One more IT for this years ISA...

bostonerimus

MonroeM wrote: »

It's done great over the past 10 years so not really a bad decision.

Or alternatively, you can select individual smaller companies IT's in the main regions such as UK, Europe, US, Japan and Asia Pacific?

"Great" isn't a quantitative measure so the question as to why F&C is attractive still remains. Is it the investment philosophy, average market cap etc?

Thrugelmir

bostonerimus wrote: »

Vanguard Global Small Cap index has better 1, 3 and 5 year returns and I'm sure there are other examples of better performance.......so why F&C?

Are you sure?

bostonerimus

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Are you sure?

Well over 5 years Vanguard Global small cap return is 100%, maybe you can post the F&C.....I see it as up 80%, but maybe I'm missing some dividends

Linton

bostonerimus wrote: »

Well over 5 years Vanguard Global small cap return is 100%, maybe you can post the F&C.....I see it as up 80%, but maybe I'm missing some dividends

5 year returns according to Trustnet......
Vanguard Global Small Companies 90.3%
F&C Global Small Companies 88.4%

Their performance graphs very close.F&C outperformed Vanguard in 4 out of the past 5 years but did badly in in 2016. Perhaps due to the Brexit vote fall in the £ as the F&C fund has a much higher % UK, small company shares not benefitting from the rise in the FTSE100.

rathernot

bostonerimus wrote: »

Vanguard Global Small Cap index has better 1, 3 and 5 year returns and I'm sure there are other examples of better performance.......so why F&C?

If I go that route the usual reason for any active v tracker - a hope/belief that the ability to adjust allocations if required will pay off.

I also like that there is some allocation to Asia other than Japan.

Not to say that's 100% the route I'm going down, could be something global similar to Fundsmith/LT yet.

Thrugelmir

Linton wrote: »

5 year returns according to Trustnet......
Vanguard Global Small Companies 90.3%
F&C Global Small Companies 88.4%

Differs once income is reinvested. Worth noting that they don't track the same indices.

F&C are above their benchmark indices i.e. 30% Numis UK Smaller Companies (ex investment companies) Index / 70% MSCI all country World ex UK Small Cap Index.

Whereas Vanguard purely track the MSCI World Small Cap
Index.

Linton

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Differs once income is reinvested. Worth noting that they don't track the same indices.

F&C are above their benchmark indices i.e. 30% Numis UK Smaller Companies (ex investment companies) Index / 70% MSCI all country World ex UK Small Cap Index.

Whereas Vanguard purely track the MSCI World Small Cap
Index.

Return figures are after income re-invested. That is the default for investment performance comparisons.

rathernot

I went with SMT which ironically lost 5% this week but in for the long term..

So now at:

Fundsmith 25%
Lindsell Train Global Equity 25%
RIT Capital 25%
Shin Nippon 12.5%
SMT 12.5%

I've got a cash ISA transferring in so by April I'll have £33k to go in.

I'd be interested on peoples views around allocations as it starts to build up.

5 keeps things simple but I'm mindful that for example RIT is massively more diverse than Fundsmith/LT though that was also the whole point of it.

bowlhead99

rathernot wrote: »

I've got a cash ISA transferring in so by April I'll have £33k to go in.

I'd be interested on peoples views around allocations as it starts to build up.

Well, I suggested two investment companies listed on the main market of the London stock exchange and you rejected them using the excuse that you preferred to stay with your relatively expensive fund platform rather than moving to one that offered a broader range of investment choices

rathernot

It's not an "excuse" - for the moment it's a simple fact that Fidelity don't offer them so I couldn't buy them if I tried.

Next year if I'm not using the Fidelity platform, which is quite likely, I'm open to that and will be looking into all the options people have suggested including those.