Good funds to invest

bostonerimus

The funds you already have have done well recently and will appear high on any league table. So if you bought them because of that why not just do the same with this year's winners? If however you have chosen the funds for the assets they hold then buy others that will give you a similar asset mix.

The difficulty in choosing/advising which funds to buy today is that you have no idea how they will do in the future. So if you want to buy on the brand do that, but it would probably be best to buy to create an asset allocation that you like. I feel that active management and concentrated holdings like Fundsmith add an extra level of uncertainty and risk over an above index investing so I don't do it. But if I was to do it I'd want the funds to own more than 30 individual stocks.

Alz1986

Baillie Giffords EWI has been very strong this year, up 18%.

cloud_dog

Alz1986 wrote: »

Baillie Giffords EWI has been very strong this year, up 18%.

Yes, and can be equally good in the other direction

Thrugelmir

badger09 wrote: »

May I ask what you dislike about passive global funds?

Where's the historic data. Vanguard built it's reputation on the most analysed market in the world, the US. Rather different when you start including companies in China , India etc etc. While the collapse of the Nikkei index was a once in a lifetime event. Does highlight the very different environments that exist.

firestone

Lama_glama wrote: »

First of all thanks a lot for the suggestions/feedback.


As I would like to invest part of the money buying funds in the growth and income category (with no bonds in it), do you have any names in mind? What do you think of Baillie Gifford Global Income Growth Fund B Acc.?



- SB1961 thanks a lot for the feedback. I will definitely look into Scottish Mortgage. It looks like the trust is 100 years old! (funded in 1909). If I buy Lindsell Train global though Fidelity unfortunately they charge me 4% entry fee. (A reason why I chose Fundsmith) and I bought the Lindsell TrainUK.


- badger09 nothing against passive funds, but I would prefer active managed funds with an history and good performance.



- Prism thanks a lot. I really like your idea and the Rathbone Global Opportunities Fund Institutional Acc.



Thanks again for all the feedback. This weekend I will look more deeply into all suggestions in order to decide how to allocate the ISA allowance for the next year.


On the meanwhile every feedback/ideas are really appreciated.

you may want to double check your 4% fee for Lindsell Train Global on Fidelity as they don't charge a buy fee on most funds ( a quick look would seem to show 0.71% ongoing with no buy fee i believe )

bowlhead99

Lama_glama wrote: »

As I would like to invest part of the money buying funds in the growth and income category (with no bonds in it), do you have any names in mind? What do you think of Baillie Gifford Global Income Growth Fund B Acc.?

'Growth and Income category' is a relatively meaningless 'category'.

If you carve up all the companies in the world into groups, using the terminology of 'growth' and 'income', you will find some that are good for income (a high level of dividends compared to the share price) and others that will provide growth potential (but a lower level of dividends), and no doubt some of them will provide a bit of both. An actively managed fund that says it is going to give you growth and income will probably invest in all three of those types.

In other words it is not really specialising at all, but it is marketing itself as being better than a pure income fund which only goes for higher income shares or a pure growth fund which only goes for companies that deliver growth at the expense of income. It is simply doing a bit of both, which is what most investors want, because income shares and growth shares might each be best at different parts of an economic cycle.

They could just call themselves a 'fund' rather than an income specialist fund or a growth specialist fund. However, that would make them sound boring and they would not appear on the radar of an investor who had started his fund search by looking for funds that have the word income in the name, or another investor who had started his fund search by looking for funds that have the word growth in the name. So to attract the investor's eye, they will imply that they are simultaneously an income specialist and a growth specialist by putting both words in their name.

You should probably try to ignore marketing buzzwords. You have decided to build yourself a portfolio of specialist funds with your ~£50k, rather than just get yourself a generalist global fund or a global index. How many funds you want and what they should specialise in depends on your ultimate objective. If you have decided to hold multiple funds in your portfolio you could easily get yourself an income specialist fund and a growth specialist fund, and rebalance between the two periodically. Or, you could look for a fund that says it tries to offer both. You may get the same result from either method.

For example, income funds might buy shares in companies such as British American Tobacco which generate a lot of cash through both good and bad market conditions, but are not exactly 'the next big thing' and will keep paying most of that generated cash out to investors rather than having an internal use for it. While growth funds would prefer to buy shares such as Alphabet (Google's parent company) which chooses to constantly reinvest all the money it generates into product development and improving market share etc, and so doesn't feel the need to pay dividends at all.

If you look at the accounts for Baillie Gifford Global Income Growth Fund at their last year end, you can see they have about a percent invested in BAT and about a percent invested in Alphabet. So they are splitting their money between some things which have a historic yield of 6% and some other things which yield 0%. Overall, the BG fund's own historic yield on the latest factsheet is about 3%. If you wanted to create that yield yourself, you could have part of your portfolio be a high income fund paying 5% and another part be a high growth fund paying 1%.

If your investments are being bought with the intention of growing your SIPP and ISA over the long term, you are probably not bothered about the actual day-to-day income anyway (which is why you are looking at Acc funds which just recycle it back into investments). So funds which aim for a 'bit of both', income and growth, are fine. But there a lot of them to choose from. There is no telling that the Baillie Gifford one will be your best option.

Aminatidi

Initial thought is are you 100% comfortable with being 100% equities?

Less about fund choice and more about risk profile should there be a significant downturn.

[Deleted User]

I put 50k of my SIPP into Fundsmith about 12 months ago. It's now worth over £60k. It was the only one of my eight funds that didn't drop into negative territory during the recent market blip at the end of last year. Terry Smith gets very good reviews. He, and his staff, invest their own money in the fund.

As part of my funds rebalancing I'm now looking seriously at Lindsell Train.

Lama_glama

First of all a big thank you very much for all the suggestions and support. I have taken my time to reply as I have read a lot this weekend to get clearer ideas.


Hi firestone, I have double checked and I confirm that unfortunately with Fidelity there is a 4% entry fee to buy Lindsell Train Global Equity. This is a pity as I like the fund and I have seen that other major providers are not charging the fee. I will sadly pass on this fund. (PDF link below. The fee is at the second page of the document).

https://www.fundslibrary.co.uk/FundsLibrary.DataRetrieval/Documents.aspx/?type=point_of_sale&id=dda46744-6dc8-42a4-9bb9-4343a8c81c16&user=PvT3AyFF%2bdj7WbZ1Iql%2fLbQ%2bbcpSygy669Tgc1SloE0%3d&r=1


Hi Aminatidi, yes I am confortable holding equities only. I do not plan to touch the invested money for a very long time. (Unless something big in life happens of course).


bowlhead99 thank you very much for your long post which is very helpful. Yes the idea is growing my SIPP and ISA over the long term, and to do not sell the funds I have (unless they perform badly for a prolonged period of time).



I have decided that for now I am going to invest 10k into the Scottish Mortgage trust.



I am still looking for other funds to invest in. What do you think of Rathbone Global Opportunities Fund?



I am at the moment examining the following options for the remaining 10k allowance:



- another 10k into Fundsmith
- 5k Baillie Gifford Global Income Growth Fund and 5k Rathbone Global Opportunities Fund
- another 5k into Fundsmith and another 5k into Scottish Mortgage trust.

Any ideas/feedback/new funds to invest in is very appreciated.


Thanks again for the help.

londoninvestor

Lama_glama wrote: »

Hi firestone, I have double checked and I confirm that unfortunately with Fidelity there is a 4% entry fee to buy Lindsell Train Global Equity. This is a pity as I like the fund and I have seen that other major providers are not charging the fee. I will sadly pass on this fund. (PDF link below. The fee is at the second page of the document).

Are you sure? That KIID states 4% is the maximum, and the fund on Fidelity's website shows a "Fund Provider Buy Charge" of 0%.

https://www.fidelity.co.uk/factsheets/Lindsell-Train-Global-Equity-Fund-B-Class-Shares/IE00B3NS4D25-GBP/?id=IE00B3NS4D25&idType=isin&marketCode=&idCurrencyId=