The firm was one of only three with more than 10 funds under management that saw at least 75 per cent of their range outperform.
Cazenove UK Smaller Companies, managed by Paul Marriage, was perhaps the best-performing of these, beaten by only three funds in its IMA UK Smaller Companies sector. According to FE Analytics data, it returned 1.21 per cent in 2011, beating its sector average and FTSE Small Cap ex IT benchmark by 10.25 and 16.37 per cent respectively.
Performance of fund vs sector and benchmark
| Name |
1-yr returns (%) |
3-yr returns (%) | 5-yr returns (%) | 10-yr returns (%) |
| Cazenove - UK Smaller Companies |
0.89 |
130.28 |
26.01 |
108.08 |
| IMA UK Smaller Companies |
-8.7 |
81.09 |
0.65 |
93.25 |
| FTSE Small Cap ex IT benchmark | -15.66 |
50.87 |
-34.09 |
9.03 |
Source: FE Analytics
Marriage’s vehicle is a top-quartile performer over three- and five-year periods as well.
It was also a good year for the firm’s two Absolute Return funds – Cazenove UK Absolute Target and Cazenove Absolute UK Dynamic – which were among the three best-performing funds in their sector.
Julie Dean’s Cazenove UK Opportunities fund – arguably the group’s highest-profile vehicle – had another stellar year of performance, with returns of 1.93 per cent, compared with losses of 3.46 per cent from its sector average. A recent FE Trustnet study revealed that Dean’s fund is one of only five to have beaten the UK All Companies sector average in every calendar year between 2007 and 2011.
Cazenove’s popular multi-manager range also fared well last year, though the Cazenove Multi Manager Diversity fund marginally underperformed the consumer price index (CPI). That said, the vehicle marginally outperformed its IMA Mixed Investment 20%-60% sector average over the 12-month period.
On the other end of the scale are Cazenove’s two fixed interest funds – Cazenove Strategic Bond and Cazenove UK Corporate Bond – which both underperformed their sector and benchmark in 2011.
Performance of funds vs sectors in 2011
Source: FE Analytics
In spite of the group’s strong performance overall, Cazenove’s funds have failed to attract the inflows that they arguably deserve. Not one of the 33 funds under management has more than £1bn assets under management (AUM), and the largest – Cazenove European – is one of the very few that has underperformed over three and five years.
In total, the group manages just over £5bn of investors’ money.