hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Stocks
Apr 24, 2021 14:07:16 GMT
via mobile
Post by hazellend on Apr 24, 2021 14:07:16 GMT
Any thoughts on this trust going forward?
Ultimately the answer is the same for any other stockmarket investment (or any other asset really).
You sold yourself a story of the investment. Normally at the same time you define your exit parameters (on both sides) for that investment. Thus. Assuming neither of your exit parameters have been hit, the question you should be asking yourself is "Has the story changed ? If it has, does it affect my original rationale ?"
As I'm guessing you're investing in an execution-only account, then this is ultimately part of the rich tapestry of learning how to make your own investment decisions.
Asking others on internet forums is a bit risky because their investment rationale (and their appetite for risk) might be substantially different to yours. I prefer to buy assets with a holding time of forever.
|
|
foolsgold
Member of DD Central
Posts: 159
Likes: 194
|
Stocks
Apr 24, 2021 22:48:04 GMT
Post by foolsgold on Apr 24, 2021 22:48:04 GMT
Any thoughts on this trust going forward?
Ultimately the answer is the same for any other stockmarket investment (or any other asset really).
You sold yourself a story of the investment. Normally at the same time you define your exit parameters (on both sides) for that investment. Thus. Assuming neither of your exit parameters have been hit, the question you should be asking yourself is "Has the story changed ? If it has, does it affect my original rationale ?"
As I'm guessing you're investing in an execution-only account, then this is ultimately part of the rich tapestry of learning how to make your own investment decisions.
Asking others on internet forums is a bit risky because their investment rationale (and their appetite for risk) might be substantially different to yours. Appreciate your comments but when I bought in to IIT it was level NAV and it took a drop like many other trusts...it took a drop and I averaged down and im sitting about even just now or not far off it so was considering selling some of it and reducing my exposure to it
Ive another 10 investment trusts with a lot more invested in.Temple Bar is an interesting one as its recovered about 70-80 percent over the past 6 months due partly to a change in the management team and reduction of the discount to NAV.Didnt catch the full gain but up about 20 percent in a few months and hope it still goes higher ...minimum 5 years investment probably 10-15 years investment horizon...done well with SMT and Edinburgh worldwide as well over the medium term so cant complain and well outperformed most of the UT versions via HL execution only brokers
|
|
sd2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 621
Likes: 224
|
Post by sd2 on Apr 25, 2021 6:37:28 GMT
Ive got a bit in Smithson amongst others.
One that intrigues me is Independendent Investment trust.
This was a high flying trust and it came a cropper last year .Think it was a combination of talk of the manager retirng and Covid but its came back strongly since the plunge with the discount to NAV narrowing.
Any thoughts on this trust going forward?
From quoteddata "In a refreshing departure from the usual marketing spiel, Independent says the Company’s policy is designed to allow the Company an unusually high degree of freedom to exploit the directors’ judgement and , to the extent that the directors’ judgement is flawed, future results could be unusually poor" There was a good upto date information on quoteddata recently but I can't find it (I haven't tried very hard) Basically a very concentrated portfolio,which is the best way to make money and loose it. As above allowed high gearing but not actually used. I have Artemis alpha fell another 30% after I bought some more during the crash. Very concentrated portfolio up 40% now. It had no gearing going into the crash added 10%. Bought Henderson high income this January based on my belief the market is going up up and away!! It's up 15% it's gearing was 37%. If you do put high gearing and concentrated portfolio together you will get magnificent performance....after the crash. Particularly so as the discount will be huge. Smithson went to a 20% discount, with out any gearing. Independent is up 50% over 5 years which is good and 46% over 1 year which is better, much better.
|
|
sd2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 621
Likes: 224
|
Post by sd2 on Apr 25, 2021 7:49:19 GMT
foolsgoldIf I owned it I would hold onto it. Some of the sectors it owns have a long way to go to get back to normal. Assuming they will do. Particularly travel and hospitality.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2021 17:28:38 GMT
It might be worth experimenting with two processes
Doubling down and
Doubling up.
Data varies but I find doubling up gets me more money.
|
|
foolsgold
Member of DD Central
Posts: 159
Likes: 194
|
Stocks
Apr 25, 2021 22:49:13 GMT
Post by foolsgold on Apr 25, 2021 22:49:13 GMT
Thanks.....It was a bit wobbly before thew Covid struck and thought it mught be martket jitters as the fund manager has stated his intention to retire.Think its very much a one man band the manager is Max Ward Taken from another site
He was a partner in Baillie Gifford & Co from 1975 until April 2000, and was head of the firm’s UK Equity Department from 1981 until his retirement in 2000. From 1989 until 2000 he was the manager of Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust PLC. He is a director of The Edinburgh Investment Trust plc.
Might hold a bit longer as the recovery seems to be holding and has a steady climb
|
|
foolsgold
Member of DD Central
Posts: 159
Likes: 194
|
Stocks
Apr 25, 2021 22:52:40 GMT
Post by foolsgold on Apr 25, 2021 22:52:40 GMT
Appreciate your comments but when I bought in to IIT it was level NAV and it took a drop like many other trusts...it took a drop and I averaged down and im sitting about even just now or not far off it so was considering selling some of it and reducing my exposure to it
As sd2 points out, IIT is concentrated and looking at its holdings.... 16% exposure to UK travel & hospitality 10% exposure to UK house building 2% exposure to UK property Coming up to a third of its portfolio exposed to things hardest hit by COVID. Hardest hit may be the first for a recovery play.
Not far off break even now so may hold for a bit then reduce exposure....Baillie Gifford Uk growth looks promising to dump some of my reduction into
|
|
sd2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 621
Likes: 224
|
Stocks
Apr 26, 2021 10:24:48 GMT
Post by sd2 on Apr 26, 2021 10:24:48 GMT
As sd2 points out, IIT is concentrated and looking at its holdings.... 16% exposure to UK travel & hospitality 10% exposure to UK house building 2% exposure to UK property Coming up to a third of its portfolio exposed to things hardest hit by COVID. Hardest hit may be the first for a recovery play.
Not far off break even now so may hold for a bit then reduce exposure....Baillie Gifford Uk growth looks promising to dump some of my reduction into
May I suggest a comparison between Baillie Gifford Uk growth and Henderson Smaller companies www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/h/henderson-smaller-cos-i.t.-ord-25pwww.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/b/baillie-gifford-uk-growth-fund-ord-25pBoth have the same investment strategy Henderson has much better share price growth over 5 years (my preferred measure) And is trading at discount while Baillie is trading at premium Baillie gifford claims that dividends are secondary, good, as they are falling. Henderson are rising BUT this year's wasn't covered. AIC says Henderson has one years worth of reserves. I don't trusts there iac figures for reserves. At very least they are out of date. There is no overlap in there top ten investments Now no doubt there will be the usual snide remarks about the past not a guarantee of the future….really who would have known! You have to use something to come to a decisions on what to buy. I think the figures show that Henderson is a better buy.
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,924
Likes: 1,191
|
Stocks
Apr 26, 2021 11:02:02 GMT
Post by macq on Apr 26, 2021 11:02:02 GMT
Hardest hit may be the first for a recovery play.
Not far off break even now so may hold for a bit then reduce exposure....Baillie Gifford Uk growth looks promising to dump some of my reduction into
May I suggest a comparison between Baillie Gifford Uk growth and Henderson Smaller companies www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/h/henderson-smaller-cos-i.t.-ord-25pwww.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/b/baillie-gifford-uk-growth-fund-ord-25pBoth have the same investment strategy Henderson has much better share price growth over 5 years (my preferred measure) And is trading at discount while Baillie is trading at premium Baillie gifford claims that dividends are secondary, good, as they are falling. Henderson are rising BUT this year's wasn't covered. AIC says Henderson has one years worth of reserves. I don't trusts there iac figures for reserves. At very least they are out of date. There is no overlap in there top ten investments Now no doubt there will be the usual snide remarks about the past not a guarantee of the future….really who would have known! You have to use something to come to a decisions on what to buy. I think the figures show that Henderson is a better buy. Would make 2 points Would disagree slightly that both have the same strategy as BG UK Growth is in the all companies sector rather then smaller companies but the main point is that BG have only been running it for about 18 - 24 months (from memory i think they took over from Schroder?) and was at a good discount at the time but the remit on what to invest in and changes are probably only now taking hold But going full circle within the all UK companies sector another Henderson IT normally shows strong with their Opportunities Trust so maybe a better comparison (and maybe the same winner over time)
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,924
Likes: 1,191
|
Post by macq on Apr 26, 2021 12:09:40 GMT
You have to use something to come to a decisions on what to buy.
Sure you have to use something to come to decisions on what to buy.
That something is not past past performance. There is probably nobody who invests without looking at past performance - even if its bad you want to know why its bad and then form an opinion on it moving forward and to a certain extent while that might be more true of somebody picking their own shares for anybody picking funds its probably still worth looking at the past. While i know someone will say just go passive and for people with no time or interest then that might be a good idea.But for the majority of people who look at active funds looking at past performance of managers,companies and their funds over different timescales and market conditions will still play an important part (rather then getting an in house fund from their Bank or BS etc) and at the end of the day is human nature Whats possibly more important is not to fall for flavor of the months which are running hot for 6 months or charts showing a fund at the top over One year and investing instead of looking at annualised returns over a long time frame which might be a more truer reflection
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,924
Likes: 1,191
|
Post by macq on Apr 26, 2021 12:36:05 GMT
While i know someone will say just go passive and for people with no time or interest then that might be a good idea.But for the majority of people who look at active funds looking at past performance of managers,companies and their funds over different timescales and market conditions will still play an important part
Aka herd mentality.
Which is why you get lemmings piling into Bolton, Woodford et al. and then feigning surprise when it all goes tits up.
Its always easy to find investments that have failed and we all have them including you whether its based on past performance or just what we think we have found to give an edge moving forward and yes the past is not a guarantee .Which is why i also said don't invest in funds that are flavor of the month or running hot for a short period of time and end up investing at the end of the cycle (but anybody who invested with both from the early days were still probably happy).But if the average investor or lemming in your words does not look at past performance then they have a very good chance of picking a bigger dog then the Ones you mentioned If you are trying to convince me that investors or even fund mangers invest without looking at past performance and the reason for it good or bad then its a hard sell
|
|
sd2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 621
Likes: 224
|
Stocks
Apr 26, 2021 13:23:26 GMT
via mobile
Post by sd2 on Apr 26, 2021 13:23:26 GMT
You have to use something to come to a decisions on what to buy.
Sure you have to use something to come to decisions on what to buy.
That something is not past past performance. Wow I got it right, I thought it would be @wallstreet who would be first with a snide comment. Surprise surprise...not
|
|
sd2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 621
Likes: 224
|
Post by sd2 on Apr 26, 2021 13:24:58 GMT
While i know someone will say just go passive and for people with no time or interest then that might be a good idea.But for the majority of people who look at active funds looking at past performance of managers,companies and their funds over different timescales and market conditions will still play an important part
Aka herd mentality.
Which is why you get lemmings piling into Bolton, Woodford et al. and then feigning surprise when it all goes tits up.
Really? They were feigning surprise? Do you ever think before you type
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Apr 26, 2021 13:30:48 GMT
Its always easy to find investments that have failed and we all have them including you whether its based on past performance or just what we think we have found to give an edge moving forward. If you are trying to convince me that investors or even fund mangers invest without looking at past performance and the reason for it good or bad then its a hard sell
On the first point, nobody (including me) is denying some investments in their portfolio have and will fail. As the old saying goes, if there was an easy answer, there wouldn't be enough Carribean islands to go round for everyone to sit on.
On the second point, I know a few fund managers. First the answer depends on their remit as per their fund's prospectus. Second is you're wrong. Past performance doesn't come into it, at least as far as the share price goes. Past business performance (i.e. company accounts), yes. Recent past business performance (through due diligence meetings to ask tough questions of company management), yes (if applicable to your fund).
But honestly, past performance of share price is stupid. Its basically on the same boat as "Technical Analysis" which is effectively reading tea leaves.
If you're talking about a different asset class (for example and especially Forex) then yes, there might well be some advantage to be had in relation to monitoring and analysis of price moves. But the equities markets, no. You have to use a bit more brain power to make sensible investment decisions, not just looking at pretty graphs.
There is one exception to the above.
Doing solid fundamental analysis and then looking at recent moves to see if the general current momentum is likely to be in your favour or whether you might want to wait a little longer before pushing the button for a decent trend to settle. So the price is used as a hint of "when" to buy not "what" to buy. That sort of thing could well be ok if its your style of active portfolio management.
(For clarity, in the above paragraph I am not talking about timing the market, trying to do that is a fool's game).
🤣😂🤣 That's the absolute definition of trying to time the market.
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,924
Likes: 1,191
|
Post by macq on Apr 26, 2021 13:32:37 GMT
Its always easy to find investments that have failed and we all have them including you whether its based on past performance or just what we think we have found to give an edge moving forward. If you are trying to convince me that investors or even fund mangers invest without looking at past performance and the reason for it good or bad then its a hard sell
On the first point, nobody (including me) is denying some investments in their portfolio have and will fail. As the old saying goes, if there was an easy answer, there wouldn't be enough Carribean islands to go round for everyone to sit on.
On the second point, I know a few fund managers. First the answer depends on their remit as per their fund's prospectus. Second is you're wrong. Past performance doesn't come into it, at least as far as the share price goes. Past business performance (i.e. company accounts), yes. Recent past business performance (through due diligence meetings to ask tough questions of company management), yes (if applicable to your fund).
But honestly, past performance of share price is stupid. Its basically on the same boat as "Technical Analysis" which is effectively reading tea leaves.
If you're talking about a different asset class (for example and especially Forex) then yes, there might well be some advantage to be had in relation to monitoring and analysis of price moves. But the equities markets, no. You have to use a bit more brain power to make sensible investment decisions, not just looking at pretty graphs.
There is one exception to the above.
Doing solid fundamental analysis and then looking at recent moves to see if the general current momentum is likely to be in your favour or whether you might want to wait a little longer before pushing the button for a decent trend to settle. So the price is used as a hint of "when" to buy not "what" to buy. That sort of thing could well be ok if its your style of active portfolio management.
(For clarity, in the above paragraph I am not talking about timing the market, trying to do that is a fool's game).
I quote "second is you're wrong.Past performance doesn't come into it,at least as far as the share price goes" not sure how i am wrong when i did not even mention the share price but said look at past performance and the reason for it good or bad which is the same as you saying look at business performance and doing DD etc -maybe you used bigger words? We all know the past is no guarantee but it does have a baring on the present even doing to quote you "using brain power" (to then ignore the past) The only way an average investor (not a lemming) can make a decision must include looking at the past as it might be ok to invest in that fund at the bottom of the pretty graph but only if you know why its there
|
|