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
 

Ruffer Investment Company shows up open-ended rivals

Retail investors tend to automatically dismiss closed-ended funds when it comes to selecting a multi-asset portfolio, but the are some good options in the space.

By Joshua Ausden, News Editor, FE Trustnet Follow
Thursday July 26, 2012


The best-known investment trusts are generally long-only, long-term equity portfolios, but the Ruffer Investment Company challenges this conception.

The £280m portfolio, which is headed up by Hamish Baillie and FE Alpha Manager Steve Russell, sits in the IT Global sector, but has a significant proportion of its assets invested in government bonds, corporate bonds, gold and other alternative assets. 

According to FE data, Russell and Baillie currently have 57 per cent in equities, 10 per cent in index-linked gilts and 5 per cent in gold and gold equities – reflective of many portfolios in the IMA Flexible Investment, Mixed Investment 20-60% Shares and Mixed Investment 20-85% Shares sectors. 

However, the fund’s record is second to none in the open-ended universe. It has returned 93.2 per cent over five years, outperforming all four multi-asset sectors in the IMA universe by at least 80.62 per cent.

The portfolio is only more volatile than the IMA Mixed Investment 0-35% Shares sector over the period, which by definition has a significantly lower proportion invested in equities. 

Performance of trust vs sectors over 5-yrs

Name  1-yr returns (%) 3-yr returns (%)   5-yr returns (%)  
Ruffer Investment Company   -3.24  30.68  93.2 
IMA Mixed Investment 0-35% Shares  2.56  23.51  12.58 
IMA Mixed Investment 20-60% Shares  -0.35  22.42  6.53 
IMA Mixed Investment 40-85% Shares -3.51  25.08  2.47 
IMA Flexible Investment   -6.28  25.19  -1.68 

Source: FE Analytics

Not one of the 485 mixed-asset funds in the unit trust and OEIC universe has come anywhere close to matching this performance.

The hugely popular CF Ruffer Total Return fund, which is co-managed by Russell, comes closest, with returns of 55.46 per cent – almost 38 per cent less than its closed-ended counterpart.

The highly rated Trojan fund, managed by FE Alpha Manager Sebastian Lyon, has returned 46.6 per cent over the period.

The Ruffer Investment Company is slightly off the pace in the returns stakes over three years, although it has still comfortably beaten all four sector averages.

It has also beaten the CF Ruffer Total Return fund, albeit with slightly more volatility. 

Performance of trust vs fund and sectors over 5-yrs

ALT_TAG

Source: FE Analytics

Unlike open-ended funds such as CF Ruffer Total Return, the managers of the Ruffer Investment Company don’t have to contend with significant inflows or redemptions. Thanks to its closed-ended structure, there is also no risk of the portfolio soft-closing to new investors. 

At present, the trust’s biggest off-field bet is in Japanese equities, which make up 24 per cent of assets under management (AUM) – the single largest sector weighting.

So far this position has failed to pay off, evidenced by the fund’s relatively poor record over one year.

However, the managers remain confident that their exposure to the battered region will pay off in the medium- to long-term. 

The CF Ruffer Japanese fund and Nippon Telegraph & Telephone are among the managers’ largest holdings.

As the trust’s low volatility and max drawdown suggest, Baillie and Russell put particular emphasis on capital preservation. 

"Much more important than getting our bets correct is that the portfolio is positioned to keep our investors’ capital safe," the managers said in a recent note to investors.

"We hope so but hope is a long way from certainty and this discomfort is no bad thing in the capital preservation game." 

The trust has an annual management charge (AMC) of 1 per cent and does not have a performance fee.



 
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
 
peggy Jul 27th, 2012 at 09:02 AM

Surely 3 year results reflect a recovery from a 2009 trough & are otherwise meaningless. 5 year performance gives the pre to postcrisis
result & will reflect consistency of approach.

Reply
Theo Jul 27th, 2012 at 12:11 AM

As seen in your table, ITs do better than UT in rising markets and worse in falling ones, and there is nothing remarkable in that.

I do not see why you compare a good IT with IT averages. Apples and pears. UTs are far more popular than ITs not because they perform better, but because of their greater simplicity, transparency and convenience. Also far better service from their houses.

CF Ruffer do not inspire very much confidence in me because in UTs, they do not have a single 5 crown fund and more than 50% are in the 4th quartile.

Reply
Doro Jul 27th, 2012 at 10:09 PM

As everybody knows between 5 and 3 years ago we had the exuberant bull market of 2008, thus the outperformance of an IT!
And obviously people seek simplicity and not returns when investing, who would invest in an investment trust without at least a couple MBAs and a PhD in economics...

Reply
Ark Welder Jul 28th, 2012 at 12:30 AM

Me. I would invest in an investment trust. No MBA, no PhD. Just an interest in making a return.

First IT investment was in a monthly savings contribution into Fleming Far Eastern IT, as it was then known. 24 years ago. Followed not long after by the ordinary shares of Fleming High Income IT.

Strange how some themes don't seem to go away...

...'bit like Flares, I suppose... :-)

(and Goths)

Reply
Ark Welder Jul 27th, 2012 at 02:51 PM

Where in the table does is it supposed to show that ITs do worse than UTs when markets are falling? The graph - of the data - tells a different story for this case.

What is your experience of investment trust houses and their level of service?

Ruffer does not subscribe to Trustnet, so their funds will not have crown ratings - nor very limited comparative data. So what are your sources of information for their performance? And over what timescale are you quoting?

Reply
Theo Jul 27th, 2012 at 12:15 AM

Correction, The 2nd paragraph should read: I do not see why you compare a good IT with UT averages

Reply
 

Back to top of page

 

Follow FE Trustnet

Video Headlines

More Videos

Gleeson: The fund I’d back to hit a short-term target

GMT 07:00 | 15-May-2013

Gray: Market rally has made me more bearish than ever

GMT 15:30 | 30-Apr-2013

 
Poll

Do you think UK inflation will increase in the next 12 months?

Yes, it will increase significantly

Yes, it will increase slightly

It will stay at around the same level

No, I think inflation will fall

Vote

 
 
  • Stay connected with FE trustnet
  • Authorised and Regulated by the
    Financial Conduct 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