Irish life vs Zurich fees

Cameron326

Wonder if anyone has any experience of a personal pension with either of these providers? I found Irish Life to be more thorough in explaining the ins and outs, but the fees seem to be light and day:

Irish Life (I’m going through AIB) have an approx 3.75% contribution charge which would therefore cost me about €350 a year (not to mention any lost interest on gains). Whereas Zurich just have a €3.5 Euro monthly fee, no contribution charge at all, IE totaling €42 a year. Seems a complete no brainer. Am I missing something? Why is Zurich’s offer *so* much better?

Geuze

Personally, I would not buy any pension with 3.75% cont charge.

Pensions are available with 0% cont charges.

Cameron326

Exactly. But why do they charge it? who would pay such a high rate when most other companies offer zero contribution charges. Is there a catch?

howamidifferent

Preying on peoples lack of understanding with pensions.

The J Stands for Jay

Cameron326 wrote: »

Exactly. But why do they charge it? who would pay such a high rate when most other companies offer zero contribution charges. Is there a catch?

I'd say a fair chunk of it goes to AIB in this scenario

Jim2007

Well what investing objective, performance, risk and diversification...

In other words what are you paying for?

TiGeR KiNgS

Cameron326 wrote: »

Wonder if anyone has any experience of a personal pension with either of these providers? I found Irish Life to be more thorough in explaining the ins and outs, but the fees seem to be light and day:

Irish Life (I’m going through AIB) have an approx 3.75% contribution charge which would therefore cost me about €350 a year (not to mention any lost interest on gains). Whereas Zurich just have a €3.5 Euro monthly fee, no contribution charge at all, IE totaling €42 a year. Seems a complete no brainer. Am I missing something? Why is Zurich’s offer *so* much better?

Irish life is cross sold by AIB, so trash.

Jim2007

TiGeR KiNgS wrote: »

Irish life is cross sold by AIB, so trash.

The OP told you that, so unless you are going to back up that statement with some sort of analysis. It's best ignored.

Henry Ford III

This thread is another example of the standard mindset here - buy a cheap product.

I'd argue that whilst pricing is obviously a consideration, using the most appropriate structure together with superior asset and fund selection are much more important ones long term, and that minimum cost solutions will ultimately cost most consumers more through mistakes caused by the lack of proper advice.

Cheapest isn't always best.

bilbot79

Henry Ford III wrote: »

This thread is another example of the standard mindset here - buy a cheap product.

I'd argue that whilst pricing is obviously a consideration, using the most appropriate structure together with superior asset and fund selection are much more important ones long term, and that minimum cost solutions will ultimately cost most consumers more through mistakes caused by the lack of proper advice.

Cheapest isn't always best.

I hear you but at 3.75% there would want to be some serious difference in performance right?

The J Stands for Jay

bilbot79 wrote: »

I hear you but at 3.75% there would want to be some serious difference in performance right?

It'd want to be >3.75%p.a. better

Jim2007

Henry Ford III wrote: »

This thread is another example of the standard mindset here - buy a cheap product.

I expect it’s because we don’t teach personal finance at school, so people simply decisions as much as possible.

I qualified in Ireland and moved abroad shortly afterwards, so most of my work experience was in Central Europe. And the only people I found knowledgeable about their financial affairs were Swiss trades people. And the reason: every apprentice must take a module in personal finance. They cover all the basics: banking, insurance, pensions, credit cards, loans, tax returns and investing.

But beyond that, we as a society do a very poor job of preparing people to make decisions that will impact their life’s for decades to come. They are left to try and figure it out for themselves and most do a very poor job of it.

Jim2007

bilbot79 wrote: »

I hear you but at 3.75% there would want to be some serious difference in performance right?

Well given the consensus return on equities is about 7%, I’d want to see double digit returns for that kind of fee, but I’m in a different market.. Although Zürich is one of the vendors here too.