Freetrade announces job cuts of up to 15% of staff - AltFi

Surely you don’t think it’s more complicated than a SIPP…which FT decided to offer? You chuck in 4k a year and get 1k free - then can take it out when you’re 60 or buying a home. How is that complicated? Compare that to tax relief on pension contributions…

I also think LISA will be far more in demand than SIPP’s for the demographic who use FT.


I 100% get your frustration @SlimShadey. I think I understood from the outset you invested with a view to making a reasonable return in a shorter time frame than has passed. I contend though that you were being way too optimistic please see post. Nevertheless, I think a company with big pockets would have quickly squashed anything that appeared to directly and immediately challenge it.

I also agree with you that a key focus of the management should be to encourage fee paying customers.

I still think that Freetrade offers a really good deal.


I would agree with this. I had New Zealand broker for a while who were kind of similar to freetrade except that their equivalent plus fee was based on your portfolio size. That way as well as having say a £10 cap they were capturing some more revenue from smaller accounts. It did suck though when a well performing stock only just pushed me into a new fee bracket and actually meant I ended up with a lower monthly return than if it was slightly less successfully :joy:

With my smallish but regular payments plus just doesn’t make sense despite the fact there are a lot of paywalled stocks I would be interested in and happy to pay something to access.

That said I believe the NZ broker removed that fee and now have a 0.5-0.1% fee on trades instead.

The complications and costs are for the provider. This is why very few brokers provide LISAs as a matter of course and even fewer accept transfers.


Exactly, as long as Freetrade continue to operate on a subscription model rather than an percentage of assets this will be an issue.

HL cap the LISA fee at £45 per year for shares, investment trusts and ETF, that is going to be tough for Freetrade to compete with and make profitable.

1 Like

It was freetrades idea to have their general account pretty much free, so why the need to become Boris Johnston and go back on their word with changes and force plus apon others.

There could be many working towards plus that can’t afford the monthly payment and or it’s not worth it for the current portfolio size they have currently.


It isn’t just HL that FT is competing with but t212 which (regardless of how it is funded) is largely free except for fx charges.

T212 can afford to keep trading of equity free because it makes 70% of their revenues and 100% of their profit from CFD (77% of their users lose money with CFD).

1 Like

I’m well aware of how t212 fund their operations but that wasn’t my point. Provided it is legal (and it is for the time being) then t212 are directly competing with FT and provide a substantially better service for less for many customers. That matters when you’re chasing new/small investors.


Did T212 not announce last year that their invest & ISA services are profitable as separate entities from the CFD platform? I may be wrong but thought I’d read that somewhere.

1 Like

If from an accounting point of view they allocate the majority of the overhead cost to the CFD division, its pretty easy to achieve profitability withe their invest & Isa service

1 Like

so as an investor you would be happy if Freetrade decide to enter in the CFD business?

1 Like

No, but not because of any kind of ethical stance more because I think it would be an unnecessary distraction (like crypto).

We all have different ethical/moral stances and it would be hypocritical of me to say that CFDs shouldn’t be allowed when there’s very many other morally-questionable areas of business that are allowed (some we can invest in eg arms/tobacco/fossil fuels etc). Do I personally like CFDs - no, but that is largely irrelevant.

Again, focusing on how t212 make their profits is rather missing the point I was making about features and competition. It isn’t as though FT is a newbie any more - I’m sure there have been many technical and business challenges but that doesn’t change that FT’s offering is falling behind.

Comparisons are not always helpful.

HL had to build their business before the internet really took off, so relied on mailshots and telephone customers.

£40m now is also worth less than £40m then…


I must say, some of the comments above and the mention of fee changes from up above are making me feel a little nervous. When I opened my account, I questioned the freemium model, and wondered if it was sustainable - my concern was being stuck with tranches of shares which were effectively worthless if dealing costs were implemented.
Over time, I’ve bought into the idea of Freetrade, and what was a grand or so is now nearly 10k and a plus account. Freetrade has allowed me to be as diverse as I like, whilst allowing me to drop money in sometimes a share at a time. Some of my holdings are just £20 or so - something which would have been impossible when I used to trade through a bank. The imposition of fees though takes this away, and I’m wondering whether to start liquidating before I’m stung.


As the author of some of those comments I can say. Some of my holdings are £20 or so and I too hold many holdings.

One thing is that even with plus, like you i still have the flexibility to spread £100 over 3 or more holdings if I so choose.

This is the joy of freetade, even with plus.

With HL or any of the legacies, we know this wouldn’t be possible.


As far as I can understand it the fee changes mentioned above are the exclusive opinion of those posting said comments. Hence those comments vinculate the ones expressing them only


None of the comments above are any more than an opinion. Freemium works well for what Freetrade wants, you’re a perfect example of someone who has found value in upgrading but wouldn’t have even joined without the free account.


Agreed, but Freetrade themselves have announced that there will be changes to the pricing structure this summer, whilst remaining vague and tight lipped about what they actually are. That’s encouraged this kind of speculation, and to my mind they would simply have been better confirming the proposed changes straight away.

Adam only mentioned a revamp, now yes it will likely include an element of pricing (inflation hits all businesses) but I wouldn’t be overly concerned.

Remember the only reason we know that they’re working in a revamp is because the CEO does regular AMA’s and is often very candid. This should be applauded.