Ausgabeaufschläge are often waived due to agreements in place anyway.
In all honesty, giving customers the choice of that interval is just overcomplicating things.
Additionally, a whole year is a rather long rebalancing interval. Given that, larger (non-) rebalancing „gaps“ can arise within a year, effectively considerably distorting the tracking of indices.
And I‘m not aware of any exchange-traded fund - let alone index tracking ones - that rebalance only once a year. It‘s monthly, maybe quarterly.
Therefore, I think they’re doing exactly what they should: keeping things reasonably simple while reasonably adhering to a given strategy.
Why should they? The management cost is incurred for an account that contains (yet-to-be taxed) untaxed money.
@San_Francisco I think I didn’t make myself clear; of course the ETFs need to rebalance regularly (their TER is only 0.1% anyway so that’s not where my complaint lies). However, within my 3a pillar, VZ (charging the big bucks at 0.68% annually) will make sell/purchase transactions to stick to the “defined strategy” (i.e. the split/allocation between Global/Swiss equity/ Real estate / Raw materials /cash / etc.) these transactions really amount to nothing at all (selling 10francs of this, buying 10 francs of that, yet still all in all some 10~15 transactions per month) irrespective of new funds coming in. This is rather futile and doing this once a year is more than enough for most investors.
the obermatt calculator is really skewed towards “their” solution. do not put trust in their sheet. Their assumptions are detached from reality.
a more accurate and transparent calculator can be found in my 3a Tutorial behind this link
Yeah, I figured out that Obermatt was very anti-3a for a long time. I see his sheet more starting point than solution. And I’ll look forward to look at yours.
In my case, I have also childcare-subsidies coming in due to “low” income. So I have more than the tax money alone at stake which complicates the calculus even more.
Now I have:
25% SPI extra
12% SMI
30% CSIF world ex CH (in USD)
rest is cash waiting for a dip like these days’ one
If I look for funds denominated in CH (no bonds), I see:
CSIF SMI (costs 0%)
CSIF SPI extra (0%)
UBF ETF SLI (0.2%) not sure how this one differs from the SMI above - need to check
CSIF CH real estate (0%)
Would it make sense to find a balance between only these funds to avoid the high fees on USD/CHF conversion?
The assumption is that I have the rest of the world covered in IB, in USD and EUR, and VIAC would only have enough funds to justify exposure to CH market.
I ran the numbers and by buying the max allowed of SPI, SMI and real estate with all my viac money I would achieve a 10% stock exposure to CH (also taking into account my other etfs which contain swiss stocks) and 1% of my NW in terms of Swiss REITs, which I find good.
Unfortunately, by maximizing all these funds I am still left with 15% cash, a bit too much for my taste. Maybe some corporate bonds? Will have to decide tonight, hoping the bottom is in.
That’s what I would ideally do, but without leaving the CHF I can only buy the UBS SLI fund which is exactly like the SMI and costs 0.2. Maybe I get some world ex CH and forget about some forex exchange fees…
As a short aside, I really wish the VIAC app showed the total combined balance of all opened 3a accounts on the very first screen, rather than making you swipe through and calculate it all manually…
By reading and partipating to this forum, you confirm you have read and agree with the disclaimer presented on http://www.mustachianpost.com/
En lisant et participant à ce forum, tu confirmes avoir lu et être d'accord avec l'avis de dégagement de responsabilité présenté sur http://www.mustachianpost.com/fr/
Durch das Lesen und die Teilnahme an diesem Forum bestätigst du, dass du den auf http://www.mustachianpost.com/de/ dargestellten Haftungsausschluss gelesen hast und damit einverstanden bist.
