To encourage people into 1 payment, which reduces admin and the need to chase people if they don’t have enough in their account to cover it monthly. That’s my guess as it’s the most common reason but maybe they’ll tell us when they announce details
5 Likes
I’m surprised nobody has told us so far tbh, Freetrade have always responded quickly before to questions like this that I don’t even think the answer to will even be any more complex/sensitive than your suggestions.
A prepayment of £30 is much better for cashflow than the £3 a month, it’s not just about cashflow predictability. Freetrade’s regualted, so needs to maintain sufficient capital and can use that cash to grow further, build new features etc.
You do have annual direct debits, so it wouldn’t have to be a manual payment each year. They’ll save a little on transactions. It’s a reward for longer term customers and a nice little incentive to become one too 
8 Likes
Bulk discount.
You’re welcome.
4 Likes
@Rob14 @PigeonStrangler given what you’ve both said and providing the process manual, then it make sense for Freetrade and be simpler for the user to just offer 1 annual payment which I would be for. So then why is monthly even touted as an option?
Oh and @Freetrade_Team1 instead of liking other comments why not just answer my query?
@HoddzDJ look at you
I think offering the option of monthly & annual payments makes sense, as some people will prefer to have the smaller amount taken each month. My personal preference would be to pay annually, then not have to worry about the fees for a year.
Hopefully Freetrade will be earning some interest on the pot of money they hold from the customers who have paid annually, which offsets the slightly lower fee they may charge for the annual up-front payment.
1 Like
I’m struggling to see what the issue is here. This is standard practice across various industries and it’s not a price increase. It’s customer friendly in both cost and time.
Personally, I thought that was how it was going to work anyway but it’s seems I made a lucky assumption.
14 Likes
I have to say, I also agree that this pricing makes complete sense. I think future users, in general, would be surprised not to receive a ‘discount’ if paying yearly via lump sum / locking into a 12 month contract. I take the point that it’s a long term product but, for example, I recently renewed home insurance and received a discount for doing so by paying upfront - I think this is a similar concept.
7 Likes
@ajw87 Thanks for your response, very insightful.
I’m a new investor. Basically, I think the yearly option makes the monthly option redundant. Anybody who is “rational” will choose to pay £30 lump sum to gain this so called £6 “discount”.
And here in lies my “issue”, we’re now in the world of investing where “fees, fees, and fees again” is a key factor on returns. You only need to browse our discussion on Roboadvisors vs ISA where we deliberated over the significance of a few basis points. Therefore, I find it selective for people to be now justifying a £6 fee disparity on an ISA product that is annual & long-term by nature just because it’s Freetrade.
Personally I do see the benefit of the different pricing with the caveat that in my eyes I assume that the £3 monthly charge is a yearly contract for want of a better phrase? Just gives the individual options, some will pay up front, some like to have monthly. It’s simple pricing and yes wasn’t shown previously but I don’t see it as an issue as such.
5 Likes
Yes, the two different payment methods just provide investors (ie Freetrade’s customers) with choice.
Even at £36, this still makes Freetrade’s ISA the cheapest flat rate priced ISA out there, especially if you factor in the free trading, so no worries on losing a few basis points there
4 Likes
And why does the monthly choice cost 20% more than the annual choice? An ISA isn’t like a regular subscription of say music or movies whereby the customer can decide to downgrade on a whim; investors are making 5+ year decisions and can’t decide to cancel their ISAs as easily.
Perhaps consider the admin for the two:
1 - Monthly collection of fee: If there is cash in the account, then fine, fee is collected and paid. If there isn’t cash in the investor’s account, stock will need to be sold to cover the cost. This could potentially happen up to 12 times a year = extra admin.
2 - Annual collection of fee. If the £30 is in the account then fine. If not, then stock will need to be sold to cover the fee. This will only happen once a year.
I don’t know whether this extra admin adds up to 20% or not but it just makes sense for me to have an incentive for the annual fee.
4 Likes
Airline tickets cost cheaper when prepaid in advance. The logic is the same here.
2 Likes
Maybe to encourage the use of a yearly fee rather than monthly? Much like discounts on paperless billing.
3 Likes
I agree, that would certainly be the logical choice, and my choice also. However, hypothetically, someone else may be put off by the thought of paying for a full year upfront in one £30 hit and may have a preference to “try” the ISA out for £3/month. They may then decide after 2 months that they no longer require an ISA for that year and opt to cancel, hence will have only paid £6.
Agree it is unlikely - most people opening an ISA will know they will require (and want) to hold it for the year. But that’s just my take on it!
5 Likes
Don’t think about flexibility being important in just year one, what about 2,3,4,10. There is a charge for that flexibility and the reason the person is paying for it is that they don’t know when they want to close the ISA. What if I start with a fixed fee then move to flexible later in life?
Is 20% worth it? That’s for the individual to decide, people decide with their wallet and I would expect freetrade to do some analysis once the product is live (alongside reviewing these discussions) to decide what the right price point is. I think everyone else here so far isn’t disgruntled by the difference which to me says it’s a sensible starting point for them to go with.
2 Likes
Cheers for the recent responses, much better than earlier ones in terms of aiding understanding.
So I gather the discrepancy is to account for some manual processes, share sales and a flexibility element.
It’d be good to also get confirmation of this when the ISA launches.
1 Like
5 Likes
I understand I am late to the conversation…but?
If we are truly making the best investing app in the world why are we charging in this manner and what exactly are the benefits.
If I pay per year do I get free instant orders?
Do I get Tips in terms of stock openings and reviews?
Do I have a round up integration/ app from my current bank?(this would be in my opinion the difference between a good experience to the F***king Ultimate unicorn 
sparkle power) (Simplicity is harder than complexity)
Or am I just being charged for this ISA?