<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Baillie Gifford Chases Unicorns With Schiehallion	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.itinvestor.co.uk/2019/03/baillie-gifford-chases-unicorns-with-schiehallion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.itinvestor.co.uk/2019/03/baillie-gifford-chases-unicorns-with-schiehallion/</link>
	<description>Exploring the world of investment trusts</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:00:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: tom_grlla		</title>
		<link>https://www.itinvestor.co.uk/2019/03/baillie-gifford-chases-unicorns-with-schiehallion/#comment-2223</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[tom_grlla]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:36:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.itinvestor.co.uk/?p=1885#comment-2223</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Was reading this as I&#039;ve been researching the BG US trust, and as you probably know, most of the US investments in MNTN are in the US trust too.

The BG PE side is interesting.  The two key appeals are:
1: Normally you need to be an institution to access unquoted companies like this.
2: Even if you can, you pay through-the-nose fees to the PE manager.

On the flipside:
1: I&#039;d like to know more about how they value the investments.  Morningstar says, &#039;Baillie Gifford has assembled a robust valuation and governance framework around the unlisted investments which gives comfort.&#039;  Where&#039;s the evidence?  Or is it just BG saying that.  I like something like SYNC where companies are simply valued at investment cost.

2: I&#039;d like to know more about Singlehurst &#038; Urquhart.  I know that BG has a strong &#039;house style&#039; and most of them are products of the graduate scheme, so there should be less to worry about individuals, but it&#039;s a different skill set I think, so I&#039;d like to know why I should believe they&#039;re qualified to do this.  I&#039;d also feel more comfortable if either manager had at least some experience with a top American PE firm.  However otherwise I generally respect the BG methodology.

Then there&#039;s the issue of performance.  USA is still new, so I used BG American as a proxy.  Over 10 years, a Nasdaq 100 ETF has beaten it (as ever highlighting how difficult it is to outperform most US indices).  Over 3 and 5 years, BG American has done better.  Unfortunately I don&#039;t know enough to get a sense of why this might be.   

The positive argument might be that in the past 5 years, the &#039;modern tech&#039; style has come to the forefront, which favours BG.

The negative argument might be that the past 5 years have seen more &#039;silly&#039; valuations, which has lended itself to BG (let&#039;s not forget how SMT performed in 2008!).

Then there&#039;s the fact that NASDAQ 100 may be being carried by the top constituents like Microsoft, Apple &#038; Alphabet - it has a significantly higher exposure to &#039;FAANGs&#039; than USA.  One could question how sustainable this is, though it&#039;s hard to deny that they are outstanding businesses.

Overall I think it&#039;s hard to have strong conviction.  Given I&#039;m normally a Fundsmith/Lindsell type, I&#039;ve been trying to find a way of getting a bit more tech/new economy exposure, but have struggled.  I don&#039;t really like the pure tech ITs (not enough conviction), Blue Whale is hard to analyse - too new, and I don&#039;t understand how he trades and manages cash.  It seems quite possible the NASDAQ 100 ETF is the way to go.  

The only (UK managed) American fund that I really believe in is Findlay Park.   I think JUSC has been a decent performer, but I don&#039;t really understand their methodology.

Hope everyone&#039;s surviving, and thank you for providing a place to discuss Investment Trusts - most people I know aren&#039;t interested!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Was reading this as I&#8217;ve been researching the BG US trust, and as you probably know, most of the US investments in MNTN are in the US trust too.</p>
<p>The BG PE side is interesting.  The two key appeals are:<br />
1: Normally you need to be an institution to access unquoted companies like this.<br />
2: Even if you can, you pay through-the-nose fees to the PE manager.</p>
<p>On the flipside:<br />
1: I&#8217;d like to know more about how they value the investments.  Morningstar says, &#8216;Baillie Gifford has assembled a robust valuation and governance framework around the unlisted investments which gives comfort.&#8217;  Where&#8217;s the evidence?  Or is it just BG saying that.  I like something like SYNC where companies are simply valued at investment cost.</p>
<p>2: I&#8217;d like to know more about Singlehurst &amp; Urquhart.  I know that BG has a strong &#8216;house style&#8217; and most of them are products of the graduate scheme, so there should be less to worry about individuals, but it&#8217;s a different skill set I think, so I&#8217;d like to know why I should believe they&#8217;re qualified to do this.  I&#8217;d also feel more comfortable if either manager had at least some experience with a top American PE firm.  However otherwise I generally respect the BG methodology.</p>
<p>Then there&#8217;s the issue of performance.  USA is still new, so I used BG American as a proxy.  Over 10 years, a Nasdaq 100 ETF has beaten it (as ever highlighting how difficult it is to outperform most US indices).  Over 3 and 5 years, BG American has done better.  Unfortunately I don&#8217;t know enough to get a sense of why this might be.   </p>
<p>The positive argument might be that in the past 5 years, the &#8216;modern tech&#8217; style has come to the forefront, which favours BG.</p>
<p>The negative argument might be that the past 5 years have seen more &#8216;silly&#8217; valuations, which has lended itself to BG (let&#8217;s not forget how SMT performed in 2008!).</p>
<p>Then there&#8217;s the fact that NASDAQ 100 may be being carried by the top constituents like Microsoft, Apple &amp; Alphabet &#8211; it has a significantly higher exposure to &#8216;FAANGs&#8217; than USA.  One could question how sustainable this is, though it&#8217;s hard to deny that they are outstanding businesses.</p>
<p>Overall I think it&#8217;s hard to have strong conviction.  Given I&#8217;m normally a Fundsmith/Lindsell type, I&#8217;ve been trying to find a way of getting a bit more tech/new economy exposure, but have struggled.  I don&#8217;t really like the pure tech ITs (not enough conviction), Blue Whale is hard to analyse &#8211; too new, and I don&#8217;t understand how he trades and manages cash.  It seems quite possible the NASDAQ 100 ETF is the way to go.  </p>
<p>The only (UK managed) American fund that I really believe in is Findlay Park.   I think JUSC has been a decent performer, but I don&#8217;t really understand their methodology.</p>
<p>Hope everyone&#8217;s surviving, and thank you for providing a place to discuss Investment Trusts &#8211; most people I know aren&#8217;t interested!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
