I also got annoyed by a 4-months-in-advance rushed card update thing with a sticky notification.
The 10CHF… I couldn’t care less to be honest.
But removing UBS TWINT is savage. How does this work for PostFinance that also issues MC Debit cards? And Raiffeisen (same)? Isn’t just UBS putting Neon on the bench now?
If there are any zero-cost alternatives (with good tracking of costs) I might be tempted to just walk out with our household account.
I never used my neon card with prepaid Twint, as I have a cashback credit card for Swiss purchases anyway.
Is that legal btw?
Why shouldn’t it be legal? Just check the terms before signing up / accepting new TOS
Is it good practice? I doubt so…
“upon expiring” it’s kind of new to me. I don’t remember having seen it.
But thanks.
Also Here I can’t see that.
Pity I don’t have the pdf I’ve downloaded when I created the account.
Me neither. Here e.g. the services and prices as of Jan. 2023
They specify “Replacement card” (20 CHF) only…
This may be of interest to people who understand Swiss German:
A podcast episode with the CEO of Neon. The podcast is about how Neon came into life, fundraising, crowdrasing, how Neon makes money, etc.
Starting at 43:30, he explains how Neon makes money.
Wow, I appreciate this transparency. Would be very interesting to compare to other neo banks.
Neon 3rd pillar is out
Fees are quite competitive.
Your opinions on strategies and etf used ?
You’ll pay 0.39–0.45% management fees per year for your pillar 3a, depending on how much money is in your 3a portfolios. The fees are charged quarterly. As soon as you reach your next threshold, the fee will be automatically reduced from the beginning of the next quarter.
This management fee includes all account and custody account maintenance costs as well as all investments and sales. Our products are also free of stamp duties (this is something you should definitely bear in mind when comparing 3a products).
We do not charge any direct product costs (TER). Some funds may incur minimal «fund of fund» costs. These costs are not charged to you directly, but are factored into the performance of your strategy. You will actually incur these costs through all 3a providers in Switzerland, but they are often not disclosed transparently. With us, these indirect product costs are only incurred for two strategies:
Do you know if you can do a custom strategy or you have to pick one of the presets?
It looks cheaper than VIAC. I might open an account for next year.
Ok so they match Finpension (0.39%) if you have >50k in the 3a.
Didnt dig deep yet, but Finpension did quite a few things to further optimize fees (including WHT) in the background, so I would be surprised if Neon would be on top of this if you consider all of it (but happy to be disproven).
Overall it seems to be a decent offer. I certainly prefer the flexibility of Viac and finpension, however, for a large number of people, the default strategies may be more important.
The default strategies seem reasonable enough at first glance, a much smaller home bias than Viac and finpension in the global strategies. They don’t seem to provide details on the allocations. E.g., how much of the world stock allocation is hedged (which is a questionable choice). Also an odd decision to hedge the gold allocation but I suspect it might be due to (unreasonable) legal requirements with foreign currency exposure (which shouldn’t really apply to gold).
Does anyone know what exactly they are referring to? It seems a bit odd given that the funds used by Offensive 100 are all also used e.g. in Dynamic 65 and Balanced 45. Why would such product costs apply to one but not the other?
What’s the legal structure behind the product?
The main WHT optimization effort of finpension applies to the non-3a finpension Invest.
For 3a, it’s important to use the pension fund variants of the relevant index funds, which Viac and finpension both do, of course. I was expecting neon 3a to do this correctly but according to their fund list, they actually use the regular fund variant, which has a tax drag of about 0.4% p.a. 
VIAC’s fee is capped at 0.40% (if you only use 0% TER funds). The lowest neon 3a fee is 0.39%. You want to switch because of 0.01% p.a.? And finpension is already at 0.39% and has a much larger list of available funds with high flexibility.
First glance at their 3a offering is not giving me good vides:
In their blog article 3a comparison 2025: Why neon convinces They provide a table comparing the main providers, and they are transparent that their offer is identical to VIAC and Finpension.
It seems like a good solution for people who don’t want to keep things simple, all within one app.
There are some weird choices (why overweigh EM by 2x?), but all in all, nothing too bad.
I’m very happy with finpension and will continue not changing. Neon was shaky enough in the past. At least with my pension I need some stability.
I wish FP had better (performance) reporting though.
