In addition to the economic advantages for building up wealth, the investment solution now offers you the option of transferring your pension assets to free assets at finpension when you retire. If you wish, you can even create a desavings plan there.
Does this mean that one doesn’t cash out the 3A securities, but instead transfers them? And one second later cashes out with zero capital gains tax and plugs the cash into whichever fund is their favourite? Edit: sounds a bit like a loophole considering the tax deductions one enjoys with the 3A over years, and the cantonal tax on cashing out a 3A (even SZ’s).
Wondering if there’s a case of all eggs in one basket, though.
That sounds promising, but I assume it is not what I understood when reading it the first time: since 3a is using index funds, and their invest solution is using ETF only, you still need to liquidate all funds, and transfer cash only. That then would not be a big advantage for us. Securities transfer would be nice, but I assume this will not be possible.
I am pretty sure that now they mean “selling everything in the 3a portfolio and adding these funds to the taxable portfolio and buying according to the strategy”.
The funds that are for pension funds only have to be sold absolutely, there is no other way. Other funds can be in principle transferred from 3a to the taxable portfolio. I heard that UBS does it with their shitty funds.
Then, theoretically, funds from a 3a portfolio which are for qualified investors but not for pension funds specifically, can be transferred to a taxable portfolio. IF finpension offer them for the taxable portfolios and I guess either have to establish some type of agreement with the fund management company or you should be eligible for a qualified investor status and/or something else.
Anyway, I don’t see much of the added value to pay an asset management fee for investing in the same ETFs as with any other broker. I would hope that finpension will start offering low cost institutional funds for taxable portfolios.
Well of course (also agree with @Burningstone), but the way it’s written “transferring your pension assets” can be interpreted verbatim and may well be interpreted verbatim by autistic people like me
If they mean that then I don’t see any benefit other than more eggs in the same basket. The reason I chose FP was exactly the fact they offer institutional mutual funds which can’t be obtained elsewhere.
Hold your horses. Finpension will first need to proof that their free Investment offer will still be around in 2-3 years. I would not be that sure about this. Most robo advisors start, and close their offices soon again. FP does not do what was required to successfully attract money inflows.
And some don’t close offices, such as Selma, but they just charge way higher fees from the beginning.
If I were using a Robo-Advisor, I would definitely take the currently best one. Even if it might possibly not exist in X years anymore (though I think it will).
Robo advisor customers don‘t take the best advisor - they take what they THINK was the best. Unfortunately, robo advisor customers don‘t really know what was the best (otherwise they wouldnt use robo advisors any more). Conclusion, they go for Big Names, Marketing and referrals.
Finpension doesnt invest in Marketing (like VIAC or Frankly do). They further don‘t have the long built up reputation that Truewealth got as a first mover. Plus, the can’t build up much reputation as thay among laymen simply don‘t exist. Average people know VIAC and Frankly from their 3rd pillar and they will probably use the VIAC Free Investments (once launched) as the already trust the brand. Finpension however has a fairly different customer base in their 3a solution (people that either know what the are doing and hence don‘t buy robo advisors and/or are executives with an 1e solution or material Freizügigkeit). These customers will give FP some Robo Volumes but I doubt they will exceed 200-300 M over the next 2-3 years. Their break even was however probably at about 500M plus. So yes, I don‘t think that the FP robo will survive.
I also don’t consider the default strategies pure passive investing. They have a weight of 40% for Switzerland (30% SPI and in addition 10% SPI Mid, which would overweight mid caps?) and the rest is also not market cap weighted.
0.2% custody fee (for Hypi Lenzburg)
+0.09%-0.2% management fee
= 0.29%-0.4% (total annual fee), which is exactly what the slider shows?
The default strategies are far from perfect, I agree.
I read that they are trying to mimic the default strategies of comparable bank offers, so that they will always beat them with the lower fee.
Yes, they are pure passive investments, albeit with a strong home bias.
Of course, most likely everybody in this forum will pass
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.
.
