Fundsmith and HL

talexuser

Terry Smith has said on many occasions he won't give a discount to Hargreaves, and thus never appears on their recommended lists unlike much poorer performing funds.

Here is HL's take on the fact they don't recommend from their latest blurb:

QUOTE
To conduct our analysis, we require regular access to the fund manager and up-to-date, monthly portfolio data, which some fund groups, including Fundsmith, choose not to disclose. We can’t, however, make an exception to our process, so we won’t be considering the fund for the list as things stand.

AND
Investors should note we have not conducted full due diligence on the group’s risk and governance oversight as the group’s funds do not feature on the Wealth Shortlist or any of our other investment solutions.
UNQUOTE

Good to know HL carried out all that diligence and research on Woodford right up until the house of cards collapsed and all their customers lost money :-)

Prism

I think part of the issue is that HL is also a fund manager. That would mean that they would get information about positions that Fundsmith is taking up before they are ready to release that information and possibly an advantage because of it

talexuser

I still think Woodford casts a pretty big shadow over any "logical" reasons on one side or the other.

valiant24

Deleted_User said:

Well, perhaps it is logical to be suspicious of any fund that is run by one dominant person, with few checks and balances.

Especially one who lives in Mauritius!
(I write as someone who has more than tripled his money over 10 years of Fundsmith investment).

Zola.

valiant24 said:

Deleted_User said:

Well, perhaps it is logical to be suspicious of any fund that is run by one dominant person, with few checks and balances.

Especially one who lives in Mauritius!
(I write as someone who has more than tripled his money over 10 years of Fundsmith investment).

Will be very interesting to see if that fund can sustain momentum, doubtful but hopefully. I have a small position from the last couple of years, so I am late to the party, probably...

talexuser

Deleted_User said:

Well, perhaps it is logical to be suspicious of any fund that is run by one dominant person, with few checks and balances.

I agree, and that is the exact situation HL recommending Woodford until the moment he went bust.