Skip to main content
Free calculator

What fees actually cost you

Three contracts, the same savings effort and the same gross return: the capital each one leaves you, and what the gap is worth in euros.

The guide

Why one point of fees costs so much

One point of annual fees does not cost 1% of your capital: it costs 1% EVERY YEAR, on a balance that keeps growing. Over twenty-five years, 1.8% of annual fees against 0.5% takes close to a quarter of the final capital — without anyone ever sending you an invoice.

Three families of fees stack up, and they are not visible in the same place. ENTRY fees are taken from every payment: 3% on €200 a month is €6 that will never work for you. MANAGEMENT fees are taken from the balance, so they grow with it. ADVISORY fees — discretionary mandate, managed portfolio, advice — come on top, and that is often where two otherwise comparable contracts part ways.

What return comparisons do not show: two contracts advertising the same gross return do not hand back the same capital. The gross return is what the fund earns; what you get is what is left of it. That gap is exactly what this simulator puts a number on, in euros and in points of return.

How to read the result

  1. The same effort, three times

    The initial payment, the monthly payment, the period and the gross return are shared by all three columns. Only the fees differ: any gap at the end comes from them, and from nothing else.

  2. The shortfall

    It is the gap between the cheapest and the most expensive contract at the end, in euros. Compare it with the total you will have paid in: the proportion is more striking than the fee percentage.

  3. The equivalent net return

    The rate that, with no fees at all, would have produced the same capital. It is the honest translation of a fee schedule: 5% gross with 1.8% of fees is not 3.2% net, it is slightly less, because entry fees weigh too.

  4. Time decides

    Add ten years to the period and watch the shortfall: it does not rise by ten years of fees, it rises far more. Same mechanics as compound interest, taken in reverse.

Once the gap has a number, the question is no longer “is this contract expensive?” but “what am I getting in return?”. A management mandate costing 0.6% a year has to beat its index by 0.6% a year just to break even. It rarely does, and that is the only question worth asking. See also what inflation takes on top, and how [tax](flatTax) applies to what is left.

Your real fees, on your real contracts

A simulator works on assumptions. Patrice tracks your actual contracts, their value and their payments, and shows what each one returned net. The account is free; the demo shows the app with sample data.

Free, no card required, no connection to your bank accounts.

Frequently asked questions

No. The calculation runs entirely in your browser, on your device: no figure is sent to a server, and nothing is kept once you close the tab — except, on this device only, the values you typed, so that switching language does not empty the form.

In the key information document and the annual statement, under “entry charges”, “ongoing management charges” and “discretionary mandate charges”. The fees of the underlying funds are on top and shown separately: for the full cost, add them to the management fee.

Not separately. Put them into the annual management fee: the calculation treats them identically, since they are also charged on the balance. An index ETF costs 0.1 to 0.3% a year, an active fund 1.5 to 2% — a gap worth putting into the comparison.

Because the tool compares fee schedules, not fund managers. Allowing three different returns would let the result say anything: lending 1% of extra performance to the most expensive contract would wipe out its fees. If you want to test that assumption, run two simulations and compare.

From every payment, initial and monthly: only the balance is invested. If your contract charges only on the first payment, set this column to 0 and reduce the initial payment accordingly.

No: it compares capital BEFORE exit tax, which is the right basis for two contracts of the same kind. For taxation on the way out, the wrapper matters more than the fees — that is what the PER versus PEA comparison is for.