The MiFID II costs and charges regulation is intended to provide clarity for end-investors but, while a positive step, argues Ray Tubman, it neither goes far enough nor makes the information easily accessible to consumers
The Investment Platforms Market Study Interim Report (MS17/1.2), which was published last month by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), raised many interesting topics. One theme that surfaces in various guises is investor charges and their relationship to services and portfolio performance. Some aspects of this presented in the FCA interim report are: * Platforms have very different charges and charging structures, which means it is difficult for consumers to compare platforms based on charges. * Charges incurred within funds are not obvious to the end-consumer, thus making it mo...
To continue reading this article...
Join Professional Adviser for free
- Unlimited access to real-time news, industry insights and market intelligence
- Stay ahead of the curve with spotlights on emerging trends and technologies
- Receive breaking news stories straight to your inbox in the daily newsletters
- Make smart business decisions with the latest developments in regulation, investing retirement and protection
- Members-only access to the editor’s weekly Friday commentary
- Be the first to hear about our events and awards programmes