Hargreaves Lansdown Share Discussion Threads

[its the oxman] 07/1/2020 16:31

With overall market levels having climbed higher these look overdue a bounce sub 1900p. Next set of results will be interesting.

[lomax99] 29/12/2019 15:34

Funny, after months of bashing HL. over W, one of the Mail's team is now tipping them for 2020:Https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/investing/article-7832985/STOCK-MARKET-WATCHLIST-predictions-2020.html

[mac15] 29/12/2019 08:49

Is the worst over?

[ochs] 16/12/2019 18:30

Looks like a sensible non-exec appointment - and interesting that John Troiano is also joining the fund manager's board to provide 'challenge' ;)

[inthemix] 16/12/2019 17:58

No Lomax didn't enjoy the rise. ":^(

[jubberjim] 14/12/2019 00:39

Agree complet oh is not the first time this has happened
All to often the website does not get up and running when there is flux in the market
Hope they get their act together
It is just not good enough

[lomax99] 13/12/2019 09:36

Hope the shorters are enjoying the rise........

[jfishy55] 13/12/2019 08:33

18bells, all sorts of problems this morning, technical issues, unable to get quotes, weird password issues. Failed to make a number of trades - pretty disappointing for what I thought was a pretty resilient platform.

[18bells] 13/12/2019 08:18

Has the HL website broken down? No trades due to "technical issue"

[j0sekl] 12/12/2019 00:26

lomax, when past reputation and backward-looking numbers seem to define their research scope, it's easy to find good stats hence the wealth list looks ok, but I doubt they have +5% outperformance unless there is some factor tailwind. The reality is that Hargreaves have no forward predictive power on their fund research imo. They can only comment on well-established retail funds, and usually regurgitate the marketing spiel.

Plus HL provides this 'research' for free. No proprietary value.

[lomax99] 09/12/2019 13:58

Well in addition to making the list, they also seem to do mysteriously well for their clients:

'This research has resulted in the selection of funds onto the Wealth 150/50 which have on average outperformed both their relevant benchmark index and their sector average after charges, by 5.8% and 11.8% respectively over the period they have been on the Wealth 150/50 list.'

Extract from a letter from C Hill, CEO to Rt Hon N Morgan MP, dated 18/6/19

[hpcg] 09/12/2019 13:12

If the fund manager offers them advantageous terms versus other platforms they mysteriously make the list. I think the reason for the shrinkage from 150 to 50 is that open ended costs have trimmed so there is less scope to offer a bung to one platform.

[ochs] 09/12/2019 10:51

Agree with lomax99 - clearly they messed up on Woodford, but since (I think) 2003 have made their clients a lot of money by suggesting funds that have performed well over the long term via the W150 (now W50). What they do need to put in place is more robust challenges internally as to why funds are in the W50 and be more willing to make changes to it.

[lomax99] 09/12/2019 10:32

Disagree with that, there is a place for a researched recommended list. The fact is that most of their W50 funds have outperformed their benchmarked indices, which will no doubt have benefited many of their clients. When faced with a choice of 3000+ funds, for those that need it, recommended lists have their place.

[j0sekl] 09/12/2019 08:42

The reality is that it will take time for HL to recover its reputation. History tells you that banks and insurers have had lawsuits and fines in the past but their retail strength continues.

HL should shut its Mickey Mouse fund research unit, why pay that bunch to allow clients to lose money? A waste of expenses and operation. Woodford till this day is a classic example of a conflict of interest as much as incompetence.

Stick to being a broker platform FFS.

[hpcg] 03/12/2019 17:03

The trend in costs for investment products is down, which must be welcome to us all. I too don't think that HL will lose many customers, but they will lose business. To use the TSB analogy, people won't close their account, but they will open a second. I did that without ever having had trouble with a bank because we all know these things can happen. In the investment arena I still have accounts with Barclays and HL but I don't add new money to them; my new money goes to IG which is cheaper and better, especially as I have little to no interest in open ended funds. As it isn't going out of business the lower it goes the less attractive a short is.

[inthemix] 03/12/2019 09:00

Everyone in it's spitting

[lomax99] 01/12/2019 16:34

Marshall Wace reduced their by just over 10%, from 0.99% to 0.89% earlier in the week. Short tracker reports overall short positions to be currently 3.08%.No doubt someone will try to drum up further scare stories relating to Robinhood (US free share dealing UK market entry) and Vanguard's pending entry into the UK SIPP market....

[lomax99] 29/11/2019 10:17

Yawn, how's your short going LK?

[growthpotential] 27/11/2019 22:07

Bring it on! Long HL

[j0sekl] 20/11/2019 13:36

Are these simplistic assumptions when medium term risks and opportunities should be at one's forefront...

How many new clients will willingly move to Hargreaves this year? How many clients might they lose? The bulks were just pension partnerships probably? But individuals in corporate pensions can always opt out or switch their pension assets to different providers.. these are people's nest eggs.

Has Hargreaves' fund capabilities improved?

Does it affect their reputation?