Woodford Concerns

[Deleted User]

talexuser wrote: »

Reports today that Barnett is under pressure from the board of Income and Growth Trust. They are in talks with Invesco Chief Investment Officer about the poor performance and suggesting measures to address the weaknesses. Presumably raises questions for Invesco about the OEICs as well.

It seems to me that there is no easy remedy for the predicament; it's not like a football club that can turn its fortunes around in a matter of months after replacing the manager.

To some extent, anyone who invests in a fund is at the mercy of its manager's "philosophy," but
I feel sorry for High Income investors; many are still there from Woodford days and rank among the most passive and patient of investors. On top of that, many of them have their investments wrapped in ISA's, and I hear that they can take up to three months to transfer out to another platform. Some are now facing an interesting choice - whether to give up their ISA status for the sake of commuting their investment at once and avoiding a potential Woodford fund fiasco, submit to Invesco's protracted transfer timeline, or sit tight.

Thrugelmir

ZingPowZing wrote: »

It seems to me that there is no easy remedy for the predicament; it's not like a football club that can turn its fortunes around in a matter of months after replacing the manager.

Paying star managers inflated salaries on the basis of hope is the problem. As with any league table. Someone is top and someone has to be bottom.

[Deleted User]

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Paying star managers inflated salaries on the basis of hope is the problem. As with any league table. Someone is top and someone has to be bottom.

If the star managers had low or no salaries, investors in Invesco Perpetual High Income would still have a problem.
So the problem for all fund investors is being a passenger. It doesn't matter if the driver is changed if the destination is the same.

iglad

WPCT is now at 29p who will buy I wonder?

Thrugelmir

iglad wrote: »

WPCT is now at 29p who will buy I wonder?

Somebody is.

AnotherJoe

ZingPowZing wrote: »

If the star managers had low or no salaries, investors in Invesco Perpetual High Income would still have a problem.
So the problem for all fund investors is being a passenger. It doesn't matter if the driver is changed if the destination is the same.

Indeed. One of the share chat boards a bunch of investors in WPCT were crowing when Woodford went because they had a new company in charge and thought it would all be hunky dory from then on*. To me that was like passengers cheering if the captain of The Titanic was replaced after it had hit the iceberg "oh it will be all OK now". Nope, already holed below the waterline in multiple places.


* reinforced in their minds by the now more than reversed and wholly irrational 30% rise in the immediate few days after.

iglad

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Somebody is.

It won't be me even if they go too 10p per share!!

Brian65

HardCoreProgrammer wrote: »

Apologies for the rudeness, nut if anyone still thinks the Wealth 50 list is a guide to good funds, they seriously need their heads examining.
.

I think the best that can be said for it is that they weed out the outright scams - storage pods, car park spaces, hotel rooms, fine wines etc

talexuser

I read a report, I think from Yodelar, some time ago that analysed the wealth 50 and said the vast majority underperformed their sectors, were worse than equivalent trackers, and only a handful were actual long term outperformers. As an active investor I never believed they could find 150 funds in the old list that were worth their charges. Now with a proportion of trackers myself I would find it hard to find 50 (and they don't even have high risk Fundsmith and Lindsell).

Reaper

Also where are all the Investment Trusts in their Wealth 50/150? Surely it can't be that they don't pay commission...?