I use the This Is Money portfolio to track my funds and also include a tracker fund. This allows me to simply compare performance over various time scales of my funds against the tracker so I can quickly identify what's underperforming and potentially worth selling.
Overall I outperform FTSE by a worthwhile margin.
Overall I outperform FTSE by a worthwhile margin.
Over how many decades?
Over how many decades?
For me its only 1 decade or so which is when I started investing proper. Remember what Keynes said. in the "long run" we are all dead!
For me its only 1 decade or so which is when I started investing proper.
Of that 10 we've had a bull market for 8 years straight, and a 'free' 15% boost from the £ devaluation, so just about everybody is showing impressive paper gains.....
Repeating the same over the next couple of decades would be a neat trick..
Over how many decades?
I started investing properly in 1996 when I started working but had bought a few things before than. I was fortunate to have been studying investment in 1987 so was interesting to see what was happening with the markets then. So I've been following the markets to some degree for 30 years.
so just about everybody is showing impressive paper gains
Except Woodford.
Fundsmiths still going well but Woodford hovering around the zero point.
A query for those who sell 'underperforming' funds. How do you judge underperformance? Funds are subject to the same cyclic effects as the rest of the market, even if the peaks and troughs can be damped somewhat by the fund managers, and selling on a fall is generally unwise unless there are other reasons to sell.
Except Woodford.
He is playing a long game though, and had a bit of bad luck recently (as can any fund manager).
I've still got a big chunk in his funds and don't intend to move it. Although I do keep mulling dumping his Patient Capital fund, but only got £10k invested, so it's in the noise.
A query for those who sell 'underperforming' funds. How do you judge underperformance? Funds are subject to the same cyclic effects as the rest of the market, even if the peaks and troughs can be damped somewhat by the fund managers, and selling on a fall is generally unwise unless there are other reasons to sell.
I keep an eye on the Trustnet ratings posted above, and generally those funds performing well today are the same ones that have performed well for the last 6 months, year , 3 years etc. They may also have performed well for ten or twenty years but to me that is of less relevance.
I tend to stick with the same funds in each class - Japan, tech, EM atc, but do increase or decrease the weighting of each region/class depending on their performance and prospects.
I do tend to agree with you footflaps.
I've actually dumped more in there in the name of diversity and I think it's undervalued currently. asempting as it is to keep throwing it at the quickly growing fundsmith like you say Woodford does seem better placed to weather storms. With big growth generally comes big losses.
Except Woodford.
He is playing a long game though, and had a bit of bad luck recently (as can any fund manager).
Bad luck? That's very generous. I call it a series of horrendous, entirely forseeable mistakes. The writing has been on the wall there for some time, just look at the content his funds: how many of those companies would you actually want to own? I can count them on the fingers of one hand.
I was copying the woodford income fund but hes had some howlers in there...provident financial the worst, then some the mkt has turned against..imperial brands, astra zenica, gsk i think.
Just shows even the experts can get it wrong, i fess up i sold out of centrica thank god, and sainsburys, they are now so cheap i m sure they ll be taken over.
so just about everybody is showing impressive paper gains.....
Except Woodford.
So it seems one of the most respected fund managers of his generation cant turn a profit in that period.
He is playing a long game though, and had a bit of bad luck recently (as can any fund manager)
Is there nothing you wont spin? If he cant perform when (as you say) everyone else is making gains, why are you still holding on?
Hes not making losses.
It's just not performing as well as many other funds.
Oh yes he is. There's a whacking great opportunity cost to owning any of his funds at the moment, because while they tread water - or go under in the case of WPCT - the rest of the market is on the up and up. In real terms he's losing a fortune. And given the execrable state of that Patient Capital fund there's a lot more to lose yet.
You can say that again... The Woodford equity fund made circa 2% over the last 12 months against Fundsmiths 24%
Woodford around 30% over the last 5yrs as oppose to Fundsmith 180%.
2% is bad as inflation is 3, i ve banked 10% but i think the ftses up 9%. Tbh i m happy at 5%, but i m greedy and preparing for a downturn.
This is what I don't get about the Woodford apologists, especially those in WPCT. They say "ah, but it's only 10% down [over 3yrs], it'll pay back in the years to come". But they never factor in the 75% gains that they have forgone in the mean time had they invested almost anywhere else.
Its classic human behaviour go be in denial about your losses, hence we tend to retain our losses and sell short our profits. Those woody numbers are poor though, i beat myself up over my cna and sbry losses, but then reinvested in a couple of winners.
I understand why people hold on though,its a tough call to crystalise losses.
A query for those who sell 'underperforming' funds. How do you judge underperformance?
Against similar funds. No point watching one continuously under perform against funds in similar markets wondering if you should sell. I do have a lot of funds so look for excuses to sell smaller holdings to concentrate on a smaller number.
The Internet and low cost trading has revolutionised this.
I do the opposite to Mudshark - a small number of current investments which rarely get altered, and a long list of possibles. Occasionally a possible gets promoted, but more because I've become comfortable with the investment manager's goals/style/behaviour than any pricing considerations.
The only big (for me) bets I've ever sold out of are index trackers which I used before knowing what I was doing, and Woodford. The latter got sold because I couldn't and still can't understand wtf he's trying to do (does he?), rather than poor performance - I sold most of it before his most recent snafus. All were easy decisions in favour of better opportunities. You have to do some reading though, and have an opinion.
Is there nothing you wont spin? If he cant perform when (as you say) everyone else is making gains, why are you still holding on?
Because I take a long term view. I expect any fund to have ups and downs every so often and don't cash out the minute a fund has a dip. If you immediately dump a fund / stock when it underperforms and then buy into the best performer, you're just selling low and buying high, which is a pretty good way to do badly long term. I'm still up 11% with Woodford at the moment, so no losses to crystallise...
They say "ah, but it's only 10% down [over 3yrs], it'll pay back in the years to come". But they never factor in the 75% gains that they have forgone in the mean time had they invested almost anywhere else.
Maybe, maybe not. For me it's just a punt. If it folds I won't lose any sleep over it.
I'm still up 11% with Woodford at the moment, so no losses to crystallise...
How long have you held it to get 11%??
Because I take a long term view.
Me too 🙂
How long have you held it to get 11%??
Can't recall, I've bought more at various points, so it wasn't a single purchase, probably 5 or 6 separate purchases over the last 2-3 years.
Which woody fund are you in? I m looking for new ideas, todays ic podcast was about investment trusts, i have a good commercial property one
Which woody fund are you in?
I bought into his main one ([url= https://woodfordfunds.com/funds/weif/ ]Equity Income[/url]) when it launched and then a small dabble into [url= https://woodfordfunds.com/funds/wpct/ ]Patient Capital[/url] when that launched. Initially it did very well, I was up 30-40% IIRC but the last year / 18 months has been pretty poor - one Pharma lost a major drug at trials and a finance company decided to commit suicide by sacking all its agents.....
Patient Capital is really a punt, like a VCT. Mainly early stage bio-tech stuff, so a chance it backs a miracle winner e.g. Aids cure, or maybe they all turn out duds and you barely get your money back. The fee structure is quite nice, if they don't make any money, they don't take any fees (although there are running costs which still apply). So far he's not had any winners and a few duds, but that's very much par for the course with early stage investment, so to be expected.
No one immediately dumps a fund, I look at 3,6 and 12 month performance to identify funds to sell, looking bad in all 3 time scales could result in a sale. I use a similar method to find buy options. Works well for me anyway.
Thanks just looked at his incme fund, 9bn invested...i have imperial brands as a direct investment. They will improve, if he held bats over imb he d have improved alot. Provident financial what a disaster.
Nice yield though.
Provident financial what a disaster.
Absolutely no one expected the mgmt to destroy their own company so quickly - quite a rare example of corporate suicide. Was doing quite well up until that point. Will probably recover though....
...I did tell you all to buy Apple a few months back.
Surfer and other newbies should examine what investors said about Woodford and Buffet before the tech crash.Then examine who came out on top afterwards.Perhaps,these recent threads about shares,this late in the bull market are a perfect contrairian indicator.Just like those enthusiastic shoeshine boys in 1928.
Re apple - warren buffets a buyer, hes got 20bn usd worth now, but scottish mortgage sold out...
No one of course ever buys a share thinking they will lose money, then 12 months later when apple has doubled/halved it was so blindingly obvious. Its called a hindsight trade.
I like the investors chronicle podcasts, recent one said when you invent a new ratio to justify a high price you are pretty much near the top of the market.
Surfer and other newbies should examine what investors said about Woodford and Buffet before the tech crash.Then examine who came out on top afterwards.Perhaps,these recent threads about shares,this late in the bull market are a perfect contrairian indicator.Just like those enthusiastic shoeshine boys in 1928.
Not quite sure what you are talking about? Never mentioned Buffet. I challenged the preoccupation with trackers over and above well managed funds.
There seems to be some hair shirt wearing attitude that you have to be making losses or accepting poor performance as a rite of passage. If you have made reasonable gains then somehow you are doing it wrong. 😀
Or because somebody made gains years ago that is a reason to hold onto their fund through some illogical sentimentality. Surely that is the opposite to good investing.
The trouble that Woodford is currently having is nothing to do with contrarian views akin to DotCom booms or Sub-prime bubbles. It's poor risk control, greed, poor judgement and lack of due diligence:
Provident financial - the warning signs were there months ago, but Woodford held so much of the stock (circa 25%) that he couldn't sell without turning the market against him. He was, and still is, illiquid.
WPCT - the initial fund raising target was £200m, but he got greedy and took £800m. There were not enough good opportunities on which to spend £800m so he's indiscriminately backing every horse in the race, and most of them are nags.
Rolls Royce - bought all the way down talking a good game, then performed a volte-face and sold at the bottom, after which the stock soared.
Drax Power - subsidy dependent. Govt cuts subsidy, stock plummets.
NW Bio - run by a former Enron exec. Funnily enough, it's mired in fraud allegations.
The list of similar examples is almost endless. If/when Prothena goes pop they'll be a run on all his funds. That he's still got £9Bn under management, which is down £1Bn from it's peak, is testament to the gullibility of your average investor!
Thanks i didnt know he had 25% of provident financial, tbh the ex ceo was called crooke...wasnt it blindingly obvious going digital to a market paying 1000% interest was flawed thinking.
I lost on centrica and their ceo is called ian con, or i con for short...anyway, bad joke, i sold out losing a lot less than i would have if i still held.
I m sure thats why kids are better stock pickers than adults, luck and the ceo name.
