Robovac rider
Frequent Poster
- Messages
- 310
Not very good.
Zurich International Equity fund and Prisma 5 fund performance this year.
Last edited:
763,000 employees; 104,000 employers, €60 million so far
- Thread starter Dave Vanian
- Start date
Zurich International Equity fund and Prisma 5 fund performance this year.
Fionclaire
Registered User
- Messages
- 108
Had the opportunity last night to see my niece's MFF portal within her verified mygov account, and have to say, first time seeing this, I was really impressed with the layout of fees/contributions and investments to date. She is a 25year old, gross salary (Jan-Aug) was €22802.88 and the transactions under the three headers were for the same period and her contributions all tallied with her payslips to the end of August, as did the employer and the state calculations.
The administration fees to NAERSA equated to €19.80 (36 wks @0.55c) Jan-Aug
The combined contributions from all three sources (herself/employer and state) equated to €798.11
Within the DEFAULT investment strategy, all contributions were split between the three Investment managers, Blackrock, Amundi and Irish Life, and will be blended between high,medium and low risk pools, but for now, she is invested in high risk pool because of her age.
I understand the AUM (Asset Under Management) fee is @ 0.03833% per annum.
Fund Performance stood @ €45.87 = (5.89% Return rate), with value of fund @ €824.18, which she was truly delighted with. One happy camper.
Attachments
Last edited:
@Fionclaire - great to hear that positive feedback.
Just one point! Some people would reasonably argue that being partly in low risk is, overall, a higher risk with someone with your neice's profile!
[The situation is different at retirement age where allocating a proportion to lower risk funds has definite merit]
Just one point! Some people would reasonably argue that being partly in low risk is, overall, a higher risk with someone with your neice's profile!
[The situation is different at retirement age where allocating a proportion to lower risk funds has definite merit]
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,601
@Fionclaire Thanks for that. Yeah it looks really slick. And who would opt out of a fund worth over €800 to get back less than half of that?
MFF is perfect for your niece. She is not far off the 40% tax bracket but even if she gets there it would be about 10 years before she might need to take some advice.
When this is up and running at 6% of salary and with less than .04% management fees there will be no room at all for the market to sell to 20% taxpayers or even 40% taxpayers less than say age 35.
MFF is perfect for your niece. She is not far off the 40% tax bracket but even if she gets there it would be about 10 years before she might need to take some advice.
When this is up and running at 6% of salary and with less than .04% management fees there will be no room at all for the market to sell to 20% taxpayers or even 40% taxpayers less than say age 35.
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,601
I think she is "high risk" until age 50 in the Default strategy.
Fionclaire
Registered User
- Messages
- 108
Yes, that is correct, I have since edited my post to reflect this. Thank you
Are you comparing like for like?
In example above of poster's niece, 5.89% return of the gross input value of 9 months contribution.
Remember, 1/9th of the contribution has just one month's growth, 1/9th has two months growth etc.
Average time is 4.5 months, so 5.89% gross growth is likely about a 15% pa growth. But it has been a good year for the market.