View more on these topics

Fidelity: Execution-only move brings welcome consistency

Fidelity head of business development Ed Dymott praises plans to include execution-only platforms in the new rules. See related articles (right) for further commentary.

Up until this week the RDR could more accurately be described as a review of the advisory market. Excluding other aspects of how long-term savings products are distributed (or administered) created the potential for market distortion.

Broadening the review to include the non-advised sector has to be welcomed by the advisory market as it brings consistency with the adviser charging rules and reduces the potential for distortion. Improving transparency across platforms has always been something we are very supportive of, as we demonstrated last year when we revealed our fees. We didn’t necessarily agree that platform remuneration created bias but we are very comfortable with explicitly charging for our services.

Including platforms and execution-only businesses in this phase is logical, and brings consistency with the advisory market. Excluding life companies and Sipps does not make sense, as exactly the same charging mechanisms exist as in the platform space – and in fact most platforms run insurance and Sipps alongside other products. This needs to be addressed and, whatever the outcomes, there needs to be consistency of treatment.

The proposed changes to the execution-only market will shake up this side of the industry. We work with around 25 execution-only businesses, as well as run and manage our own Personal Investing business.

Explicit charging is not something a business should be afraid of. What we should see instead is a clearer differentiation between the charges for non-advice versus advice. This will help customers understand what they are paying for, and the value of the services they are receiving. It will help advisers too.

As Fidelity and as a platform we are well on the road to meeting these new requirements. The fact that these were so well signposted should not come as a surprise. We have already launched our unbundled pricing model, and expect this to be the main structure adopted going forward. Having to provide unit rebates rather than cash rebates is a nuisance rather than a material issue and, although it is an unnecessary complexity, we already process millions of unit rebate transactions today.

The crux of the issue is that our industry is now moving to a point where there is a fair value exchange. No longer will a customer receive a service from a provider which is remunerated by someone else. This will ensure that the value proposition is clear, well-understood and actively chosen by the customer. What will this mean for pricing? Well, price is only really an issue in the absence of value, so those businesses that are best meeting the needs of their customers will do well. It is only businesses which do not have a clear and well-articulated value proposition and do not meet the needs of their customers that have to fear today’s paper.

Ed Dymott, is head of business development at Fidelity Worldwide Investment



Plans shelved to bring Money Advice Service under FoI

The Ministry of Justice has shelved plans to bring the Money Advice Service under the Freedom of Information Act, Money Marketing understands. In November, the MoJ was in discussions with MAS to bring it under the Act. Money Marketing understands those discussions have ended and the MoJ has no plans to officially consult on requiring […]


Aegon: Govt auto-enrol consultancy charging stance will hit advice

Aegon has warned the Government’s stance on consultancy charging for automatic enrolment will discourage employers from taking advice. An FSA RDR newsletter, published last week, says a consultancy charge cannot be levied on an auto-enrolment group personal pension if the employer is paying the minimum contribution. Once auto-enrolment has been fully rolled out in 2018, […]

David Shelton: The Business of Advice

Over the past few weeks, there have been some interesting moves by bigger players in the advice market. Barclays and Co-op are pulling out of mainstream face-to-face advice, Lloyds are talking to the regulator about a simplified model and Marks & Spencer has announced a move into mortgages. The IFA community tends to dismiss the […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Agreed. “Having to provide unit rebates rather than cash rebates is a nuisance rather than a material issue” FOR THE paltform, wrap and FSA, but for a client it will be a significant nuisance, which they will want their IFA to resolve for them, which takes TIME which as we all know is MONEY. So QED, baning cash rebates is detrimental to clients, so why is it being done contrary to the evidence NMG provided?

Leave a comment


Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm