slight reduction (from 0.45% to 0.35%) on the charges on my money market funds, it looks like I will not be any worse off.
HL’s platform fee increases and new charges on the funds and share account would have cost our family an extra £50 per month, so we have transferred elsewhere. HL has lost our accounts and the hundreds per month we were paying; we will gain thousands in cashback from the new broker. Seems like an own goal from the new management in trying to squeeze more fees from their wealthiest customers and thus triggering an exodus of assets. Our previous loyalty was not rewarded.
@ADT — As ever, it’s worth asking if you’re looking for insurance after the flood has already happened. (Not saying it’s necessarily so, the software run-up was long and lofty. But certainly when everyone is talking about the risk of a flood and the water is already around their knees it’s worth asking 😉 )
@ermine — Aha, somebody read my ‘Finally’ quote! I’m not sure when the last time a comment referred to it was. Years perhaps? (Shoe Dog is a great book, by the way. Your mileage may vary 😉 )
Thanks for the links TI.
I took the windfall of ii reducing some account costs to position against HL. Still can’t figure out what is cheapest for me, but they seem there or thereabouts. If I could just stop trading, it would be cheaper …
@ADT(1) there’s evidence of a general rotation at the moment into quality. For index I have taken that as a move from vwrl to vhyl which knocks out much of the tech growth stocks. The difference in performance over past 6 months is noticeable. As TI notes – does that mean the trade is done? Not for me, but dyor of course. Also a flight to yield anticipating le deluge but that is a dangerous game…
I had already transferred about 1/3 of my modest holdings from HL to AJB, mainly because of the HL App’s graphs continuing not to work for most funds, and then their move to private equity.
HL sent me the email stating the new charges but also said they would not charge me the dealing fee on funds for the first 12 months. I’d like to suggest fellow Moneyvators check their email for this statement.
They have separately sent two emails warning me of my high frequency of fund switching, which tells you I am a bit active!! A main benefit to me over the years is HL free fund switching. On other platforms you have to sell, then buy the following day I believe.
They have also notified my wife of the new fees and indicated between the lines that she won’t pay more than at present.
Despite this I am still inclined to move accounts.
I have a dormant ii account; I left some years ago because I found the app was not reliable. I understand it is much improved so shall shortly be moving money there and anticipate that all will be with AJB and ii in due course.
Random off topic question – is there a forum on the monevator website to ask it’s very learned readers about what they would do in various case study scenarios?
Another quote reader here. Agreed, this is not good advice. A dream is good, but one needs to keep themselves fed etc. The worst was an unemployed would-be Guardian film reviewer I met in a pub once. “Have you written anything?” I said. “No, but I know I would be really good at it. I just need a chance,” was the response.
I had a guiding star of what I’d like to do for a calling in my 20s, but said yes to any and everything as I was starting from nothing – and was happy regardless. Somehow, it did happen in my late 20s. Mostly luck, I think. Also bear in mind, what appeals in your 20s, may not necessarily do so in your 40s after a decade and a half of working in it and approaching near burn out.
Also, what worked for a 50 something is unlikely to work for today’s 20 something. The only advice I give is say yes to stuff, because at 20 you probably don’t know yourself that well yet – and that in five years time, things will probably work out OK despite today’s angst.
Better off with their SIPP, worse off with their ISA due to relative pot sizes, so nets out to almost no difference overall with present amounts invested.
The decider for moving my ISA might be when I flip to living off natural yield from ISA they can automatically pay out to nominated bank account, vs InvestEngine you have to make manual withdrawals from accrued income.
Although that is a very weak advantage I know.
I don’t trade much, at the moment just reinvesting dividends every few months.
When I consolidated all of our pensions and ISAs well over a decade ago, we were very close to putting it all with HL but they announced their previous round of fee hikes just in time, so it all went elsewhere. We’re on a very good “grandfathered” deal with BestInvest, so we pay very low capped platform fees and their trading costs for ETFs (so low “fund” fees) are also very reasonable.
We left our “unwrapped” shares with HL and we’ve been trickling them into ISAs at BestInvest, which is nearly complete. In September this year, we have four NS&I linkers maturing, and it’s now a “no access” deal with roll over, so this will go on a new roof, more solar, more gifting, and what’s left will not now be going to HL.
As it happened I had moved all my funds out of HL (into AJB) just ahead of the fee announcement. HL used to be great for customer service but I had huge trouble executing a simple change of address which they were distinctly unhelpful with. Whether or not its their new owners, their service has declined and the website is somewhat out of date. The fee announcement would have pushed me over the edge as I held everything in ETFs rather than funds.
@ADT – The Economist got that idea from us! https://monevator.com/what-to-do-about-extreme-us-market-valuations/
I’m joking, and I agree with you, low vol is one way to reduce exposure. It also worked during the dotcom bust: https://monevator.com/do-the-risk-factors-beat-the-market/
It’s still 26% tech sector though.
@Ermine – why would you need to end up on a park bench? The advice is to steer into what you enjoy, what you’re good at, what motivates you. That doesn’t have to end in being a failed poet.
I’ve just been listening to someone talking about how his students fret they’re not doing enough extra-curricular (sports, charity, arts) because they’re concerned with how that will look on their CVs. FFS. So now I’ve even got to select my leisure activities based on whether it’ll get me an interview? Sod that…
@Traveller – what case studies do you have in mind? There isn’t a Monevator forum but your ideas might make for good articles that everyone can contribute to in the comments.
@TA (14)
“I’ve just been listening to someone talking about how his students fret they’re not doing enough extra-curricular (sports, charity, arts) because they’re concerned with how that will look on their CVs.”
Hasn’t this always been the case? If not for work, then certainly for university entrance – and I’m talking of the early 1970s here.
Thanks for thoughts and links @TI. The ii fee hike has a greater impact on me than HL’s fee structure, which has served me very well. It’s a little different to standard as I salary-sacrifice to an HL SIPP for my work place pension. Our Group deal gets us a preferential fee structure but does tip us towards funds rather than ETFs which creates a value ceiling encouraging (roughly annual) partial transfers out (to AJB or ii). A bit of a nuisance but the flexibility this has provided over the more usual workplace offerings I have experienced has been a fantastic learning ground. I believe the preferential rate perpetuates through retirement (Q1 at my retirement meeting with them next week!) but will have to keep an eye on that.
Re: enshittification – my heart sank when I saw in the FT this week that Virgin have bought out my fibre broadband supplier – so that’s a big increase in price on a regular basis and terrible service then – SIGH!
@David V – Perhaps there has always been a percentage who valued their leisure time insofar as it burnished their CV. I can believe that and I’m sad for them. It wasn’t my experience and many commentators seem to believe it’s a problem that has only gotten worse.
I don’t know if it’s significant at all but this week is the first I remember where the Guardian Fantasy House Hunt has featured something I could afford to buy, namely the 1 bed flat in Manchester….
The Atlantic article on POWs during the US Civil War was very interesting. Many thanks for the links as always, there is always something that I would never have happened across myself!
“for university entrance – and I’m talking of the early 1970s here.”
I used to do university admissions – I never paid any attention to “extra-curricular” claims. I wanted exam results and the views of their Physics (or Chemistry or Maths) teacher or, sometimes, I’d see that their headmaster had something to chip in.
In many years the three most persuasive comments came from the Head of Physics at Eton (one comment), and the Rector of Falkirk High School (two).
@dearieme #22
“I used to do university admissions – I never paid any attention to “extra-curricular” claims. I wanted exam results and the views of their Physics (or Chemistry or Maths) teacher or, sometimes, I’d see that their headmaster had something to chip in.”
Surely ability in science is easier to discriminate?
Had you been admissions tutor for Classics at Oxbridge, it would have been a lot harder to rely on examination results.
@ dearieme
What were the 3 best comments?
@TA #15 > The advice is to steer into what you enjoy, what you’re good at, what motivates you. That doesn’t have to end in being a failed poet.
Part of the objection is having seen DWYL, LWYD work for Steve Jobs but very few others. The tragedy is that particularly on starting out most of us are of average talents, we start off skint at best or underwater at worst and we need to avoid falling out the bottom more than rising to the top. What was you first job? Mine were kitchen porter then clearing tables, because you have to stay solvent enough to learn the basic ropes of adulting. Misallocate too much of your life force to dreams with terrible odds early on and the park bench beckons
There’s an epidemic of mental health issues because of that toxic message that if you aren’t leading the pack you are epic fail, social media emphasises that success has many fathers but failure is a bastard. I have no idea who or what Phil is, but the message is the same as the National Lottery. It Could Be You – sotto voce but it’s almost guaranteed not to be. The xkcd cartoon sums it up well.
Of course there’s a kernel of truth, which makes Phil’s platitudes dangerous. Faced with a range of occupational paths which are of a similar likelihood to succeed, for sure, favour the congenial. I was always going to be a better engineer than travelling salesman. For example there are many teenagers who are good at football, just not with the potential for ‘professional football’ standard. The bummer with that is that the hit rate is low, there’s space in the marketplace for the great but not the good.
As a second order grouse, work is not the only way to living a good life, and those that are FI but also RE have presumably concluded, but my main charge to Phil is the xkcd problem. Beware the park bench if success is one of those things where many are called but few are chosen. Things like pro sports, becoming the next Mr Beast/ Taylor Swift/POTUS . If you have BOMAD or a trust fund behind you, sure, you can take the risk, but otherwise beware the sting of the dreams lost in the long tail.
Like many, I used HL but swapped to AJBell a few years ago for (slightly) lower fees.
In the last 3 or so years, I’ve made over £5,000 in different bonuses as my ISAs, SIPPs, GIAs are shuffled from one platform to another.
So long as these switching bonuses exist – we are winning right?
The effective platform costs are dropping to near zero and in the case of my new SIPP provider, the £1500 they paid me last month will take me 14 years to pay back in fees – but I will probably switch again in a year or two.
Long may it continue!
@Ermine – Heh, good grouse 🙂 I think Phil’s sentiment is dangerous only in a world where everyone makes ridiculous long-odds bets based on an “inspiring” meme they read last Tuesday. In reality, people who grew up dreaming of being the next Taylor Swift end up being music PRs etc. People who wanted to be the next Truman Capote become journos, teachers, publishing types, and the next Truman Capote.
I wanted to a professional footballer when I was a kid. It was obvious to me I wasn’t good enough so I didn’t push it. I worked with three people who all had a much more realistic shot. None of them had a job in football – they all had to jack it in somewhere along the line but they didn’t end up on the proverbial park bench. Handy to have in the works football team though.
Don’t people who like kids become teachers? People who like animals become vets? People who want to help the sick become doctors? Not all of them obviously, but some?
When I was at school, I was advised not to play to my strengths – which were in the humanities – but to pick subjects that were going to be “in demand” as the person advising me saw it. Essentially that meant the sciences. It was terrible advice for me. I think that’s why I care about this issue so sorry for going on 🙂
Eventually I did get what some might consider to be a dream job that played to my natural strengths. Not because I planned it but by complete accident. The money was fine, no park bench. That led to a non-dream job. The money was a bit better but not by enough.
I don’t think there’s a correlation between choosing something you enjoy or want to do – at least initially – and not making a living. I expect there are nutters who self-destruct trying to achieve the impossible but most people do OK.
My first job? Newspaper delivery boy. First job I did cos I had to eat? Working in a late-night takeaway dealing with drunks.
I think ‘do what you are good at’ not what you want to be good at is not a bad way to think about a career.
re HL – net net the pricing changes are a wash for me. What I am more concerned about is the ownership. Previously a FTSE 100, reasonable corporate governance, fairly lowly levered, possibly govt could step in if a major issue occurred. Now the entire opposite. I won’t be putting any more funds in HL purely because of risk mitigation.
Investors typically under price the risk of a broker failing in their search to save a few basis points in cost imho. It is not clear if HL or II etc ever went under that you would easily get all your funds back. There are various articles around the net explaining why it’s a bit more risky than the average punter thinks.
With reference to HL, I would be paying a lot more so hopped over to AJB. All transferred in less than 10 days and was impressed by this.
Now, as for mitigating broker risk, is it actually possible to own a share directly with a company? So, all my money is effectively tied up with three US companies. Is it possible to somehow just own direct divorced from the broker?
@HAK #29 certainly in the UK you can own share certificates directly, I own a share certificate in Whitbread because my Dad used to work for them. Companies hate that and continually push you to held them as a nominee, which is how I own all my other shares. I don’t think you can hold a share cert directly in an ISA or SIPP for instance, but unwrapped, sure. No idea in the case of US shares.
HL ought to be careful. I was with Selftrade when they decided to self destruct. It was not about fees, more about the very intrusive demands they were making. I transferred out as soon as I could, along with many others. It didn’t end up well for them.
https://the-international-investor.com/2014/au-revoir-selftrade
My first job ? Left school at 16 and worked as a labourer in a cotton mill. Left for the GPO at 18 and had a fulfilling career in telecoms/tech. Never planned anything but it worked out well, and I suspect it’s the same for lots of us.
This is the second time HL have caused a fuss about fee changes. Last time the big issue centred on the charge cap for shares (£45). So they have had another peck at the bowl. Decided I can’t be bothered dealing with people calculating against me so shifted my isa to ii who already hold my sipp so I get the isa free.
That’s £220k shifted out. I suspect HL will be losing big portfolios to become marginally more attractive to smaller portfolio holders.
Anecdotally their customer service is also not what it was (based on my daughter’s experience considering moving her pensions).
“UK economy grew by worse-than-expected 0.1% in final quarter of 2025 – BBC”
That’s not a BBC link: It points to Sky News
@all — Thanks for the great discussion. Enjoying the riffing on Phil Knight’s words of wisdom (or not) in particular!
@JtE — Oops, thanks. (I do try to get a diversity of links in rather than it all being the BBC, Guardian, and FT so sometimes I’ll search for as second source for the same story but if I’m not careful I’ll fail to update the anchor text. That’s what’s happened here.)
We have nearly 3/4 million with HL across 8 accounts and 3 family members. The decision to move that away was made this week. Haven’t decided where yet.
Charges weren’t the reason, it’s the PE buyout. Customer service has got massively worse since the buyout and trust has finally gone with how the charges changes were presented, which felt like being lied to, like we are small children.
We were with HL for the customer service and were happy to pay extra for that. It wasn’t only about the investments themselves. I knew that in the event of my death, at least HL would make the investments probate process easier for my family. They may not be perfect, but at least HL would be solid and less of a nightmare with the paperwork. That was worth paying extra for and we were happy to do so. It was one of the reasons why the bulk of our money was with HL. This is a lot more than just about investment fees.
Not only are we moving some of our accounts, it’s going to be all of them now. How the charge changes were communicated was the last straw. No confidence in the direction of the PE firm if the first big thing they do is use marketing gaslighting when they even up the fund/share fee charges. The whole thing was presented as somehow marvellous and wonderful and how we should all be very grateful, rather than a honest ‘we need to even up charges for all our customers and this is what is happening’.
I have completely lost confidence and trust in HL as a firm. There is no longer any benefit in happily paying extra for the customer service because that has clearly been flushed down the toilet as policy with the new owners. Even the Woodford nonsense didn’t achieve that.
@TA #27 > I think Phil’s sentiment is dangerous only in a world where everyone makes ridiculous long-odds bets based on an “inspiring” meme they read last Tuesday
We have sample bias on here. Almost by definition the Monevator readership has won the financial position lottery, at least in not bumping along the bottom end. Something that I have observed over my working life and beyond was that there is an increasing fragility in the financial lottery of life for the average fellow. There is serious destitution in the UK now in some areas, due to the increasing costs of the essentials of life (heat, housing) relative to median earnings. The K shaped economy is splitting apart the middle, and the hashtag #uskillline about how many Americans are just one emergency away from falling out the bottom applies here to a lesser degree. It’s not just Americans. It happens here too. I have given some folk relatively modest amounts of money (few hundreds to ~1k) a few times, to forestall misfortunes (losing a tenancy, failure of a laptop which was the essential tool of their trade) that could cascade, at best into usurous debt, at worst the street. These folk weren’t feckless, just a couple of hits of bad luck away from disaster.
So yes, while I was thinking about Phil in the Do What You Love, Love What You Do follow your dreams Ray Bradbury sense (another fella could afford that in gentler times), the sentiment is a lot more dangerous now. The economy has fewer openings for dreamers to get ahead, and harsher on the downside. As Tyler Cowan’s book title said, Average is Over. The WSJ precis cited in Wikipedia is harsh but recognisable on the ground some fifteen years after publication
As an example, going to university used not to be the long-odds bet that it is now, our host’s 2012 grouse titled “University has become an unaffordable luxury” notwithstanding 😉
@Ermine – I’m not sure what you’re saying. I’ve offered examples of service industries and professions that are – to some extent – staffed by people who gravitate towards them because they were attracted to the core purpose e.g. medicine, teaching, publishing, media, entertainment, charitable sector etc. I’m sure we could think of more.
We’re talking about broad swathes of the economy in total. But you’re saying, I think, you’re more likely to end up at the bottom of the heap if you’re partly motivated by an attraction to a particular vocation, pursuit, or vision of the future that includes doing something you care about?
But I can’t see the causal connection between the inequality you mention and lots of people aiming for the unattainable.
In many ways it seems the opposite is true. It seems more likely to me that people starting with advantages in life (education, parental backing, social capital and established networks) are more likely to believe that they can pursue a career in something they are inspired by. They’re more likely to believe that because it’s true. We wouldn’t have to look too deeply into the socio-economic background of people in media, for example, to see that many in those professions had a head start that helped propel them towards their goal, and that cushion enabled them to believe they could earning a living in a career that suited them.
Whereas, I’d wager that many people who are getting the shitty end of the stick didn’t have good options to start with. But they didn’t fall through the trapdoor because they banked everything on their “dream”. They just didn’t have good options.
I think most – though not all – people are good at being realistic. Most do what they must to live. Whether they live well or not isn’t anything to do with pursuing their dream.
Re: people who do dream. Some people pursue it for a while then settle for a compromise version i.e. the proverbial music PR.
But overall, people get to where they’re going by so many circuitous routes it’s untrue. Much of the time it’s just chance.
Still, if someone dreams of being a doctor one day, or running their own business, it seems likely that inspiration will provide them with the motivation juice to keep going when the going gets tough.
It seems like we’re coming at this from different angles though? You’re interpreting the advice as some kind of: “Shoot for the stars and follow your dreams, baby” BS. Possibly attached to a series of expensive YouTube webinars where, “I teach you how to be a winner!” I don’t see it like this. I’m not interpreting the sentiment as buy a lottery ticket to be the next Taylor Swift.
“What were the 3 best comments?”
From Eton: This amiable, clever boy is, above all, a natural scholar. Accordingly he won’t get a First but will comfortably take an Upper Second.
Result: admitted.
From The Rector:
1. This girl is much more able than you will infer from her results. Early in the autumn her mother was diagnosed with cancer and her father abandoned the family. The girl therefore had to look after her ill mother and her young siblings. That she managed to pass her exams too is enormously to her credit. I urge you to admit her.
And so I interviewed her and the old boy was right. She was sharp as you like. Admitted.
2. This boy is clever, has a wonderful memory, and is nothing but trouble. (Details followed.) I urge you to think twice before admitting him. Result: interview. Further result: rejection.
My only original contribution to admissions policy was to try to persuade the admissions tutor at a Cambridge College on a good rule for tie-breaking if two candidates seemed well matched in suitability. (i) If both male, admit the younger. (ii) If one of each sex, spin a coin. (iii) If both female admit the prettier.
The AT gave me a shrewd look: was I teasing? Then she announced: I shall adopt at least your rule (iii). Short term it will make it easier to recruit Supervisors. Long term it might attract abler male applicants.
But was she out-teasing me?
Thanks for the links. “Will your retirement go as planned” by White Coat Investor was a sobering read. My father retired at 60 and was gone within 2 years from a fatal heart attack, not much retirement at all. If you’ve reached FI and want out of work, don’t get stuck on that One More Year too long…you just don’t know what’s round the corner. I planned to retire at 55 and made it at 57 after some OMY procrastination and part time working. By July 1st this year I will have lived longer than both my parents.
As for HL, I just had a look at Glassdoor employee reviews out of curiosity wondering how it’s going after the PE acquisition as I’ve experienced PE as an employee myself. I know this can be self selecting to the negative but it doesn’t look great. Rating is 3.1 out of 5 compared to 4.1 for AJB. I wouldn’t apply for customer help desk work at HL, it paints a picture of micromanagement, monitored loo breaks etc and being treated like a robot (I think this is not uncommon for help desk work though?). Maybe this explains the reports of customer service fall-off. I haven’t needed to use their CS recently but it was previously good which is why I stuck with them. That and the ease of actioning SIPP drawdown via the website and no paper form pushing. ISA will be transferred out perhaps as the PE and platform concentration risk is a worry above the increased ISA platform fee cap from £45 to £150.
Thanks @dearieme
Interesting – I had an ex colleague who had similar rules for hiring Actuarial types.
– always female
– usually the younger
– always the prettiest
Not sure how he got away with it really. But he did has a lot of females at his funeral last year
@The Hare #35
The HL private equity buyout story is that HL’s growth was slowing due to higher fees and poorer offering vs competitors. Their back office is running on manual processes and old technology which meant costs as a % of AUM were increasing over time (i.e. diseconomies of scale).
The PE consortium intends to ‘invest’ in fixing the back office (i.e. cost cutting). This would allow them to cut fees and use the HL brand to bring back growth with positive economies of scale this time. Leverage on the buyout was ~4.0x so not too racy (vs highs of ~6.0x).
The reality is that this kind of ‘operational transformation’ is very difficult to get right. You can see that in the fact that a fee cut which should be a good news story has turned into a story about the opposite.
+1 for the HL “exodus” here, a good 6 figure sum across ISA and SIPP (100% ETFs) moved or moving to Freetrade with the 1% incentive an added bonus. Only cost some small effort to shuffle the couple of ETFs available with HL but not FT – I’ve left a smaller LISA with HL to retain access to those options.
It feels like a completely unforced error by HL as they could have continued to benefit from the customer inertia of their pricing being neither the worst nor the best, propped up by the impression of good service etc.
Instead their attempt to charge me an extra £5/month annoyed me sufficiently that they’ll now be making £0/month total! Given time the market will do it’s job and I’m sure we as informed customers will be the winners regardless.
Before jumping know where you’re landing.
Has everyone out there who’s transferring done the necessary DD on the recipient platform(s)?
At the very least run solvency ratios, debt financing burdens (including structure and cost of debt), liquidity impacting factors, any published stress testing, implied or actual legal parent group guarantees and platform security position and reinvestment through the normal mill of (at an absolute minimum) free version Gemini + ChatGPT + Claude + Grok + Perplexity, and then check out the relevant cited sources.
Return of capital before return on capital.
Always.
Then confirm that you can actually hold (and, as the case may be, trade) the various funds/ ETFs/ ITs/ shares/ individual bonds that you want to in the way you want to and transfer in specie to avoid market timing risk.
And only thereafter look at the cashback.
Noone wants to be like those poor souls in October 2008 logging into their Icesave accounts…Ever.
@platformer #41
Yes. I read a lot about it before and after the buyout. There are issues to fix. But it’s PE doing the buyout. And an awful lot of HL clients are there for the customer service. It was HL’s USP. Take that trust away and there is a problem. There really isn’t any back up. It’s not a bank. The FRSA protection is crossed fingers, really. It’s all about trust. It’s not the fees change itself. Fair enough, the fees difference between shares and funds was evened out. It’s the way it’s been done. It does not feel honest and have no confidence any more in HL.
@TI 7 – strong disagree about “too late,” First because “better late than never” is true and secondly because I have noted over the last 20 years that the favourite story of the financial pages is Gold At All Time High Is It Time To Invest? To which the clever response is hurr hurr how stupid but it turns out the money making response is YES
@B. Lackdown — I didn’t day it was too late, I said one should consider that hedges often become more popular when it is too late. 🙂
Gold, sure, but equally it could be $4000 or lower next year.
Over the long term stuff cycles up and down but the assets we invest for the long term go up, whether gold or equities. To some extent this does make timing moot, unless your time horizon is say
Moved 1x SIPP, 2x ISA, 2x GIA (~£300k, planned to increase to ~£500k next couple of years) from HL to II. For me fees were going up from £290 to ~£700 on the projected balance; the GIA fee implementation and hike in ISA fee cap was killer. £200 cashback + £100 trading allowance, and all in fees of £180 at II the switch was a no brainer.
I already have IBKR as main GIA but their ISA / SIPP implementation is a bit clunky for me.
As ever I find myself going against the grain on this forum. The recent price change (hike?) for Interactive Investors was acclaimed by all and sundry on this forum, yet I found my fees going up by circa 30%. Whereas the recent change on Hargreaves significantly reduced my fees. Go figure.
I also laugh at all the hoo hah over AI. I had the (mis?) fortune to have significant cap gains on my interactive brokerage account. So, hopped on the platform to identify my historic trades going back years…. Something AI could do in a second right? No sign of an AI agent on the II platform, in fact no ability to single out single stocks or time periods. You have to manually download 2 years time periods of ALL your trades into separate csv files, then amalgamate them then try to identify your particular stock. Ok I thought. When in a worksheet I can get AI to rip through that and calculate it… Except it couldn’t. I ended up actually writing them on pen on the back of an actual envelope. So forgive me when I scoff at the assertions on the current ability of AI. I haven’t seen any sign of it in the wild and find I’m very much still dealing with “sorry unintended item in bagging area” on a daily basis.
I’m a big fan of HL active savings as a home for my six year cash pile (Flagstone offers something similar). The convenience more than compensates for the loss of a few basis points on the best possible rates. I wonder if this will change.
I spoke to HL regarding their new fee structure. As a family, we hold a good seven figure sum with them and I told them that we were now thinking of leaving.
I asked if they had any kind of customer retention rebate or similar. It seems that they will not budge, so it’s time to study the best buy brokerage table.
That’s very short sighted of HL there IMHO @C64 #50. I’d pay if they offered something others don’t but:
– AJB offers more instruments/ securities at lower platform and dealing charges
– IaBkr is there if you want massive sophistication (and complication 😉 )
– T212, IG and Freetrade are there for low low fees and Freetrade offers upto £10,000 in total to switch £500,000 and up for each of ISA and SIPP. Only need to stay a year.
– ii is inbetween AJB and HL with upto £3,000 to switch.
– CSD switch is an option for GIAs, albeit with a more modest switch incentive arguably and higher fees than most now. Again though, only need to stay a year.
And AJB is now ‘safer’ I’d guess than HL post PE buyout of the latter.
Why didn’t HL just keep calm and carry on? Customer inertia would have taken them a long way. Don’t rock the boat. Their fees update is a (significant) unforced error. Would a publically listed company have screwed it up like this? Maybe. There was the whole Woodford business I suppose.