Woodford Concerns

[Deleted User]

All for individuals making their own decisions but those who purport to be experts bear responsibility for their recommendations.
HL listed Woodford's fund in their Wealth50 up to the day that investors were trapped.

AnotherJoe

bowlhead99 wrote: »

Y
Woodford said performance had been poor, and it was.

My point was, someone posted saying thinsg were on the up over the past two months but Woodford himself said they werent.

However, Woodford's claim for some time has been that UK stocks were getting overlooked and sentiment about how bad brexit would be, was overdone.

So, it seems to be fair to say, as Scarpacci did, that he's 'noting the change of sentiment over the past two months' towards an environment where Woodford's thesis can do better.

I didnt read it that way. I read it as him saying Woodford was on the up over the past two months and going back i see i misread that. My bad and my apologies to S.

It doesn't really matter that the change wasn't gradual and that a good part of the 20% rise in Lloyds share price happened in the last 24 hours. Woodford doesn't invest for 1-day periods so it doesn't matter to him if sentiment turns slowly (0.3% rise for 60 days) or quickly (20% rise in a week), what matters is that the potential in the UK-exposed businesses does get unlocked rather than continuing to be suppressed.

Nobody is "disingenuously claiming that he's been on the up for a couple of months".

yep, my bad.
Rather, they are saying that over the couple of months (during which he followed for his listed stocks, much of the same strategy previously criticised), some value is emerging or recovering, even if it emerged at the end rather than evenly throughout. As Scarpacci notes, the spike in positive sentiment towards the sort of things he holds in the income fund may be short-lived. Time will tell.
It did indeed. And not much either
I agree with Thrug that Woodford is damned if he does or if he doesn't, and you have proved the point by saying something along the lines that if Woodford has any good results it is only because he was forced into following a strategy that gave him good results.
Well, I wrote that since that seems to be the case.

You're unable to see past some historic bad calls on stocks

"some" ? Are you avin a giraffe?

and so in your mind from hereon in, any gains must be pure luck (because he selects at random and doesn't perform any research or due diligence)
Random would have been a better strategy , even if those gains are gains (or reversal of losses) from things that match a strategy he has touted for a while (longstanding holding NRR up 9% today, LLOY up 12% today).

I was referring to recent buys - IAG, BAT, BT.

NRR's not a good example, since its long term down, wasnt especially hit by Brexit, and has been steadily declining just this year. LLOY (which i used to hold) has not done much but obviously good income (which was why i bought it)

What good calls on stocks has he made since he went independent? And do you think they outweigh the bad calls?

We know you're not a fan, because you've bashed him in almost 100 posts over the last 28 pages of the thread.

I was mildly uninterested until IH was brought to my attention which then made me question every single valuation and every pick, since to get something that wrong smacks of astonishing incompetence.

Note that, since the 357% uprating of IH by Woodfords partner in crime Link, there has been literally nothing from IH issued, (actually nothing, not just nothing to justify that 357% uprating but literally nothing), and now more nothing, their latest results are late.

IH is circling the pan and the only question is, does WPCT or IH go down the S bend first ?

So, no surprises that if he has something that goes up in value like a property holding company or a UK focused bank,
Did they go up since he bought them ? which throw off some of the shackles of Brexit uncertainty and posts a good price rise for a change, you'll say that they are things he never usually holds and he is now just copying income funds;
If he'd stuck to buying things that income funds usually buy instead of way out of his, his analysts and his valuation partners area of competence we wouldnt be having this friendly discussion. Its clear he was forced into changing strategy.

whereas if he has something that goes down in value he is terrible at selection.

He IS terrible at selection, I dont see how anyone could even attempt to argue the opposite, there's a list as long as your arm of companies he bought that have declined 90% or more, that's why his funds are all down / closed / crashing ! The classic 'chimp throwing darts' would have got more right.

interbear

ZingPowZing wrote: »

All for individuals making their own decisions but those who purport to be experts bear responsibility for their recommendations.
HL listed Woodford's fund in their Wealth50 up to the day that investors were trapped.

I agree. I invested in Woodford fund as part of a balanced portfolio but a significant part and thus far I reckon I'm about £7.5k down. And yes, "investments can go up or down", I'm not naive enough to think otherwise. But I certainly do harbour a sense of resentment at HL continuing to promote the fund as part of their Wealth50 right up to the point of suspension. That certainly did communicate a sense of purpose and confidence that the downward trend could be addressed / reversed over the longer term.

I see today that the fund has been wound up completely so this could get even worse - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50052945

Woodford himself appears to be firmly in denial.

interbear

brewerdave wrote: »

Including me and my OH:( Sitting on a loss of ~ £8500 in SIPPs and ISAs on direct investments with Woodford Equity Income ( and an unknown amount in various composite funds). Haven't heard of any moves on the Woodford Income Focus fund. Is that still being managed by him??

Likewise. And you raise a good point. I thought it was bad enough with my direct investment in Woodford as part of my own HL S&S ISA. However, I also have my kids' ISAs on the HL platform, one of their multi-manager funds which I've just realised also includes Woodford. Damn and damn again.

If anything this is quite a learning process. I may stick to trackers or premium bonds going forward!

AnotherJoe

interbear wrote: »

Likewise. And you raise a good point. I thought it was bad enough with my direct investment in Woodford as part of my own HL S&S ISA. However, I also have my kids' ISAs on the HL platform, one of their multi-manager funds which I've just realised also includes Woodford. Damn and damn again.

If anything this is quite a learning process. I may stick to trackers or premium bonds going forward!

I do think Woodford is an extreme outlier. He really seemed to have a penchant for picking big companies with catastrophic problems, or startups seemingly with somewhere from low to literally no, chance of being a breakout stock. Did any of his early stage biotech companies come good ?Maybe some did?
But there woudl be no harm in sticking with trackers, as long of course as you dont track a really niche index.
And yes, HL deserve equal opprobrium, if they could miss soemthing as obvious as Woodford, why trust their judgement on the rest of their Wealth [STRIKE]50[/STRIKE]49

talexuser

interbear wrote: »

I may stick to trackers !

Unfortunately a lot of investors will lose confidence because of this and may pull out of the market altogether. Many of those that see the sense in staying may well come to that same conclusion. Do your own research, read around about the fund and its contents, if not, stick to trackers.

AnotherJoe

Ive just spotted this in the Link announcement about the winding up of WEIF*.

Please be aware that the receipt of your proceeds from the winding up of the Fund will be deemed to be part disposals of your shares in the Fund for capital gains tax purposes and may, depending on your personal circumstances, give rise to a capital gains tax liability. If you are in any doubt as to the taxation consequences of this action you should seek professional advice.

Laugh? My socks are still drying on the radiator


* just in case someone reading in a few weeks time wonders if this is about WPCT

itwasntme001

All this is probably why many people prefer investing in property - tracks inflation better then stocks, can use leverage, get actual income, have more control in terms of what you buy (even trackers you cant control what you own as companies grow or go bust), is illiquid so much less likely to sell based on emotions, is a real asset that you can see and touch.

newatc

AnotherJoe wrote: »

I do think Woodford is an extreme outlier. He really seemed to have a penchant for picking big companies with catastrophic problems, or startups seemingly with somewhere from low to literally no, chance of being a breakout stock. Did any of his early stage biotech companies come good ?Maybe some did?
But there woudl be no harm in sticking with trackers, as long of course as you dont track a really niche index.
And yes, HL deserve equal opprobrium, if they could miss soemthing as obvious as Woodford, why trust their judgement on the rest of their Wealth [STRIKE]50[/STRIKE]49

We all have to take responsibility for our own investments but how anyone can consider taking financial advice (which I understand often ends up using their multi-manager funds) from HL is beyond me. I suppose in due course Woodford will disappear from HL history and Wealth 50 stats.

Prism

ZingPowZing wrote: »

All for individuals making their own decisions but those who purport to be experts bear responsibility for their recommendations.
HL listed Woodford's fund in their Wealth50 up to the day that investors were trapped.

I do think that the loss of revenue and lower share price from this poor recommendation by HL will mean things will take care of themself. HL's image is currently tarnished (at least a little), which will force them to think more carefully going forwards.