Hi everyone
anyone considering Frankly for their pilar 3a over VIAC? Not many details available yet but really interested about the cost/fees with it (they are marketing it being different)
some news/links:
1 Like
Itâs too early to compare. We donât know the cost and the ETFs available.
The price will be known at the launch of the app on 19th of march.
1 Like
Itâs not released yet (coming out only in a month) but looking forward to trying it out next year
This year I have already been ripped off by VIAC paying almost 1% in FX/transactions costs.
The fund choice youâd be buying with ZKB is very limited however. Hereâs basically the main fund of interest youâd be buying to max out stocks - Swisscanto 95 VT - 0.38% TER and ~30% CHF hedged (Iâd guess equivalent to around 0.5-0.6% hedging cost)
1 Like
Plus 0.19% spread, 0.65% buying fee, 0.3% yearly custody fee (see here )
(edit: thats for zkbâs classic 3a offer though)
Iâd be quite surprised if frankly ends up cheaper than Viac. ZKB already has a big base of private customers to market it to, so it doesnât really need to use costs to stand out like Viac does. WIR has always been a business bank and doensât have the same consumer marketing muscle. I do kind of expect is that ZKB will offer a lot of ETFs and the option of high stock components like Viac does. That alone would give it a wide appeal. But I might be surprised.
Great news - competition always helps to push something forward to the next level.
1 Like
People writing reviews before the product or its conditions are known?! 
Feels weird, as if guerilla marketing.
1 Like
0%
0.10%
Thatâs for existing ZKB 3a accounts. For frankly they promise a âradikal neues Preismodellâ - yet to be seen what exactly, but probably much more competitive.
Not quiteâŠ, from that link:
Ausgabespesen: ⊠0.10% beim Swisscanto (CH) Vorsorge Fonds 95 Passiv VT
RĂŒcknahmespesen: ⊠0.09% beim Swisscanto (CH) Vorsorge Fonds 95 Passiv VT
thats a total of 0.19% âspreadâ in other words, and
TransaktionsgebĂŒhren: 0.65%
thats what I called 0.65% âbuying feeâ (ok maybe a bit a misleading term, and I think they charge the same buying and selling actually)
Lets see⊠cheaper than their current it must be 
Thatâs fee (and which actually even goes to existing shareholders not ZKB), not spread. Spread is 0% - there is only one price published for each day.
And counting your way, VIAC spots >1.5% spreads
Again, this is for existing ZKB 3a accounts. Weâll see in a month their brand new radical price structure and whether they will crush the competition with it.
agree, a fee it is (with the same effect as a spread)
Not sure what point youâre trying to make. It is a feeâŠ
I dont see a reason to look at it any other way. Worst case it is 1.5% at viac, indeed (for USD funds, but not for their SMI fund, there itâs an extremely low 0.02%). Again, not sure the point youâre trying to make
âIssue Fees in Favour of the Fund - 0.10%â, âRedempt. Fees in Fav. of the Fund - 0.09%â - fee is added to the fundâs capital mass and attributed to existing shareholders.
Unlike VIACâs case where they and/or WIR fully pocket that 1.5% FX spread themselves as pure profit (it actually costs <0.00x% to trade FX at interbank level as you can enjoy it yourself at IBKR)
theyâre probably referring to the fact that this covers the transaction cost the fund has when you buy/sell, wouldnt increase NAV. In Viacâs case this is covered by the fundâs spreads plus part of the 0.5% flat fee.
ZKBâs profit is part of the Transaktionsgebuehr of 0.65% (presumably twice, so 1.3%). But I agree, VIAC/WIRâs fx fees are even more of a steal.
So 0.48 total TER but with a maximum of 95% stocks, so pretty much the same as VIAC if you are 100% stocks. I wonder what their FX rates are.
95% invested is passive.
95% instead of 97% stocks will reduce longterm returns by 0.15%.
In fact, 95% is in equities, 2.5 % is real estate and 2.5% in commodities. The fund itself is fully invested. However, i donât know how much money is invested each time in the fund.
This is franklyâs all-in fee.
Swisscanto (CH) Vorsorge Fonds 95 Passiv VT CHF is described as a âfund of fundsâ - are there any further costs âhiddenâ in the target funds?
So a quick comparison between both.
I will compare the global Global 100 from VIAC and the Extreme 95 index from Frankly:
Flexibility:
Frankly offers 8 funds (3 active and 5 passive). Only 1 can be chosen at the time unless you have multiple 3a accounts. The funds are not transparent as we donât the indexes they are using.
Viac offers more than 20 funds that can be mixed and offers prepared strategies like Global 100, ect. The funds are transparent
Winner: Viac
Timing
Frankly invests every day of the week
VIAC invests only once in a month
Winner: Frankly
Fees:
Frankly has 0.48% all-fee (the currency fees are inside the fund so I would assume lower than 0.75% from VIAC). Based on the factsheet, it is not a fund of funds.
Subscription fees: 0.10% and Redemption fees 0.09%
Viac has a 0.51% all-fee + currency fees.
Subscription fees: 0.08 Redemption fees: 0.03% (numbers from: CSIF (CH) III Equity World ex CH - Pension Fund)
Winner: Frankly
Diversification and long term returns
Frankly has 30% of Swiss equities, but 70% of the total fund is in CHF. 60% of foreign stocks are hedged. 100% of the money can be invested.
Viac has 37% of Swiss equities. There is no hedging. 97% of the money in the account is invested.
Based on the literature the hedging has an important impact on long term returns and wouldnât be recommended.
Winner: VIAC
Support
Frankly offers support by phone, email and social media.
VIAC offers support by phone, email and online chat.
Winner: Both
7 Likes