저자: TerrySmith · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 펀드는 설정 이후 누적 약 47.8~49.6% 상승해 지수(약 29.4%)를 크게 앞섰으며, 방어적 우량주 위주 전략의 성과를 강조하고 비용·회전율 관리를 핵심 차별점으로 제시했다. 성과: 2011년 설립 첫해 +8.4%(시장 -4.5%), 2012년·2013년 초에도 시장을 상회. 지난해(2012) +14.2% vs 시장 +12.7%. 연환산 약 18.3% vs 시장 11.7%. 채권지수 16.5%, 현금 보유는 실망스러운 결과라고 언급. 전략: 일상 필수재·럭셔리 등 방어적 기업에 집중하고, 경기민감 업종(부동산·은행·경기순환주)은 피함. 모든 분기·모든 시장에서 초과수익을 낼 수 있는 운용자는 없다는 입장. 규모·용량: 운용자산 약 12억 파운드, 평균 시가총액 약 490억 파운드 종목 투자. 1% 지분을 가정해도 130억 파운드 규모까지 유동성 문제는 없다고 봄. 실제 상한은 자금 규모보다 처리 가능한 투자자 수(약 6,000명)에 의해 정해질 것이라고 설명. 비용: 운용보수 1%, 총비용비율(OCF) 1.16%로 낮은 편이며 다음 해 약 1.13%로 하락 예상. 일반 투자자의 실질 비용은 약 3%로 추정되며 배당수익률을 잠식한다고 비판. 매매비용은 OCF에 미포함, 평균 펀드 회전율 80% 대비 본 펀드 회전율은 0.48%, 매매비용 0.01%. 리스크/조건: 시장 상승기에 상대적으로 뒤처질 수 있고, 성과는 장기 관점으로 평가해야 한다는 조건부 메시지. 특정 종목 매수·매도 추천 없음. 출연자 전망: 구체적 자산 가격 방향 예측 발언은 없음(과거 성과 및 장기 전략 설명 위주).
다듬은 글
i'm pleased that you're here in such numbers as well tonight that's very nice to see because to repeat what martin said to some degree we only endeavor to do two things at fun smith which is run your and our money as well as we possibly can and communicate with you and we think the the latter is very important indeed and we think that in order to get the best from the strategy that we're endeavoring to employ it's important that you understand what it is we are and equally what it is we're not doing and what results you might get from that because if we don't then from time to time either of us could make decisions which are detrimental to our long-term performance in this regard so communication is very important and by having this meeting what we hope is that to some degree at least the communication will be two-way which we'll try and do a bit later on um undoubtedly the most important subject to to touch upon is the performance of the fund that's the the table which shows the performance uh since inception to the end of february as you can see over on the right hand side there you can see that the fund is up 47.8 since inception actually i think it's up 49.6 today we failed to get it to go to just 50 up which would have been a nice uh take on the on the meeting but there we are these things don't uh we don't do precision landings uh versus the equities which is shown there that's uh for the sake of uh comparison we take the morgan stanley capital international index in sterling with dividends reinvested so the the comparison we're making is with the t-class uh in which i and the majority of you are invested which is the accumulation class and you can see that we are basically up 47.8 against a market if you like that's up 29.4 percent it's been a very uh strong period for bonds for uh for most of this and a lot of con bringing concerns about whether or not there's a bubble in bonds and whether a great rotation is or should take place into equities bonds are up 16.5 which is pretty extraordinary during the period obviously outperform that and cash if you kept much of your money in cash you'd have been pretty disappointed by the outcome so far if you annualize that as you can see and we've annualized 18.3 per annum uh the market has um has annualized about 11.7 per annum and you can see that uh bonds have done about 6.8 over there looking at the individual years for a moment last year which i suppose is the one that probably we're most focused on sitting here today we were up 14.2 and you can see the market was up 12.7 so we outperformed it by a small margin um i've got to say i'm slightly surprised that we outperformed it at all and if you read my annual letter you'll see that i expressed that surprise we're not trying to run a fund that will outperform the market every reporting period every quarter or every year or in all market conditions and if if you expect that then i think at some point you will be disappointed and frankly i think if you seek that in other fund managers i know you're going to be disappointed because there is no such human being in my experience and that my experience is about 39 years in the industry one way or another this year there isn't somebody who is capable of outperforming in every reporting period in every market condition or if there is i must have just not stumbled across them in four decades i suppose what we seek to do is to actually perform very well when markets are relatively poor frankly but still by being fully invested to have a respectable performance when they go up but maybe not market matching so you can see if you look at our individual years our best year was 2011 our first year when we were up eight point four percent and the market was down four point five percent that's the sort of performance that i tend to expect that we will very significantly outperform very poor markets and i'm pleased to say that in 2012 and today in 2013 you'll see that we've outperformed a very sharply rising market and as i say but the reason for my surprise there is the things that we seek to own are very defensive companies if you want to use the jargon of the trade they are companies that supply or service our everyday necessities and luxuries and they're not the sort of things that do well during great cyclical upswings so they're not real estate companies and banks and very heavily cyclical businesses and so it's modestly pleasing i suppose that they've they've performed so well during a period when the market itself was so strong so that's the the performance that we've uh um uh delivered so far um i hope it pleases you but frankly you're the judges in the end i've when i was an analyst one of my pet hates was meetings i went to with managers who told me that their figures were very good i thought it was my job to decide that and so it's your job to decide this basically if you are pleased then we are pleased because you must be the ones who make that uh make that decision basically uh the the fund has grown in size as you can see there we have about 1.2 billion pounds under management now which is significantly larger than the day we started when i put 25 million of my money into the fund which i've still got in and some more because apart from the growth in its value i've actually put some more money in during the period um one of the the questions that often gets asked and i guess i might be heading off one of our questions later here but i'm sure there'll be others um is is there some cap on the size of the fund are you worried about its growth and so on um i mean ultimately the answer must be yes um you know every investment strategy that's ever been discovered or devised has some kind of limit to it but i don't think we need worry about it at the moment um the companies we invest in by and large are very big companies the average market value of a company that we invest in is about 49 billion pounds at the moment and if you do the arithmetic if we owned one percent in each of the companies that are within our portfolio at the moment we would have a 13 billion pound fund um now i would suggest that a one percent holding is not a particularly illiquid position so i don't think we need worry about a ceiling with regard to amount of funds in the near future uh if there's to be a ceiling and i think there's likely will be at some point it's a ceiling that will be governed by something other than the amount of money i think it will be governed by this um by the amount of people that we can or wish to deal with and as i said in echoing martin's remarks i think this is a a strategy which is relatively unusual perhaps surprising but it is and certainly not plain vanilla and therefore it requires quite a lot of of communication between us for us all to understand what it is we are and aren't doing so that uh people can actually roll with the various uh what i call character testing deviations that we'll encounter on our journey together and um that means i think there's a limit on how many people ultimately will be able to deal with and communicate with um we have i think mark wouldn't know the numbers better than me but about 6 000 investors at the moment and it's quite a lot um and and our team at the moment is a team which is split roughly three ways between those of us who manage the money those of us who run the administration of the business and those of us who handle the marketing of the business um but we've no wish in the end to become something which is basically an administration machine uh with a small sort of group of people in the corner who run the money uh and so i think the the limit that we will seek to impose at some point is when we find that we're actually creaking at the seams from in terms of the number of people that we're having to deal with so that's where i think the the size thing comes in um well it's on size i should also mention costs one of the most important and frequently overlooked factors in the investment performance that you get is how much people charge you or spend on your behalf when it comes to managing your money and if you look at the moment my guess for what it's worth is that the average uk investor who uses an investment advisor a wealth manager or whatever and pays them a fee that investment advisor uses a platform to marshal the investments which charges a fee or gets a trail commission and they pay a fund manager at the end maybe one and a half percent which is at the moment still the norm for this industry roughly they're probably shelling out somewhere in the region of three percent per annum would be my guess now um it may or may not have you may or may not have noticed that that is in fact higher than the yield that you can get on equities at the moment or bonds which means if you're paying that 100 or more of your income is being consumed in costs um that in my view is not a viable position and i've no doubt one way or another over time that will change and i hope what we do makes a small contribution to engineering that change as it comes but what's our own performance like in that regard well if you're in the t-class which i'm in we charge you one percent uh for your investment um our so-called uh ocf ongoing charges figure which i believe was known as the total expenses ratio until recently my colleagues tell me last year was 1.16 so we spent 0.16 of a percent more than the annual management charge in running the fund for you the vast majority of what we paid in that regard were basically uh things linked to the custodial nature of the fund in other words it was caused by activity by you our investors when you do things we have to pay a charge to get that administered so that's the primary spend that we make on your behalf in running the fund and i think you'll find that's low my suggestion to you is 1.16 is pretty low and that's the comparison i think perhaps you should be making when you're comparing costs of funds is that ongoing charges figure or total expenses ratio rather than simply the management fee for what it's worth our guesstimate this year given our fund has grown is if it stays about its present size uh our total cost will will drop about three so-called basis points to about 1.13 why how well some of the people that we pay are fixed costs or at least they don't know that yet but they will be fixed costs trust me now cfo will take care of that and and so their charges will not be permitted to rise in line with with our assets under management and so we will be able to reduce the amount that it costs you unfortunately that's not the whole cost of people managing funds um the the total expense ratio or ongoing charges figure um does include the annual management charge and the administration of the fund the one thing that it doesn't include for our fund or for any other fund is the cost of dealing on your behalf and and this is another thing which i think is almost universally overlooked by investors most people might think to look at the annual management charge a few things to look at the so-called tr ocf almost none of them look at the cost of dealing and according to the the last fsa occasional paper on this the average fund manager in the uk turns over his or her portfolio about 80 percent per annum and um i would guess that they are adding by doing that another cost which is hidden not shown in those figures i've just been quoting to you of about one and one to one and a half percent which comes out of the performance which is being delivered by the share prices and dividends of the companies which you own so that's another uh drag to bear in mind in terms of your investment performance it's almost worth you always think of giving up at this point don't you um it's uh but what's our performance like that there well you'll know that one uh some of you will know that one of the hallmarks of what we're endeavoring to do is to buy very good companies and then to try not to deal with them at all if we possibly can and we always try to not deal at all but we never quite managed to accomplish it last year our dealing our voluntary dealing in companies not including inflows into the fund obviously which we've got to invest because if you if you took the inflows as part of the turnover clearly in our first year we'd had a hundred percent turnover but uh if you x out the uh the inflows and outflows of the fund which is the the correct way of doing it our turnover last year was point four eight of a percent so we turned over less than a half a percent of the fund and our total dealing costs were one basis point point zero one of a percent uh it's a black armband day for the broking industry if this catches on i gotta tell you
댓글 0