Skip to content
Purpose-built for UK MPS due diligence

Stop juggling factsheets,
spreadsheets and switching calculators.

One standardised dataset of UK MPS strategies feeds the comparison chart, the calculation engines, the meeting pack and the audit trail. One platform for the whole due-diligence workflow, so a Tuesday-morning client review takes minutes, not an afternoon.

or email enquiries@mpscompare.co.uk

Every subscription includes every feature. Sections marked Multi-seat administration apply once a firm holds more than one seat

The visuals on this page are simplified previews built to illustrate each feature. The tools in the product are more detailed and interactive, and run on live data. What you see here is a representative snapshot, not the full surface. Firm names, people, dates and reference identifiers shown in the previews are fictional sample data; the engine and document versions stamped on them are the real versions in force.

Part 1 of 4

Research & browse

Find what you need. Search and filter every UK MPS strategy we hold a current snapshot for, drill into any portfolio, read about the firm running it, and trace every figure back to a dated provider snapshot.

Browse every UK MPS strategy

One table, every strategy we hold a current snapshot for. Sort on any of: Risk, YTD, 1yr Return, 3yr Return, 5yr Return, Yield, Total Fee, AUM. The sort indicator at the top of the table tells you what you're sorted by; the lowest Total Fee in the visible set is flagged in green.

Filter sidebar: provider, type (Active / Passive / Blended), risk band 1–10, fee range. Every row carries a one-click Watchlist add and a deep link into Comparison.

MPS Portfolios Sorted by: Total Fee ↑
Provider / PortfolioTypeRiskYTD1yr3yr5yrYieldTotal FeeAUM
Alpha Balanced Active
Alpha DFM
Active 5/10 +4.2% +8.6% +5.1% +6.7% 1.8% 0.85% £820m
Bravo Balanced Blended
Bravo DFM
Blended 6/10 +3.6% +7.2% +4.4% +4.9% 1.6% 0.72% £1.4bn
Charlie Balanced Passive
Charlie DFM
Passive 5/10 +3.1% +6.4% +3.8% +4.2% 1.9% 0.50% £3.1bn
Delta Balanced Active
Delta DFM
Active 5/10 +2.8% +5.7% +3.5% +4.5% 2.0% 0.78% £560m
Lowest Total Fee in view flagged ▼ · Watchlist + Compare columns sit alongside in the product.

Per-portfolio detail page

Four headline cards at the top: Risk Rating (X / 10), 3yr Return (annualised), Total Annual Fee, AUM. Underneath, three side-by-side panels: asset allocation, a net-of-fee return chart, and a periodic return chart with YTD / 1yr / 3yr / 5yr cards.

Discrete annual returns broken into six 12-month buckets (0–12m through 60–72m). Top 10 holdings in a numbered 2-column grid sorted by weight. Portfolio characteristics (number of holdings, active share, annualised volatility, historical yield) show “—” where a figure isn't available, never a made-up placeholder. Direct link to the provider factsheet.

Charlie Balanced Passive
Charlie DFM · Passive
Risk Rating
5 / 10
3yr Return
+3.8%
Total Fee
0.50%
AUM
£3.1bn
Asset Allocation
Equity 60%
Bonds 30%
Property 5%
Cash 5%
Discrete annual returns
YTD
+3.1%
0–12m
+6.4%
12–24m
+4.2%
24–36m
+1.8%
36–48m
+5.1%
48–60m
+3.6%
Top 10 Holdings
1. iShares Core MSCI World ETF
2. Vanguard FTSE Dev World UCITS
3. iShares Core £ Gilts
4. L&G Global 100 Index
5. iShares Core FTSE 100
6. Vanguard US Equity Index
7. iShares Core MSCI EM IMI
8. L&G UK Mid Cap 100 Index
9. iShares £ Corp Bond
10. Vanguard Global Bond Index
Holdings
47
Active share
Std deviation
8.2%
Yield
1.9%

Provider directory

A grid of every MPS provider we hold data for. Each card shows: provider name, type, portfolio count in our dataset, average fee across their range, average 3yr return, year established, and AUM where the provider publishes it.

Useful as the first cut before opening any single portfolio. No league tables, no editorial scoring: providers stand on their own numbers.

4 providers · sorted alphabetically
A
Alpha DFM
Active
Portfolios
8
Avg fee
0.81%
Avg 3yr
+4.6%
Est.
1998
AUM
£820m
B
Bravo DFM
Blended
Portfolios
6
Avg fee
0.69%
Avg 3yr
+4.1%
Est.
2004
AUM
£1.4bn
C
Charlie DFM
Passive
Portfolios
5
Avg fee
0.52%
Avg 3yr
+3.7%
Est.
2007
AUM
£3.1bn
D
Delta DFM
Active
Portfolios
7
Avg fee
0.78%
Avg 3yr
+3.5%
Est.
2011
AUM
£560m
Part 2 of 4

Analysis tools

Seven calculation tools driven by one shared engine, so the maths stays consistent everywhere, plus an AI layer that explains the figures. Every result can be reproduced exactly from its inputs and the versions behind it.

Side-by-side performance comparison

Up to four portfolios on one chart, plotted as cumulative return in percent, the same way a factsheet presents performance, so the numbers reconcile with what the provider publishes. Choose the time window, overlay your firm benchmark, and toggle net-of-fees.

The line is drawn from each strategy's actual reported returns, with no synthetic smoothing to flatter the picture. Below the chart sits the full data table (fees, returns over every horizon, risk and size) plus a one-click PDF that's logged the moment it's produced.

Cumulative return since Jan 2021
5yrInception · Show net of fees
-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% Jan 21 Jan 22 Jan 23 Jan 24 Jan 25 YTD
Alpha Balanced
Bravo Balanced
Charlie Balanced Passive
House benchmark (Mixed 40-85)
Year-end anchors compound on the previous year. Final point is YTD partial year. Benchmark dashed.

Fee Impact

A look back, not a forecast. It shows the real cost drag a client has actually carried over a 1, 3 or 5-year window, using the returns and charges that genuinely applied. The total brings together the fund charge, the provider's management fee and, if you want, your adviser fee, compounded the way the regulator's own projection standard does it, not simply added up.

A comparison against strategies in the same risk band shows where the portfolio sits among its peers. Every export carries the FCA's required fee-disclosure wording word for word, and is logged automatically.

Window: 1yr3yr5yr Engine v1.3.0
Starting value
£250,000
Period actual return
+22.6% (5yr)
Adviser fee
0.50% (optional)
PortfolioOCFDFMTotal FeeFee paid · 5yrNet final
Charlie Balanced Passive 0.40% 0.10% 0.50% £7,820 £298,430
Bravo Balanced Blended 0.55% 0.17% 0.72% £11,240 £295,010
Alpha Balanced Active 0.70% 0.15% 0.85% £13,260 £292,990
Peer-band median (Risk 5–6): 0.74%. Charlie sits in the lowest decile.
Historical fee drag, not a forward projection. PDF footer: “Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Fees may vary.”

Growth Projector

Three forward scenarios, Conservative, Moderate and Optimistic, built from the strategy's own track record: its historical return and how much it has swung around that average. Add a goal line and the tool shows the chance of falling short, using a transparent statistical model rather than a black-box simulation.

Set the starting pot, the monthly contribution, the time horizon and the target. Each scenario is drawn as its own clearly-labelled line, so a client can see the full spread of outcomes at a glance.

£100k initial + £500/mo · 10yr · mean and volatility from snapshot Engine v1.5.0
£100k £140k £180k £220k £260k Yr 0Yr 2Yr 4Yr 6Yr 8Yr 10
Conservative
£158k
−1 std dev
Moderate
£218k
mean
Optimistic
£268k
+1 std dev
Goal
£200k
Probability of missing the £200k goal: 22.4% (log-normal).

Switching Analysis

Stay or switch? The tool runs both paths side by side over your chosen horizon, each with its own range of outcomes, and marks the point where switching pulls ahead once the cost of moving is taken into account.

Break-even is reported to the nearest part-month, not rounded up to the next whole year, so the answer is precise enough to stand behind. It factors in the difference in wrapper charges, the one-off cost of transitioning, and (where relevant) an optional capital-gains-tax estimate.

£250k · £2.5k transition (wrapper + CGT) · 2yr horizon Engine v1.7.0
£240k £260k £280k £300k Mo 0 Mo 6 Yr 1 Yr 1.5 Yr 2
Stay (5.2% net)
Switch (5.6% net)
Break-even: 18.4 months monthly interpolation (NPER)
Period
Stay
Switch
Δ
6 months
£259.0k
£257.3k
–£1.7k
1 year
£268.0k
£267.5k
–£0.5k
18 months
£273.0k
£273.0k
£0.0k
2 years
£288.0k
£289.2k
+£1.2k

Income & Drawdown

Drawdown in retirement, plotted against the client's age rather than years-from-now, so they can read it directly. The range of possible outcomes widens across the horizon, built on the same modelling that powers the Growth projector.

The headline number is the probability of running out by a chosen age. We lead with the risk, not the rosy case, because that's the honest way to frame it and the way compliance teams expect to see it.

£500k pot · £30k/yr (6%) · age 65 → 90 Engine v1.9.0
£0k £200k £400k £600k Age 657075808590
Moderate end pot
£30k
Conservative
£0
Optimistic
£220k
Probability of running out by age 90: 42% · framed as the bad outcome.

Holdings Overlap

For any two portfolios, it works out how much of what they hold is actually the same. The largest holdings sit side by side, with a column showing the difference in weighting for each name and a note on how much of each portfolio those top names represent.

It's the quick sense-check on blended construction: two strategies that both lean heavily on the same global index aren't really diversifying a client, however different they look on the cover.

Two portfolios · top 10 by weight Engine v1.3.0
42.3%
overlap by weight
Alpha Balanced
Active · Risk 5
Bravo Balanced
Blended · Risk 6
Holding
A %
B %
Δ
iShares Core MSCI World ETF
18.2
14.8
3.4
L&G Global 100 Index
8.4
9.1
0.7
Vanguard FTSE Dev World
7.6
6.2
1.4
iShares Core £ Gilts
6.4
5.0
1.4
iShares £ Corp Bond
5.2
3.8
1.4
Vanguard LifeStrategy 60
4.1
4.1
BlackRock Global Bond
4.2
4.2
Top-10 coverage: A 62% · B 58% of total book.

Risk Analytics

The diagnostic layer behind a strategy's headline return. Put up to four strategies side by side and compare how much they swing (volatility), how far they've fallen in bad spells (drawdown), how their returns are distributed, and how closely they move together. Headline cards summarise volatility, downside risk and the worst peak-to-trough fall for each.

Everything is measured over a period you choose. When a strategy's volatility looks like an outlier next to its same-risk-band peers, the tool flags it, and it does that without ever exposing the rest of the market's underlying data, so the comparison is fair but nobody else's figures are laid bare. Every export is logged.

3 strategies · Jan 21–May 26 · gross of charges Engine v1.5.0
Rolling annualised volatility · 36-month window
4% 8% 12% 16% Jan 22 Jan 23 Jan 24 Jan 25 May 26
Alpha Balanced Active
Bravo Balanced Blended
Charlie Balanced Passive
A Alpha Balanced Active
Risk
5/10
Ann. vol
11.80%
Sortino
0.74
Max DD
-14.20%
B Bravo Balanced Blended
Risk
6/10
Ann. vol
8.20%
Sortino
0.91
Max DD
-9.80%
C Charlie Balanced Passive
Risk
5/10
Ann. vol
9.40%
Sortino
0.83
Max DD
-11.60%
Correlation matrix · mean 0.85
ABC
A 1.000.920.78
B 0.921.000.84
C 0.780.841.00
A is more volatile than its 7 rated peers over this period (11.80% vs 9.10% peer median).
Peer comparison is computed server-side; the universe's monthly series never reaches the browser. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results.

AI insights + drafting

Two AI surfaces, both powered by Anthropic Claude. Inline insight panels in the Comparison and Risk Analytics tools describe, in plain English, the notable points in the figures already on screen, with a bounded follow-up thread. A drafting aid produces a first draft of the Meeting Pack decision note and the Suitability Letter rationale, landing in the same editable field you would have typed into.

Grounded server-side on catalogue data and computed figures only; the model never derives a figure and never produces a recommendation. Session-only: nothing AI-generated is saved, exported, or written to the audit trail. Every output is a draft the adviser reviews and owns.

AI insights Comparison · 2 strategies
Adviser aid only. AI-generated observations for you to evaluate, never a personal recommendation; output can be incomplete or wrong. Session-only: nothing is saved, exported, or added to the audit trail.
Summarise the key differences How do the ongoing charges compare?
AI-generated · adviser must review

Both strategies sit at risk 5/10. Alpha Balanced Active carries the higher total fee (0.85% vs 0.50%) while their 5-year returns sit within roughly two percentage points of each other.

The fee difference is the most consistent gap in the supplied figures.

Grounded on the figures on this page
Draft decision note / suitability rationale Draft with AI
Session-only · nothing saved · not financial advice. Drafts land in an editable field; the adviser owns the final wording.
Part 3 of 4

Workflow & outputs

The day-to-day flow: shortlist with watchlists, assemble a meeting pack, draft the suitability letter, brand every PDF, and keep a 7-year append-only audit trail of everything generated.

Watchlists & due-diligence tracking

Your own research workspace. Tag each strategy with where it stands: Unranked, Vetted, Watching, Concern or Reject, and add a note on why. If the data behind a strategy has been refreshed since you last looked, a banner flags it, so you never act on a stale view.

Duplicate a list in a click to spin up a variant, and send your shortlist straight into Fee Impact, Growth or a Meeting Pack. Export the whole thing as a branded PDF, logged like every other output.

Balanced Risk 5 shortlist
6 items · last viewed 28 May 2026 09:14
2 items have new snapshot data since you last viewed.
Charlie Balanced Passive
Low fee · clean track record
Vetted
Alpha Balanced Active
Strong 5yr return; monitoring drift
Watching
Delta Balanced Active
Awaiting May factsheet
Watching
Bravo Balanced Blended
OCF rose 12bp at Apr review
Concern
Echo Balanced Active
OCF above peer band
Reject
Foxtrot Balanced Passive
Unranked
Deep-link to: Fee ImpactGrowthMeeting Pack

Meeting Pack assembler

A clear four-step build. Pick up to four strategies, add the sections you want (each becomes a page), attach your supporting evidence and drag it into order, then add an optional adviser decision note that prints on its own page. You sense-check the headline figures before anything is generated.

Every attachment is stamped with the exact date and time it was added (“29 May 2026 13:45”, not a vague “2 days ago”), because a compliance file needs the actual moment. Each pack is produced as a single branded PDF carrying a tamper-check fingerprint of everything inside it.

Pack: Q2 Review Sticky right-rail · Pack Structure · Generate
1
Strategies 3 / 4
Alpha · Bravo · Charlie
2
Inline sections 4
Cover · Allocation · Performance · Fees
3
Attached evidence 3
Comparison · Fee Impact · Growth · drag to reorder
4
Adviser decision note optional
Printed as a dedicated page
Attached evidence (drag to reorder)
⋮⋮
Performance Comparison · 3 portfolios · 5yr
29 May 2026 13:45
⋮⋮
Fee Impact · Alpha · 5yr window
29 May 2026 13:42
⋮⋮
Growth · £100k · 10yr
28 May 2026 16:12
Full date-and-time stamps on attachments (“29 May 2026 13:45”), never a vague “2 days ago”.

Suitability Letter Builder

Pick the recommended strategy and the builder assembles a draft suitability letter around it. The facts (fees, risk rating, performance basis) are pre-filled from the same snapshot data as every other tool, the framing text is keyed to the strategy's risk band, and the result lands as a firm-branded PDF alongside the rest of your evidence.

Every client detail stays a bracketed placeholder. [Client name], [objective] and [rationale] are yours to complete in your own words, because the suitability judgement is the adviser's, never the platform's. Firm accounts pre-fill letterhead and adviser sign-off automatically, and every generated letter is logged like any other export.

Draft letter · Charlie Balanced Passive Methodology v3.3.0
Meridian Wealth Partners Letterhead · set once in Firm Admin

Dear [Client name],

Following our meeting on [date], this letter sets out my recommendation for [amount] held in your [wrapper].

Recommended strategy: Charlie Balanced Passive · Risk 5/10 · Total fee 0.50% (pre-filled from the current snapshot)

This strategy is consistent with your assessed risk tolerance of [risk profile] because [your rationale].

Sign-off: Sarah Chen · Chartered Financial Planner Generate PDF
Amber brackets are completed by the adviser and never stored by the platform. Facts come from the same snapshot data as every other tool; each generated letter is logged like any other export.

Branded PDF exports

Every PDF, whether comparison, fee impact, growth, switching, income, overlap, watchlist, meeting pack or suitability letter, carries a branded cover and a provenance strip. Set your firm's name and colour once and it flows automatically onto every adviser's output; a firm that sets nothing gets standard MPS Compare branding.

Each PDF is saved the moment it's created, alongside a record of the data and calculation versions behind it and a unique fingerprint of its contents. When a regulator asks for a document, you hand back the exact file that was issued, retrieved from the archive, never re-created after the fact.

PDF cover + provenance strip
MW
Meridian Wealth Partners
Fee Impact Analysis · 5yr window
Prepared by Sarah Chen
22 May 2026 14:08
Data version
2026-05-15
Methodology
v3.3.0
Engine (Fee Impact)
v1.3.0
Integrity hash
sha256:3a7bd3e2…
Archived on creation · 7-year retention (SYSC 9.1) · a SHA-256 digest over the exact stored PDF bytes proves the archived file is byte-for-byte the one issued; the mpsc_… footer reference resolves it back to its audit row.
Firms apply their own brand from the Firm Admin panel; outputs use standard MPS Compare branding until they do.

Per-user audit trail

Every export writes one permanent record: who produced it, when, what they chose, which data it used and a fingerprint of the result. Those records can only ever be added to or read. They cannot be edited or deleted by anyone, including us. That's enforced deep in the system, not just hidden from the screen.

Browse the whole history from your dashboard. Individual advisers see their own activity; firm administrators see the whole firm's. Records are kept for seven years as standard, in line with the FCA's record-keeping rules.

Audit Trail Your activity
42 events · last 30 days · 7-year retention
Performance Comparison 3 portfolios · 5yr window 22 May 2026 10:14
v1.3.0 hash a7c9f2b1
Fee Impact Alpha Balanced · 5yr 21 May 2026 15:32
v1.3.0 hash 3e1b94a7
Watchlist Balanced Risk 5 shortlist 20 May 2026 09:01
v3.3.0 hash 8d24c0f9
Growth £100k · 10yr · goal £200k 18 May 2026 14:20
v1.5.0 hash b5e6071c
Records can be added and read, never edited or deleted, by anyone including us. Enforced by the system, not a policy.
Part 4 of 4

Multi-seat administration

Everything above, plus what a firm needs once more than one person holds a seat. The tool surface is identical at every seat; these rows are about administration, shared branding, and audit aggregation.

Multi-seat administration

Multi-seat accounts with roles

Three roles, kept deliberately simple: admin (runs the firm and sees firm-wide activity), IFA and paraplanner. Every seat gets the complete toolkit. Roles decide who can administer the account and who can see what, not who gets which features.

The admin view lists each member with their role, how much they've produced and when they were last active. Every seat on the subscription is included at the agreed count, so there is never a reason to leave a paraplanner sharing someone else's login, and the system won't let a firm lock itself out by removing its last administrator.

Meridian Wealth Partners · Seats & Invites
4 active seats · 1 pending invite
UserRoleExportsLast activeJoined
Sarah Chen(you)
sarah.chen@meridian.example
Admin 42 22 May 2026 09:48 14 Jan 2025
Marcus Webb
marcus.webb@meridian.example
IFA 28 21 May 2026 17:02 02 Apr 2025
Priya Nair
priya.nair@meridian.example
IFA 19 18 May 2026 11:34 03 Mar 2026
Tom Aldridge
tom.aldridge@meridian.example
Paraplanner 31 21 May 2026 14:10 21 May 2026
Multi-seat administration

Invite teammates by email

Admins invite teammates by email and assign a role. The recipient accepts from a single-use link and their seat appears on the firm account straight away.

Invites draw on the seats your subscription already holds, so an admin can see at a glance how much headroom is left. Need more? Seats are added to your subscription by contacting us, and the new allowance applies immediately. Pending invites show when they were sent and can be resent or revoked at any time.

Invites draw on the seats your subscription holds. Need another? Seats are added to your firm on request.
Recent invites
rachel.holt@meridian.example
IFA · sent 22 May 2026 11:04 · expires 29 May 2026
pending
tom.aldridge@meridian.example
Paraplanner · sent 21 May 2026 09:12
accepted
priya.nair@meridian.example
IFA · sent 14 May 2026 14:30
accepted
Multi-seat administration

Shared firm branding

Set your firm's name and brand colour once. From then on every adviser's output, across every tool, picks it up automatically, with no fiddling per document and no risk of an off-brand PDF reaching a client.

Only administrators can change the branding. Everyone else inherits it but can't alter it, a boundary enforced by the system rather than left to good manners.

Firm Admin → Firm Branding
Display name
Meridian Wealth Partners
Brand colour
#1A3C6E
Admin-only · only administrators can change it; everyone else inherits it and cannot.
Live PDF cover preview
MW
Meridian Wealth Partners
Comparison · 5yr
22 May 2026
Applied to every adviser's PDF · every tool v3.3.0 / v1.3.0
Multi-seat administration

Firm-wide audit + member scoping

Administrators see every output across the whole firm in one place; individual advisers see only their own. That separation is enforced by the system itself, not merely hidden from the screen, so a member can never quietly reach another's records.

Every entry carries the exact date and time, the data and calculation versions used, and a fingerprint of the result, so the question “which figures did this client see, on this date?” always has a precise, evidenced answer.

Audit Trail Firm-wide view
Admins see every output across 4 seats; everyone else sees only their own. The separation is enforced by the system, not just hidden from view.
Filter: All advisersAll toolsLast 30 days
S
Sarah Chen Performance Comparison 3 portfolios · 5yr 22 May 2026 10:14
v1.3.0 · hash a7c9f2b1
M
Marcus Webb Fee Impact Alpha · 5yr 21 May 2026 15:32
v1.3.0 · hash 3e1b94a7
T
Tom Aldridge Meeting Pack Q2 review · 3 strats 20 May 2026 09:01
v3.3.0 · hash f02d5e6c
P
Priya Nair Watchlist Balanced Risk 5 18 May 2026 14:20
v3.3.0 · hash 8d24c0f9
Multi-seat administration

Archived PDFs · 7-year retention

Every PDF is stored the moment it's created and kept for seven years. Open any past record and retrieve the original file. We hand back exactly what was issued, never a re-created copy.

Each record keeps the data and calculation versions behind the document plus a fingerprint of its contents. Check the stored file's fingerprint against the record and they match: proof the document is untouched. Built for FCA evidence requests, data-subject access requests and routine compliance review.

Audit row · 22 May 2026 14:08
Fee Impact · Alpha Balanced Active · 5yr
snapshot 2026-05-15
methodology v3.3.0
engine v1.3.0 (fee-impact)
hash a7c9f2b1
Re-hashed stored file: a7c9f2b1 matches the audit row. The PDF is the one the adviser issued, not a regenerated copy.
Archived on creation · 7-year retention (SYSC 9.1)
Multi-seat administration

Firm Admin panel

One place to run the firm, with five tabs: Seats & Invites, Firm Branding (name, colour and a live PDF preview), Audit Trail (recent firm-wide activity), API & Integrations (manage access keys) and Compliance (retention, FCA reference and an at-a-glance access summary).

Administrators only; other members never even reach this area. The restriction is enforced by the system, not just kept out of the menu.

Firm Admin · Meridian Wealth Partners
Admin-only · other members never reach this area.
Seats & Users
4 active seats · 1 pending invite
Firm Branding
Display name · brand colour · PDF preview
Audit Trail
Recent export activity, firm-wide
API & Integrations
Active keys + generate (SHA-256 hashed)
Compliance
Retention posture · FCA reference · access summary
Compliance tab footer notes: “Every export records its engine or PDF generator version, the methodology document version, and a SHA-256 integrity hash over the exact stored PDF bytes.”
Structural compliance

Built so compliance signs it off

Six structural properties built into the platform, not policies we ask you to take on trust, but behaviours enforced by the system itself and proven by our test suite.

Append-only audit trail

Every export is recorded permanently: who produced it, when, what they chose, the data behind it and a fingerprint of the result. Those records can only be added to and read, never edited or deleted by anyone, including us. Kept for seven years, in line with FCA record-keeping rules.

Immutable data snapshots

Once a set of figures is recorded it can’t be altered or removed, because adviser sessions simply have no way to rewrite history. Corrections are made by adding a new dated set, and every export notes exactly which version it relied on.

Tenant isolation, tested

Each firm’s data is walled off from every other firm’s, and we prove it on every release with an automated test that signs in as one firm, tries to read another’s data, and confirms nothing comes back.

UK-hosted (London)

Your data is hosted in London and stays in the UK, never the US. The credentials that could touch firm data never reach anything a browser can see; they live only on trusted, locked-down systems.

COBS-aligned framing

Methodology, risk warnings, the prominence of past-performance caveats and the shape of the audit trail are all reviewed against the FCA’s conduct rules. The platform is not available to retail investors: the strategy data and every tool sit behind a login, so what a signed-in adviser reads is professional framing throughout.

No client personal data collected

By design, there is nowhere to put a client’s identity: no name, no reference, no free-text field anywhere in the product. If data were ever lost, none of it could be tied back to an individual.

One platform. The whole MPS due-diligence workflow.

Replace the factsheet folder, the spreadsheet, the switching calculator and the meeting-pack template with one platform. Standardised data, calculation engine and audit trail baked in, built for FCA-authorised firms. One subscription covers every feature and every seat.

or email enquiries@mpscompare.co.uk