Share this page:
Stay connected:
Welcome to the Citywire Money Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error

Standard Life Pension performance discrepancies
Jim S
Posted: 19 April 2018 13:53:21(UTC)
#1

Joined: 08/12/2016(UTC)
Posts: 250

Thanks: 422 times
Was thanked: 307 time(s) in 154 post(s)
I have a Standard Life workplace pension. I transfer the balance to my SIPP regularly, but that's not really relevant to what I'm asking about.

I was reviewing performance of my pension holdings in the SL funds on the SL wedsite. When I log into my pension acount on its website, I can see the performance received for each fund I hold in a 'performance' tab. I can also open a link to a 'factsheet' about each fund, which is a pdf document.

However, when I compare the fund factsheet returns over 5 years with the actual performance received (both data from its own website) there are some big differences.

Standard Life Active Plus III actual performance shows 30.4% over 5 years, whereas the Factsheet shows 43.2%

SL Blackrock Aquila Connect Pacific actual performance shows 32.15% over 5 years, whereas factsheet shows 52.1%

Standard Life Overseas Equity Pension Fund actual performance shows 56% over 5 years, but factsheet' shows a whopping 97.4%. (I invested mainly in this fund because I had looked at the factsheet stats beforehand)

One partial explanation is probably that the factsheets all show 31/12/12 to 31/12/17 performance, whereas the performance tab shows last 5 years from today. Another part of the expanation mightb be their 1% (if we believe that) annual fee.

But I don't think either can explain discrepancies of 12.8%, 20% and 41.4%!

Does anyone else with an SL pension see similar discrepancies in their account?

I have emailed them but their first response to the discrepancy in their information was to pass my query to 'the relevant team' and their second (I kid you not) was suggesting I see a financial advisor! I have gone back to them again, so we'll see what the explanation is, if any. Just wondering if this is a wider issue?

Tom Mozy
Posted: 19 April 2018 14:33:23(UTC)
#2

Joined: 09/07/2013(UTC)
Posts: 141

Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 213 time(s) in 82 post(s)
Its because the first £1 saved into your pension at the start of the 5 year period would have produced the returns on the fact sheet but no doubt you have been buying the funds monthly via pension contributions.

Your average buy cost wont be the price at the start of the 5 year period. Markets have risen

Think of a regular saver advertised at 5%. For your first monthly amount that will make 5% but your last month saving wont. 5/12. It will average 2.5% over the year.
2 users thanked Tom Mozy for this post.
Jim S on 19/04/2018(UTC), john brace on 19/04/2018(UTC)
Jim S
Posted: 19 April 2018 16:17:51(UTC)
#3

Joined: 08/12/2016(UTC)
Posts: 250

Thanks: 422 times
Was thanked: 307 time(s) in 154 post(s)
Hi Tom

Thanks for the feedback. I may well be wrong but don't think the 'Cumulative Fund performance' tab on the SL pension website is customer specific, I think its what all customers receive after charges if they hold those units. On the page it say 'Cumulative performance is the total amout(%) that a fund has gained or lost over particular time periods.'

Also all holdings in my current plan have been paid in since July 2017, whereas the performance tab shows performance up to a 10 years.

But maybe I am mistaken, it is possible they do have some wierd counter-intuitive calculation going on and they have calculated returns over 5 years, including funds I transferred out under a different plan number. In that case the 5 year performance would be unusually high since most contributions were in the last 2 years.


AJW
Posted: 20 April 2018 11:12:09(UTC)
#4

Joined: 15/06/2017(UTC)
Posts: 84

Thanks: 79 times
Was thanked: 56 time(s) in 38 post(s)
Perhaps it's a different series (and therefore different ter) to your own?

Phone and ask.
john brace
Posted: 28 May 2018 15:27:23(UTC)
#5

Joined: 03/02/2012(UTC)
Posts: 70

Thanks: 211 times
Was thanked: 40 time(s) in 22 post(s)
Jim S -you mention that you regularly transfer Standard life pension contributions to your SIPP.

We are in a similar situation with a SL workplace pension as well as a HL SIPP. Can you tell me how easy this is? Are there any charges by SL for transferring?
Thanks
Jim S
Posted: 21 June 2018 12:20:31(UTC)
#6

Joined: 08/12/2016(UTC)
Posts: 250

Thanks: 422 times
Was thanked: 307 time(s) in 154 post(s)
john brace;63041 wrote:
Jim S -you mention that you regularly transfer Standard life pension contributions to your SIPP.

We are in a similar situation with a SL workplace pension as well as a HL SIPP. Can you tell me how easy this is? Are there any charges by SL for transferring?
Thanks



Hi John

Well, I was able to do a partial SIPP transfer fine a year ago. For this year I was just told by SLA on the phone - after first being told it was fine - that I can't do a partial transfer until I'm 55. Apparently you can do a full transfer before 55 but then they have to close your account and create a new one next month for your contrributions to go into. I couldnt be bothered to do that, so I've asked my employer if I could contribute direct into my SIPP instead.

If your 55 or over, it should be free and straightforward I think.

BTW, I eventually got very informative feedback from a helpful person at SLA about the apparent performace discrepancy of their global fund (related to my original post). Apparently there was a big drop between one rolling 5 year period and another a few months later, that was all.

I have two issues with SLA,
(1) the funds available in the pension seem to have quite mediocre performance. There are some strong SLA funds which aren't available in a pension. Eg. both UK and global smaller company funds are decent.
(2) some of the the people you speak to on the phone don't seem very well informed & they contradict each other.

But overall they could be a lot worse
1 user thanked Jim S for this post.
john brace on 21/06/2018(UTC)
Jim S
Posted: 21 June 2018 12:36:49(UTC)
#7

Joined: 08/12/2016(UTC)
Posts: 250

Thanks: 422 times
Was thanked: 307 time(s) in 154 post(s)
I just had another poke around on their website and this time I WAS able to find a better range of funds available. I think the website is just a bit clunky.

Now I've got a Baillie Gifford Global + UK fund, Fidelity Global Special Situations fund, and Standard Life Global Smaller Companies fund.

I'm happier with these than what I had before, so will stick with them I think.

+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets