Woodford to leave Invesco

redbuzzard

Glen_Clark wrote: »

Now 554 which suggests a discount of 3% on the last published NAV of 571.13
Doesn't look particularly cheap to me.

http://markets.ft.com/research/Markets/Tearsheets/Summary?s=EDIN:LSE

Depends where you start from!

CLDN holds unlisted securities - the discount is against "fair value" for the unquoted holdings which may also be illiquid, so not really a like for like comparison.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

EDIN had fallen from a premium if over 5% to a discount of around 3%.

gozomark

Linton wrote: »

Trackers have had a pretty poor record in trying to emulate a managed income fund. Do they go for highest dividend yields and come a cropper when a share is high yielding because its value is collapsing or if the high yield is obviously not sustainable? If not what criterion do they use?

they dont use any criterion - they are trackers

redbuzzard

gozomark wrote: »

they dont use any criterion - they are trackers

Criteria as to what to track? That can be any stock index, bond index, or using criteria like divis as has been mentioned - e.g. IUKD.

The idea of passive investing is that you still do the asset allocation part, then look for things that capture the relevant market performance - rather than trying to invest selectively in those markets and beat them (which most active funds fail to do for well researched markets).

SavingFish

Vanguard Equity Income Index seems like a reasonably interesting option if you've after an income fund but have an aversion to active managers.

Whilst you might be able to find some bargains with ETFs, I tend to prefer OEICs just because of exactly this sort of random frothy noise based on market perceptions (the stockmarket has enough of that already).

Shaolin_Monkey

I would think EDIN is still at a discount now or at least close to par, depending on how you want to value it:

As at close of business on 14-October-2013
NAV per Ordinary share (unaudited) with Debt at Par
EXCLUDING undistributed current year revenue 578.17p
INCLUDING current year revenue 590.36p
NAV per Ordinary share (unaudited) with Debt at Fair Value
EXCLUDING undistributed current year revenue 558.93p
INCLUDING current year revenue 571.13p
The NAV includes a provision for any performance fee applicable.

Last I looked it was trading around 558p.

redbuzzard

SavingFish wrote: »

Whilst you might be able to find some bargains with ETFs, I tend to prefer OEICs just because of exactly this sort of random frothy noise based on market perceptions (the stockmarket has enough of that already).

No argument with the Vanguard comment.

You shouldn't get random frothy noise with an ETF tracking quoted securities. In that respect they are more like an OEIC than an an IT.

SavingFish

redbuzzard wrote: »

You shouldn't get random frothy noise with an ETF tracking quoted securities. In that respect they are more like an OEIC than an an IT.

Ah sorry, I wasn't clear. The second comment was in relation to actively managed funds.

I like some active funds like Invesco Perpetual High Income, but I don't like investing via ETFs because I feel they're subject to the same kind of random panics as individual shares.

Glen_Clark

SavingFish wrote: »

Whilst you might be able to find some bargains with ETFs, I tend to prefer OEICs

I thought an ETF is Open Ended

Linton

SavingFish wrote: »

Vanguard Equity Income Index seems like a reasonably interesting option if you've after an income fund but have an aversion to active managers.
.......

Yes but..

One of the claimed advantages of an index tracker is that it follows the market and so cannot perform unusually badly. If you look at the "index" the Vanguard fund follows you will see it's a privately commissioned artificial index based on undisclosed criteria designed to provide dividend income with good sector and share diversification. So its not clear that it bears any relationship to a real-world market.

Are such funds really trackers or are they simply automated investing where the manager's investment criteria and strategies are encapsulated in a computer program? ie a computerised active manager.