Your Basket
Your Basket
There are no funds in your basket. To add funds to your basket use the Green Plus Icon wherever you see it next to a fund.
Fund name
Aberdeen American Growth  
Fidelity American  
Schroder UK Mid 250  
M&G Recovery  
Jupiter Merlin UK Growth  
Close Basket Open basket

Login

Login

Register

It's look like you're leaving us

What would you like us to do with the funds you've selected

Show me all my options Forget them Save them
Customise this table
 

Andy Brough: Why I’ve had a bad five years

The manager explains his dramatic fall from grace and how he has steered the Schroder UK Mid 250 fund back to the top quartile of its sector this year.

By Thomas McMahon, Reporter, FE Trustnet Follow
Friday September 28, 2012


Poor stock-picking and a rapidly changing, risk-averse market were the causes of many years of underperformance for Schroder UK Mid 250, according to manager Andy Brough (pictured), who says his fund is now back on track and ready to build on its recovery.

ALT_TAG "I made some poor investment decisions," he said, in an exclusive interview with FE Trustnet.

"I bought the wrong stocks – Luminar, for example. We had a position in HMV too, and this was a company that tried to transition to a more internet-based model but failed."

"The fund grew too big at £3bn and when you’re running a fund that big there’s no point chasing your positions."

Launched in 1999, Schroder UK Mid 250 was one of the most highly regarded UK growth funds in the early 2000s, but the credit crunch instigated a dramatic fall in performance, and mass outflows soon followed.

Performance of fund vs sector and index over 10-yrs

ALT_TAG  

Source: FE Analytics

The fund shrank from a peak of £3bn to its current size of £1.17bn.

However, it has had a stellar year in 2012, becoming a top-quartile performer, more than doubling the returns of its sector and beating its mid cap benchmark.

Performance of fund vs sector and index in 2012

ALT_TAG 

Source: FE Analytics

Brough admits that the fund became too big to handle: "The fund had a great five-year start. I think at £3bn it was too big. If it got to £2bn in the future I think that would be the limit."

He adds that he had too much exposure to domestic demand rather than to companies that had revenue streams from outside the UK.

However, he also says that a dramatic change in investor sentiment and behaviour made managing money harder after the financial crash.

He commented: "You haven’t been rewarded for being a contrarian in the past few years. Before, if it was a reasonable business but unloved by the market, you were eventually rewarded, even if you had to wait, but now people are obsessed with momentum."

"People want to be invested in the Stella Artois stocks – those that are reassuringly expensive. In my 25 years of running money that’s the only time this has happened."

Brough says he has revamped his strategy, cutting down the number of holdings from 75 to 54 high-conviction stocks and looking to take advantage of the internet revolution.

"Now I’m looking for companies that can take quite a strong position and then transfer it onto the internet – Sports Direct for example."

"William Hill is another company that’s doing really well off the back of the internet – 70 per cent of betting revenues are online now."

"The Daily Mail is a company that people are starting to realise is not just a newspaper but an internet company."

FE Trustnet research has shown that mid cap funds tend to outperform their large cap rivals over the longer term, albeit with higher volatility.

Brough says that even for income-seeking investors, the FTSE 250 is a better place to invest.

"If you only invest in equities you need a rising stream of dividends and earnings. Mid caps do that; and they tend to open up new areas in the economy too, so they’re more dynamic. Only 65 of the 250 companies that were in the 250 when I started are still there."

"The trouble is if you look at the FTSE 100, mining, oil, banks and telecoms make up about 40 per cent and it’s quite hard to get those all going in the right direction."

"In the 250, the biggest holding may be 1.5 per cent of the index rather than 9 per cent as it is with the FTSE 100, so it’s easier to get diversification."

Before its recent turnaround, the fund was named in Bestinvest’s list of dog funds – those that consistently underperform their sector and benchmark – on six consecutive occasions. 

Brough likens this period to British cyclist Bradley Wiggins’ first, vain attempts to win the Tour de France.

"I like to think of the fund as the Bradley Wiggins of the industry – when he first started he won a number of Olympic golds but then he tried the Tour de France."

"He was a bit fat for the race, not really up to it and didn’t do too well, but he trained hard, changed what he was doing and ended up winning it."

"I even grew some sideburns."

Schroder UK Mid 250 has a minimum investment of £1,000 and a total expense ratio (TER) of 1.66 per cent. Brough also heads up the Schroder UK Smaller Companies fund.



 
Add your comment
Step 1: Tell us what you think...
 

Step 2: Prove you're not a robot...
You don't have to do this every time you submit a comment.

Login or register free and you won't see it again.
Enter the words above:
Step 3: Submit your comment...
Submit
 
Bob Donaldson Sep 28th, 2012 at 05:02 PM

Good of a fund manager to admit when he got it wrong more importantly when funds grow to big.

If only the parent Schroders stopped marketing funds and was prepared to close them off at a certain size it would be beneficial.

The problem is too often the marketing departments run the funds and not the fund managers.

Reply
valiant Sep 28th, 2012 at 04:40 PM

Ark Welder
Me thinks again you just want to argue. I have to get on and alter some of my investments now.
Have a good day

Reply
Ark Welder Sep 28th, 2012 at 04:42 PM

QED

Reply
valiant Sep 28th, 2012 at 04:09 PM

I am discussing your remarks, not your investments. If you hold investments that contradict your views then that would be slightly strange.
I'm not particularly interested in such things as Fixed Income Websites.
I try to look at the world economies and make my own mind up, rather than being overly influenced by the mass media.
What I see is many economies sinking under massive debt including the UK and USA. To that background markets are rising and so I become extremely sceptical of what is going on.
QE has helped stocks but little else. If your investments are cautious or risky is up to you. For instance if you are invested in fixed income but argue against it on here, that would be a little ridiculous.
I like to make my own mind up but when I see a good article on here it can help alter my view or make it more entrenched.
Discussion and opinion is vital in most things and thats what I am doing on here.

Reply
Ark Welder Sep 28th, 2012 at 04:24 PM

"QE has helped stocks but little else"

On that, I would, again, suggest that you read those other sites. I would also point out that there are several sub-divisions within Fixed Interest, and that there are bonds that are not fixed interest.

You may also wish to consider the style and content of your own remarks made in response to other posters on occasion - such as simply posting 'you must be joking', earlier.

Reply
valiant Sep 28th, 2012 at 03:42 PM

Ark Welder,
Cash or DIRECTLY OWNED GILTS, maybe the safest bet. As I have said I am not discussing the relative merits of bonds or equities. I am simply trying to point out the mass delusion of easy riches from stock markets. If you have a different view that's fair enough.

Reply
Ark Welder Sep 28th, 2012 at 03:52 PM

You may want to have a regular read of Bond Vigilantes and Fixed Income Investor sites. Also, some of the financial newsagencies. You may also wish to ponder on the fact that your knowledge of my asset allocations is minimal to non-existent - hardly the basis for an informed assessment of what my views are.

Reply
valiant Sep 28th, 2012 at 03:03 PM

Mark,
In many ways you may be right.In the bull markets of the 1990's it's probably true Mickey Mouse could have made money. Now its altogether different, although the Federal Reserve is doing its best to keep stock prices up.
My summing up would be that if you can afford to take significant losses then fine, if not try and find safer investments.

Reply
Ark Welder Sep 28th, 2012 at 03:33 PM

Your last sentence applies to bonds - including gilts - as much as it does to any other asset type. QE is implemented by buying bonds, with asset price rises elsewhere - including in other bond classes - being the secondary effect.

Reply
valiant Sep 28th, 2012 at 02:54 PM

Bond funds, equity funds, individual shares all need new money to pay the original investor.
As long as there are more buyers than sellers prices will tend to rise. The problem is if most buyers jump off at the same time prices will tank because sellers outweigh buyers.
In that situation some will have made money and many will have lost, that as always been the position with investing
I am not trying to argue the point between bonds or equities.
The idea that the majority of people buying a share will sell it at a higher price cannot hold true, or we would all be millionaires.

Reply
MRMARK LOCKYEAR Sep 28th, 2012 at 02:54 PM

Just goes to show anybody with a brain fund managers are no better at picking the right shares than me or you.

Reply
valiant Sep 28th, 2012 at 02:43 PM

Ark Welder,
Companies don't repay the original investor, new investors do.
Well what are new investors using apples and oranges.

Reply
Ark Welder Sep 28th, 2012 at 02:46 PM

They use exactly the same as purchasers as bonds, of course.

Reply
valiant Sep 28th, 2012 at 02:37 PM

To sell a bond you need new money too, well of course you do.

Reply
Ark Welder Sep 28th, 2012 at 02:42 PM

Then to use your own logic, that makes them as Ponzi as equities.

Reply
 

Next page»

Back to top of page

Fund mentioned in this article

Schroder UK Mid 250

View factsheet

Group mentioned in this article

Schroder UT Managers

View factsheet

Manager mentioned in this article

Andrew Brough

View factsheet

 

Follow FE Trustnet

Video Headlines

More Videos

Gray: Market rally has made me more bearish than ever

GMT 15:30 | 30-Apr-2013

From the analyst's desk

GMT 10:00 | 29-Apr-2013

 
Poll

Would you be concerned if a manager of a fund you owned took charge of another portfolio as well?

Yes

No

Vote

 
 
  • Stay connected with FE trustnet
  • Authorised and Regulated by the
    Financial Services Authority
  • © Trustnet Limited 2013. All Rights Reserved.
  • Please read our Terms of Use / Disclaimer
    and Privacy and Cookie Policy.
  • Data supplied in conjunction with Thomson Financial Limited,
    London Stock Exchange Plc, StructuredRetailProducts.com
    and ManorPark.com