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
 

Five trusts that protect on the downside

FE Trustnet looks at closed-ended funds that have a track record of protecting capital when markets turn sour.

By Thomas McMahon, Reporter Follow
Tuesday July 03, 2012


One of the biggest factors that concerns investors about putting their money into investment trusts rather than funds is their reputation for higher volatility, creating a higher chance of them losing their stake. 

Here FE Trustnet looks at those trusts that have protected investors’ money the best during the two market crashes of the past decade – the Lehman crisis of 2008 and the dotcom crash of 2002.


Global – Ruffer Investment Company

This company launched in July 2004, and the graph of its performance since then against its IT Global Growth sector and the MSCI World index shows it took the 2008 crisis in its stride. 

Performance of trust vs sector and index since launch

ALT_TAG
Source: FE Analytics

 Out of the funds in the four global IT sectors the portfolio has the lowest max drawdown of -6.73 per cent over five years, meaning that if you had bought and sold at the worst possible moments this is all you would have lost. 

In 2008 the fund gained 23.01 per cent, while the MSCI World index lost 17.92 per cent and the fund’s IT Global Sector lost 30.13 per cent.

Not a single other trust in the four sectors made money in that calendar year.

The portfolio’s managers, Hamish Baillie and FE Alpha Manager Steve Russell, invest in bonds as well as equities, with fixed instruments providing the four largest holdings as of March.

The managers are 24 per cent in Japanese stocks – a significant overweight position, illustrating that they’re unafraid to take a strong contrarian approach.

Ruffer Investment Company has an annual management charge (AUM) of 1 per cent, and is currently trading on a premium of 3 per cent.


Personal Assets Trust

The Personal Assets Trust has been around longer than its Ruffer rival, and over ten years it has the lowest max drawdown in the four global sectors – 22.63 per cent.

That figure was achieved in the most recent five years, meaning over that time frame the trust is second only to the Ruffer Investment Company.

It offers investors a way to access the investment strategy of FE Alpha Manager Sebastian Lyon, who has run the portfolio since 2009 but whose Trojan fund is currently closed to new investors.

Personal Assets lost just 3.24 per cent in 2008, the second-lowest amount in the four sectors, and 8.71 per cent in 2002, putting it in the top quartile.

The trust has made 102.22 per cent over ten years with the lowest annualised volatility in the IT Global sector over that period, 11.44 per cent.

It has a total expense ratio (TER) of 1.15 per cent, and is on a premium of 1.3 per cent.


UK – Capital Gearing IT

This is the only trust in the five UK sectors to have made money in 2008, recording gains of 4.72 per cent for the year.

During the dotcom crash it performed a similar trick, being one of only two to break even in 2002, when it rose 3.24 per cent.

The closed-ended fund’s max drawdown of 10.92 per cent is the best over ten years, as is its volatility of 11.85 per cent.

Performance of fund vs sector and index over 10yrs

ALT_TAG
Source: FE Analytics

It’s been headed up by industry stalwart Peter Spiller since 1982, who runs a highly diversified portfolio of equities and bonds. The trust’s top-10 holdings account for less than 10 per cent of assets under management (AUM), which is extremely rare.

The trust, which is currently trading on a premium of 6.56 per cent, appeared in FE Trustnet’s list of the best trusts on a risk/return basis back in May.


Schroder Income Growth IT

Picking a second UK-focussed fund is tough given the degree of Capital Gearing’s outperformance.

Schroder Income Growth was second best in terms of its 2008 performance and fourth best in 2002, when it lost -3.17 per cent.

It has top quartile scores for volatility – 16.81 per cent – and max drawdown – 35.58 per cent. 

In 2008, when the FTSE All Share lost 29.93 per cent, and the average trust in IT UK Growth & Income lost 36.49 per cent, Schroder Income Growth lost only 12.89 per cent.

The portfolio also protected investors well in 2002, losing the least of any trust in its sector – just 3.17 per cent.

While it doesn’t have the reputation or track record of Spiller’s Capital Gearing IT, the fact it’s on a discount of 4.8 per cent may tempt some investors. Its income focus is also a big draw; according to FE data, it’s got a one year historic yield of 5.32 per cent.

Sue Noffke has headed up the trust since July 2011.


Emerging Markets – Aberdeen Asian Income

Emerging market trusts deserve their reputation for higher risk, with some eye-watering max drawdown figures substantially higher than the sectors already considered.

Aberdeen Asian Income, launched in 2005, is the least risky in these terms, with a max drawdown of just 30.55 per cent and five-year annualised volatility of 18.62 per cent – the lowest in the emerging markets sector by some distance.

Performance of fund vs sector and benchmark over 5yrs

ALT_TAG
Source: FE Analytics

In the meantime it has produced gains second only to the Aberdeen Asian Smaller Companies IT among emerging market trusts over five years, making investors 117.28 per cent.

It’s currently trading on a premium of 5.14 per cent, and has a yield of 3.56 per cent.



 
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
 
Ark Welder Jul 03rd, 2012 at 03:47 PM

It would be interesting to see how Perpetual Income & Growth stacks up against Schroder IG over the same timeframes. It does have the advantage of having the same manager in place throughout.

Perhaps what the article does highlight is how looking at longer-term data can mask more-recent changes, i.e. different fund managers. The one-year-ago management change to Schroder IG has been stated, but there has also been a change to the management of Troy Income & Growth, just three years ago, and Troy have demonstrated an ability to for capital protection in a number of their funds. So, personally, I would be more inclined to look at them rather than Schroders for this (I hold neither, as it happens).

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