View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manager/article/a653449
Henderson's O'Gorman: why we are selling Apple
on Jan 25, 2013 at 08:56
We have been reducing our position in Apple in our index aware funds to 7% from 10% over the last six months.
We’ve been doing this despite its very large (13%) weighting in the MSCI AC World IT benchmark as we were concerned that, while it is incredibly cheap and its ecosystem is still very powerful, it lacks sufficiently good product in the near term.
If this persists, there is a danger that its strong barriers to entry (iOS, Apps store, iTunes, brand) would be eroded by some rather mediocre product (iPhone 4s and iPhone 5).
The loyalty of the installed base is apparent by Apple’s still very high retention rate of customers – despite undifferentiated product it still dominates high end Western smartphone sales.
The issue is that the company is not picking up many incremental users versus Android. Additionally its problems are compounded by a competitor of sufficient scale to compete with it in the form of Samsung (our largest overweight position at 2% active).
Our view is that risk reward is fairly balanced in Apple. On the positive side, all Apple needs is a good product, or indeed a product as good as the competition.
Then the power of its eco-system and the inertia/loyalty of the customer base combined with the incredibly cheap valuation could lead to very powerful outperformance.
On the negative side, there is a risk that if it fails to deliver a good product it risks a fairly major erosion of its (highly profitable) installed base.
So what to do with the stock?
The model is index aware and Apple, as we stated is 13% of our benchmark (albeit our maximum position given regulations is 10%).
News sponsored by:
As the UK coalition government strives to rebalance the national economy, so called 'reshoring' looks set to play an increasingly important role in economic recovery.
Today's top headlines
With talk on interest rates on the horizon, our latest roundtable debate covers income investing against a changing backdrop