A few years ago I had a similar Standard Life pension pot (among other pension pots) due to a brief spell as a permie with a large corporation, which had negotiated an approx. 0.7% discount (0.72 or 0.74 or similar IIRC) off the fund charges, that nominally resulted in a total charge* of about 0.3% for me. For what it's worth, I thought Standard Life was among the best of the traditional providers. However, I understand that level of discount was typical of what may be available to large organisations, and so it provides a clue about typical profit margins.
Somewhat independently, I have a SIPP with AJ Bell, but I originally considered II and another one I've forgotten. The low-lost providers all seemed roughly similar at the time (a good few years ago now) and I went with them because of a clearer and smoother website. Their charge structure changed last year, which highlighted how much cheaper ETFs can be than funds.
To answer the original question, unless you are particularly nervous or there are other factors specific to your circumstances, I strongly suggest you switch to a low-cost SIPP. I had no switching/exit fees from Standard Life, but double check yours. Without doing the research, my gut feel is that a few simple low-cost trackers (say 50% UK, 50% US currency-hedged, maybe a bit of other countries, whatever) via a low-cost platform will very likely have given better performance over the last few years than your Standard Life fund (which itself seems not that bad).
* The charges, fees, etc. etc. across the financial services industry (to me) seem 'almost intentionally' confusing. The first I found it all rationalised in one place was several years ago in Pete Comley's "Monkey with a Pin" free online book: well-researched, detailed, but easy-skim-read and probably still very relevant - Read/download the book (FREE) | Monkey with a Pin. He later wrote a similar, more philosophically-speculative ebook about inflation.
To me, there is little to justify the obfuscation and complexity other than a lot of vested interests, and the recent FCA report all but says this: https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/m...s/ms15-2-3.pdf
Somewhat independently, I have a SIPP with AJ Bell, but I originally considered II and another one I've forgotten. The low-lost providers all seemed roughly similar at the time (a good few years ago now) and I went with them because of a clearer and smoother website. Their charge structure changed last year, which highlighted how much cheaper ETFs can be than funds.
To answer the original question, unless you are particularly nervous or there are other factors specific to your circumstances, I strongly suggest you switch to a low-cost SIPP. I had no switching/exit fees from Standard Life, but double check yours. Without doing the research, my gut feel is that a few simple low-cost trackers (say 50% UK, 50% US currency-hedged, maybe a bit of other countries, whatever) via a low-cost platform will very likely have given better performance over the last few years than your Standard Life fund (which itself seems not that bad).
* The charges, fees, etc. etc. across the financial services industry (to me) seem 'almost intentionally' confusing. The first I found it all rationalised in one place was several years ago in Pete Comley's "Monkey with a Pin" free online book: well-researched, detailed, but easy-skim-read and probably still very relevant - Read/download the book (FREE) | Monkey with a Pin. He later wrote a similar, more philosophically-speculative ebook about inflation.
To me, there is little to justify the obfuscation and complexity other than a lot of vested interests, and the recent FCA report all but says this: https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/m...s/ms15-2-3.pdf
Comment