Was not allowed, they forced me to take a 3rd pillar account (no funds) with them. It’s there to pay back the 2nd mortgage.
It was a good deal overall, so we went along. I will try to get it changed to a conservative fund with them eventually, but I cannot guarantee they will allow it.
All very good questions that I would also be interested in.
Banks calculate the LTV (lending value) of a portfolio according to their own valuation and forecast of a portfolio/stocks. The security margin applied in the Bank i work for is rather large, for the benefit of bank and debtor.
I personally doubt that a VIAC portfolio with a „global“ strategy can be pledged. And if so, the lending value would be rather small, easy only 20% of a portfolio.
cash only or a very conservative fund of the lending bank might work.
Thanks @TrickMcDave that’s helpful info.
I understand that banks would surely prefer a pledged cash account - I would too. I was interested to know if a 3a fund is an option, so potentially yes, but of course if it’s worth so little (20%) that’s not really much use.
An “expensive” but conservative 20% or so stocks fund is also not interesting for me.
And I think there are certain difficulties in case of a collateral shortfall (drop of 3a portfolio). If the lending bank issues a margin call, i.e. asks you nicely to immediately provide additional collateral, how would you do that in a 3a account if you already paid for that year? Pay more than the CHF 6883?
Has anyone a pledged 3a account that is invested in any funds/etfs/etc.?
I use only Global 100
Using the Global-sustainable 100 as it matches my way of thinking.
According to their factsheet, I’m loosing 0.1% doing that this year comparing to the Global 100. But won 0.4% over the last 3 years and 0.3% over the last 5 years.
I use the proposed Global 80. I’m curious if the Global 100 was actually recommended to anyone by their wizard? The main attraction of Global 80 for me was to have some real estate (5%) in there.
I’ve been wondering if I should go to Global 100 but I haven’t had the time to check how those two have performed when compared to each other and their tracking indices.
Take care what your intent is, to have 15% RE included.
I had G80 too, thinking RE would reduce volatility/risk somewhat, which is what Global 80 is sold for (“less risk than Global 100” for example).
In 2020 RE tanked even more than shares (-50%), and are a long way away from previous highs (still -15 to -30%).
(Something similar happened to a RE fund I had in 2008, btw, can’t say if that was normal in that crash (all RE funds) or bad fund choice)
I’m done with RE funds, compared to stocks - less profits in good times, more losses in bad times.
The Viac RE ETF’s are also funds of funds or REITs, which I don’t feel too comfortable with, just too opaque, each additional level will take their cut.
An ETF of a defined basket of shares is just more transparent.
Just my 2 cents.
Excellent points, thank you. I actually got burnt with a REIT some years ago. I need to look more into the Global 80 positions. There is another downside to this strategy and that is the 5% of gold which I’m not a huge fan of.
@LeStache I also looked into having some RE exposure in Viac with a custom allocation but in the end I settled for their global 100 strategy.
One of the reason was that the swiss RE funds (if they directly own their assets) are already relatively tax-efficient so it’s probably better to buy them on IB if you want and free up some tax-free space inside the 3a for more stocks.
Of course simplicity (or laziness if you want 
) was also a big factor for me in favor of a non-custom allocation
2x Global 100 and started 2021 with a third with custom strategy
I copied @Joey’s portfolio from here and it’s done reasonably well for me. Very similar performance to Global100, I let it and a Global100 portfolio run side by side for the entire 2020, and the individual just barely outperformed Global100.
37% Swiss companies? Why would you do that on purpose? 
And why even complicate it if it performed the same as G100 - just choose the latter?
As 40% needs to be CHF denominated, I thought to just take the plunge and put it in stuff that’s actually trading in CHF rather than do currency hedging. I can try to soften this home-bias in my non-3a stock portfolio.
As for the same performance of G100, that I’ve only found out at the end of last year 
But yeah, it might be time to re-evaluate the allocation options that VIAC offers, I had set it up over a year ago and haven’t paid it any more mind since.
I have since changed the portfolio a bit to optimize it and take advantage of the US dividend exemptions in 3a
35% SPI Extra
2% SMI
35% US Pension Fund (s&p500)
15% EM
10% EU
EM and EU could be switched, but I am not convinced so much about Europe…
G100 seems uncomplicated, but in the background you have alot more funds, each with there own currencies (CAD, JPY, etc.) this I am trying to simplify (hidden currency exchange fees still a thing? 0.75%) now by leaving out canada and asia pacific. Also G100 has a large amount of SMI which I dont like.
Regarding VIAC and the avaible funds. On my side, I am missing CSIF (CH) III Equity World ex CH Quality - Pension Fund which is available at finpension. I asked them if they had some plan to had such fund but apparently, they have more demands for China based ones. However, they would consider it if the demand is enough. Therefore, if any of you is interested, do not hesitate to bug them with it!
Count me in for Quality.
Let’s make CH0253609066 happen! 
We’ve previously had the discussion over here.
EDIT: Actually that’s where I’m going to answer
I have my 3rd pillar in VIAC as well. Initially I did not pay much attention about their asset allocation because it was not much money. But year after year it is starting to be a big chunk of my money.
Currently I have 1/3 in VIAC global-100 (Credit Suisse) and 2/3 in mutual funds with managers.
I see that in VIAC we have also the “Individual strategy” option. Is global-100 good enough or could it be easily improve by the “Individual strategy”?
Thanks