Citywire printed articles sponsored by:
View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/money/article/a709790
Neil Woodford v Mark Barnett: how do their numbers compare?
Can Woodford replacement Mark Barnett replicate his number?
Investment is famously motivated by a balance between fear and greed: Neil Woodford’s investors were in many cases in his fund because they appreciated his ability to walk the line between the two.
His flagship fund, the £14 billion Invesco Perpetual High Income fund , has returned 208% since 1999 versus an index (IMA UK Equity Income) return of 66%. Over that period his deepest drawdown (the biggest downward swing in the fund's value) has been -17.49% versus a peer average figure of -23.38%.
That lack of volatility was enough for many investors to forgive the fact that for much of the time within that period – particularly since the 2009 bounce – his compound annual return has run below peer-average.
Can his replacement Mark Barnett replicate those numbers? Over the last 10 years Barnett lags Woodford by 197% to 218%. He knocks the peer average of 119% out of the ring however.
Over five years the situation is reversed, with Barnett returning 90% to 72% versus the peer average of 65.9%.
Over time, Barnett’s drawdown has consistently run a few basis points below Woodford’s – for instance in the depths of 2008 he recorded a maximum discreet loss of 19.89% versus -17.49%.
But equally in recent years he has consistently offered higher compound annual returns – particularly since the beginning of this year as markets have rallied hard globally.
So occasionally more return, consistently a little more risk – although given that is relative to one of the safest pairs of hands in UK equity management, that is probably not cause to start panic selling.
More about this:
Look up the funds
Look up the fund managers
Tools from Citywire Money
From the Forums
Weekly email from The Lolly
Get simple, easy ways to make more from your money. Just enter your email address below
An error occured while subscribing your email. Please try again later.
Thank you for registering for your weekly newsletter from The Lolly.
Keep an eye out for us in your inbox, and please add email@example.com to your safe senders list so we don't get junked.
by Michelle McGagh on Dec 11, 2013 at 05:01