F and c investment trust

bowlhead99

dividendhero wrote: »

Only drawback is that the divi payout isn't huge...

Just picking up on this point -
Granted, its 1.6% lags their benchmark, the FTSE All-World at 2.55%. But whether that's a 'drawback' depends on personal circumstances, for example:

If you have a 6 figure sum in this and other ITs you'll have used up your dividend allowance so will be paying tax on whatever extra they distribute - an extra £1000 of divs would be £75 to £380 of tax cost (or up to £525 if you were in an awkward tax band and lost personal allowance because of it), Whereas an extra £1000 of unrealised capital gain might have nil tax cost if it is cashed in at a time that you can fit it inside your annual exemption or if you never cash it in (e.g. no CGT on death).

If you are running a fund invested for the long term without a particular need for income, it can be fine to use a lot of growth assets that don't choose to pay significant dividends (e.g. private equity, Amazon, Alphabet etc) ; which may do better over the long term than by using a strategy to deliberately / artificially focus on dividends. For example FTSE All-World High Dividend has only half as many stocks as FTSE All-World and currently yields 1.7% more dividend. But its total return for the last 5 years has been worse by an annualised 2.9%...

Growth stocks or dividend payers in the public markets will each have their time in the sun as the economy goes through its cycles, but I generally try not to cast a 'feature' of a strategy as a 'drawback' unless it is really costing me something long term.

Still, if your username has the word dividend in it, I guess it may irk you to hold something that pays less than a couple of percent

Ash_Pole

bowlhead99 wrote: »

10 year total return F&C 248% net of fees
10 year total return FTSE World index 210% gross of fees

15 year total return F&C ~440% net of fees
15 year total return FTSE World index ~350% gross of fees

20 year total return F&C ~410% net of fees
20 year total return FTSE World index ~300% gross of fees

24.75 year total return F&C 739% net of fees
24.75 year total return FTSE World index 681% gross of fees

The ~ denotes where I just looked at the chart on Trustnet rather than getting an exact number. The 24.75 was because Trustnet's data for F&C only goes back to Jan 1995 although the trust has been going rather longer than that.

Yes I know FTSE World does not include emerging markets, but it's what Trustnet has on its dropdown list for easy comparisons - don't shoot the messenger.

Wow that's pretty impressive. A good advert for active management rather than passive

Reaper

dividendhero wrote: »

Only drawback is that the divi payout isn't huge...

It isn't but it's also pretty secure. They have increased it every year through crashes and recessions without fail for the last 48 years.

bowlhead99

Ash_Pole wrote: »

Wow that's pretty impressive. A good advert for active management rather than passive

There are loads of actively managed investment companies that have beaten their benchmark. The proponents of passive management will of course note that there are probably even more loads of actively managed investment companies that have done worse than their benchmark or which may be marking themselves to an inappropriate lower benchmark to claim that they're doing a good job.

One would hope that any competent manager with the ability to gear their returns in a closed ended structure, could at least cover their fees over the long term, even if that's at a cost of volatility.

talexuser

I've had it inside the ISA for a few years, and before that, unwrapped, had to sell and rebuy to use up CTG allowances when it did well. It has not been the best performer for the past year or so, so a top up depends on whether you think it will bounce back sooner or later?

Sally57

I thought CGT is not applicable in ISA or SIPP accounts but only in GIA?

F&C has performed consistently well over long periods of time when compared to global OEIC’s with the exception of the more recent successes of funds such as Fundsmith and LTGE but in my opinion long term F&C is still a good choice.

cloud_dog

Sally57 wrote: »

I thought CGT is not applicable in ISA or SIPP accounts but only in GIA?

You are correct, it is (or not depending on how you read my response), but you are correct.

talexuser

Sally57 wrote: »

I thought CGT is not applicable in ISA or SIPP accounts but only in GIA?

True, hence "before that, unwrapped".

Most years I crystalise a 11/12k gain to rebase future CGT liabilities.

I rearraged the portfolio a couple of years ago to have the highest dividend payers inside the ISA, but have more outside since only able to transfer 3.6k into the SIPP a year (and obviously 20k into the ISA).

tin586

Ash_Pole wrote: »

Wow that's pretty impressive. A good advert for active management rather than passive

Survivorship bias is worth bearing in mind.

londoninvestor

londoninvestor wrote: »

Apparently not, but there are a few that aren't much younger...
https://www.theaic.co.uk/aic/news/press-releases/five-oldest-investment-companies-still-relevant-after-150-years

One you could sort of argue is older...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adams_Express_Company

...but not really. As a corporate entity it dates back to 1854, but back then it was a transport company. It didn't meaningfully become an investment fund until 1929.