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
 

UK Equity Income: The adventurous choice

Most funds in the sector invest in the UK’s largest dividend holders but optimistic investors should look for funds with more cyclical exposure.

By Mark Smith, Reporter, FE Trustnet Follow
Friday May 04, 2012


More adventurous equity income investors who are optimistic about the chances of a recovery should take a closer look at the Standard Life Inv UK Equity Income Unconstrained fund.

The £85.9m portfolio has a much higher weighting to economically sensitive sectors such as miners and financials, areas that should do well when markets return to growth.

"Standard Life uses a quantitative screening system called Matrix to filter stocks in the first instance to give managers a list to focus on. Funds which use the system tend to do very well in bull markets," said Hargreaves Lansdown’s Rob Morgan.

Data from FE Analytics shows that the fund dramatically outperformed the market in the bull years of 2009 and 2010 with returns of 42.53 per cent and 23.53 per cent respectively. By comparison, the average fund in the sector returned 22.88 per cent and 14.58 per cent.

Over the last three years it has returned 58.55 per cent compared with 47.31 per cent from the sector average.

Performance of fund vs sector over 3-yrs

ALT_TAG

Source: FE Analytics

Thomas Moore, who heads up the fund, is comparatively young for a fund manager but he is already being talked about as a future star of the industry. His style is deliberately different from the competition.

Morgan added: "Rather than hunting for the highest-yielding stocks, Moore targets dividend growth. He’s happy to take a position in a stock that has a dividend well below the sector average if it has the potential for dramatic growth."

"This means that the make-up of the portfolio is very different to many of the others in the sector, which tend to hold the largest FTSE 100 companies. There’s room in the portfolio for mid-sized and smaller companies and we like that because it means there’s little overlap with the likes of Woodford.”

Cineworld and packaging company DS Smith feature in the fund’s top-10, along with Petrofac and Legal & General. These are not typical holdings within a sector that tends to rely on the largest constituents of the FTSE.

The downside of this approach is that the fund is more volatile. With an annual score of 18.09 per cent over three years, it is among the least predictable portfolios in the sector.

Year-on-year performance of fund vs sector over 5-yrs

  2012 returns (%) 2011 returns (%) 2010 returns (%) 2009 returns (%) 2008 returns (%)
Stan Life Inv UK Equity Income Unconstrained
10.85
-9.85
23.53
42.53
-44.79
IMA UK Equity Income
6.51
-2.9
14.58
22.88
-28.54

Source: FE Analytics


Its exposure to cyclicals also means that it suffers in times of economic stress. In 2008 the fund lost 44.79 per cent, putting it in the bottom decile for performance. The third quarter of 2011 was also particularly hard on it.

Morgan added: "The fund is vulnerable to market falls but if you are optimistic about improvement in the economy then it won’t lag behind UK All Companies like the majority of equity income funds and will provide you with decent capital growth as well as income."

The fund’s one-year historic yield is 4.07 per cent. It is by no means the highest in the sector but considering the approach, it is highly competitive.



 
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
 
Theo May 04th, 2012 at 04:42 PM

The above chart shows the fund's performance over 3 years and taht has been a bull period. I think a much better period for assessment would be 5years which includes both rising and falling markets. On that basis performance has been disappointing (see the fund fact sheet page)

I for one would like to see TN writers present charts with the whole history of a fund (up to 10 years) and let the reader decide how to interpret it. A snippet of the last 3 years is the minimum acceptable to IFAs and TN must not restrict itself to the minimum. Of course some fund houses may not like to see that some of their emperors have no clothes, but that is another story.

Reply
gillian clough May 04th, 2012 at 05:06 PM

I agree. I select my funds by looking at the 3 and 5 year stats, and the AGR for the last 5 years, plus the outperformers in 2008. This led, for instance, to an investment in Trojan, beofre it got so popular that it soft-closed.

Once 2008 falls out of the 5-year stas, I would like to look longer - 7 years or 10.

And why oh why don't all funds have to show by law the AGR, dividends included, so that I don't have to keep doing manual calculations off the Compound Interest chart? A few show it since launch, but that gives no basis for easy comparison. Again, some fund houses may not like investors to have such an easy comparison.

Reply
Saver May 08th, 2012 at 02:24 PM

I totally agree with the two other writers. Three years is not helpful, especially at present. I make a point of looking at longer periods, and especially at how funds performed through the great crash of late 2008 / early 2009 - a better measure of whether fund managers know what they're doing. At present, 3-year charts all start after the great market nosedive, so are dubiously flattering.

Reply
 

Back to top of page

 

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