Oh dear I cannot agree with this no matter how well promoted Sally Bowles is.
Sharon’s point is that Investment Trusts are valued by those who invest in the long term and that a lot of value is being lost by not investing in them. “Value” is not just a matter of maths , it is about outcomes and we need to measure the returns on investment companies in the past and consider for the future.
I am a fan of some investment funds and agree that they are potentially offering more value than unit funds which charge more for doing the same – nothing.
But I don’t think we can throw out the value offered by both passive and active funds based just on the value for doing nothing , that investment trusts/companies achieve.
Sharon Bowles is doing great work in the Lords and with Ros Altmann has been championing Investment Trusts/Companies. Her point is that these investment vehicles can do more than many funds which see money go overseas, where high charges aren’t justified by management and where the focus on growth is second to “de-risking”.
If we simply argue on charges, we miss the real question as to whether to buy investment companies share or pay annually for fund management.
Do I see investment companies appearing on many trustee horizons but I may be inexperienced. I do not see much talk of them at conferences or in the pages of professional investor magazines.
I hope that including this blog among others, I may get a better view of our reader’s thoughts. The comment pages are open for your views.