Where can i gain SEDOL codes for the Retail version of this fund? Available on the Aviva Wrap.

I would like to buy this fund as an ISA wrapper. Please can you advice. Thank you.

How do I transfer into this fund from an M&G one?

It appears that I can only add Invesco High Income Inc. to my portfolio When I wish to add the Acc. fund. How do I do this?

Att'n Paul Martin, To select the Acc' you first need to add the 'default' Inc' fund to your basket, then go to your basket in the 'Tools' menu and 'click' the small '+' icon next to the fund. This will provide you with a drop down 'menu' for the various classes of units. Just tick the 'Acc' unit and 'untick' the 'Inc' unit and the 'Acc' unit will be shown in your portfolio.

Hope this helps
Kind regards
Keith Greaves - IFA (Tamar Valley Financial)

I have noticed that when all the other funds go down IP HI is steady, it also gives a divi which I reinvest into the fund. Its an ideal fund whilst this hurricane goes by

Quite right on return from '95. I was only concerned over the last three years. I have moved a modest 10% and agree with you that it is an excellent fund, even if now and again Mr Woodford gets a bit worrying!

Explosif - I would recommend keeping the faith. Contrarian views are often controversial but it is generally this thematic approach which works out over the longer term. Nicholas - as an investor who has held the Fund since '95 I am confused as to why you think the Fund is a long term failure. Since 1st Jan 95 the Fund has returned 491% against the 259% of the All Share index and 247% of the FTSE 100. Quite how this is a failure I am unsure.

Trackers are in many ways inefficient investment vehicles as you own more and more of the elements as they grow in value, so own the most of the overpriced elements and the least of the underpriced. I would have thought the return you had achieved thus far would have been ample to see you through any doubts over 2 year performance statistics?

I am considering charging Invesco for my defence and marketing of this Fund, but I do genuinely believe in the future prospects of achieving competitive risk adjusted returns going forward and have staked my clients Portfolios accordingly. I have to answer to them as well as having my own money invested in this, so you can see why I am aware of the minutiae of the figures.

I am getting seriously worried about this fund which I have held since 1995. Looking at the long term is fine , but this IS a long term failure and it could well be that Woodford is simply wrong now. I am reducing my holding and going into a simple tracker pro tem.

Fair Point Nick, well made. I continue to hold this fund and certainly hope that it does well (better)? in the longer term. I suppose what I was trying to say was that what worked well in a previous recession had failed to have quite the same impact this time and, I stand by my comments about some of Mr. Woodfords' stock picks in the hope that he is better informed than myself. I admire your research Nick and hope you do well with your own investments.

Explosiv - This type of collective investment Fund is effectively a basket of shares and so are not ever going to be immune to the wider market. However, if you look at the maximum drawdown across this period (if you bought at the highest point and sold at the lowest) of this Fund compared with others you will see why the term defensive is used - Inv Perp High Income -33.81%, UK Equity Income Sector Average -44.06%, FTSE All Share --45.03%. Your comparison with the JPM Natural Resources is interesting saying they carry the same risk as the maximum drawdown on this Fund was -66.78%. Taking two specific points in time is not a fair basis for comparison. Since 1st August 2007 the Fund has returned 2.92%, above the 0.01% average for its sector and only just behind the 7.66% of the FTSE All Share, whilst taking on approximately half the volatility and therefore providing a higher degree of capital preservation. Over the longer terms of 5/10 years, which is the recommended term of investment, the Fund has outperformed the sector and the index. Asset management is about more than just looking at pure total returns and the underlying risk needs to be properly understood when providing analysis of investment vehicles.

If you are feeling an urge to buy into this fund because of Mr. Woodfords track record during previous 'hard times' I would recommend caution. A moderate £1,750 lump sum investment in August 2007 has, to date, realised a 'profit' of £43.24. Most of Mr. Woodfords' stocks are seen as 'defensive'. This seems to be Brokerspeak for safe but, of course, the phrase 'defensive stock' is a misnomer. They appear to fall just as fast as speculative shares in a recession but take a lot longer to recover. To use an example this fund, on todays valuation, has retracted by 1.98%. JP Morgans Natural Resources has fallen by 1.67% and yet the latter is generally regarded as high risk. Why on earth Mr. Woodford keeps his faith is stocks such as BT is, frankly, beyond me. As a private investor with a day job I have easily outperformed a professional with my own stock picking, and yes, I've picked some bad ones too.

I have never seen so much c**p on a websitem when all I am looking for is your current price !!!!!!!!!!! Use the KISS principal please

i hold this fund but it does not appear on the drop down list for inv./perp the income fund does ??

Mickey: I understand your point regarding pontification, however it is another argument based on short termism. A previous poster comments on British investors being sheep. Although his point was wrong in terms of the comparison he drew, what you are promoting is Investment Managers adopting the same position and following the short term trends. Mr Woodford has consistently outperformed the market over the longer term. With the benchmark driven culture of modern investment vehicles, finding someone who has conviction enough in their thematics is rare, and finding someone who conistsently provides outperformance as a result even rarer. It is so easy to have a Fund that tracks 95% of the benchmark with a few small divergences. I seem to remember Mr Woodford being slated in the press for not including Tech stocks during the Tech boom. However his opinion that it was hard to find intrinsic value in the companies was eventually proved right when the bubble burst and he went stratight back to the top of the performance tables.

The simple point is, when I want UK Equity exposure for my clients at least the majority of the monies end up with Neil Woodford, and I also have belief in his current convictions that the defensive sectors in which he currently has overweight positions represent the best stock level value on fundamentals.

Bottom of an 18 Fund Sector over 1 year means nothing, and I have not even considered reducing any of my positions in this Fund and will continue to add to them in the near, medium and long term.