Our Privacy Statment & Cookie Policy
All LSEG websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.
If you are not confident of building your own fund portfolio—or, indeed, if you want a blended ‘core’ of asset classes to build onto with more tactical views—then you may well have cause to look at Mixed Investment funds.
They come in three risk bands, with risk seen as increasing as the equity component increases. Those who saw the value of their bond holdings decimated as inflation spiked may wish to query this view of risk, but that’s how the system works. In addition, there is a Flexible sector, where the fund manager can vary the asset mix, with an equity range of zero to 100%. In practice, Flexible is structurally higher in equities than the highest equity band, but that is another story.
This—the most equity heavy of the mixed investment classifications—is by far the most popular with investors. Over one, three, and five years, the 0-35% and 20-60% Shares classifications have consistently suffered redemptions, while 40-85% has been in the black over each time period.
Which is a tad surprising. Intuitively, you would expect flows for these three sectors to run broadly in tandem. Mixed Investment (MI) clients are grouped by risk tolerance, but there’s nothing to suggest that risk-averse investors are pulling money from funds while their more risk-tolerant peers are ploughing it in. So, what’s happening?
Two possible, and potentially overlapping, explanations seem most likely. First, and more prosaically, it’s possible that those with greater exposure to bonds will have been scarred by the fixed income explosion around 2022, and are pulling money out of bond-heavy MI funds. Possible, but that effect will likely have tailed off by now, whereas latest net flows over 12 months indicate it’s still going strong.
The other is that, in the decade plus following the Global Financial Crisis when rates were close to zero, investors used MI funds as a bond proxy, with a fixed income-like profile but with an equity kicker. This wouldn’t apply so much to 40-85% Shares funds, as you’d then be getting mainly kicker—all tequila and no lager, for the bon vivants amongst you. When rates went back up in 2022, bond yields followed in their wake, so this trend reversed, to the detriment of conservative and balanced MI funds. That, at least, seems to be the most plausible explanation. If you have a better one, I’m all ears.
That tilt towards equity has had its benefits, as returns rise in line with equity level across the three MI classifications, over one, three and five years, with 40-85% outperforming 0-35% by almost 18 percentage points over the latter. That return profile can never be a given, of course: equity valuations are at historic highs, and the fall, when it comes, may be every bit as precipitous and more as were the bond falls of 2022. But for now, at least, the attractions of the classification are apparent.
What’s interesting, however, is that while there is a clear relationship between the three sectors’ equity weighting and returns, this isn’t so apparent within the classification. The correlation between current equity weighting and 12-month performance is positive, but too low to be particularly significant—indeed, it’s lower than when we last looked at the sector a year ago. In short, simply buying into the most equity-heavy fund will not have delivered you the best results.
Orbis OEIC Global Balanced Fund Standard—first placed over three years—is a case in point. Its equity exposure would position it well down the table. Nevertheless, it’s well ahead of the pack over three years. It has the highest Consistent Return score of 5—as, indeed, do four others on the table.
Table 1: Top-Performing Mixed Investment 40-85% Shares Funds Over Three Years (with a minimum five-year history)
All data as of July 31, 2024; Calculations in GBP
Source: LSEG Lipper
This article first appeared in the September edition of Moneyfacts (p15)
LSEG Lipper delivers data on more than 380,000 collective investments in 113 countries. Find out more.
The views expressed are the views of the author and not necessarily those of LSEG Lipper. This material is provided as market commentary and for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment research or advice. LSEG Lipper cannot be held responsible for any direct or incidental loss resulting from applying any of the information provided in this publication or from any other source mentioned. Please consult with a qualified professional for financial advice.
Are investors sacrificing performance by moving from active to passive funds? Last ...
Google "small-cap performance" and you’ll find a bunch of sponsored links from ...
Asset class view Money market funds (MMFs) saw the largest inflows for the month ...
Headline figures Assets Under Management Chart 1: Assets Under Management of ETFs ...