As sustainable investing grows in popularity, how can we distinguish truly sustainable companies and funds from greenwashing? To help investors with this question, a growing number of companies offer ratings which rank stocks or funds based on a variety of ESG metrics. However, these ratings can sometimes be more of a hindrance than a help.
While they are perhaps not as well-dressed – or cosmetically enhanced – as the Kardashians, there is a select group of celebrity fund managers who regularly outperform and are endlessly profiled in the media. Deemed to have the Midas touch, these individuals often control staggering large amounts of money too.
So, you have decided you want to incorporate some environmental, social and governance (ESG) principles into your investment portfolio. You have read our guide on the different ESG styles of investing, but now you are faced with a key question: do you choose an active or passive fund? As ever, it all depends on your goals and how much you are willing to pay to achieve them. To help you decide, we take a look at the differences between active and passive ways of investing sustainably and cover some of the pros and cons of each.
Once you’ve decided on an asset allocation strategy that suits your plans and expectations, it is time to get more granular within each asset class. There are a number of ways to do this, for example last week, we wrote an introductory piece on Growth versus Value style investing. Another way to mix up your portfolio is to invest in specialist funds to express a particular view on the future direction of markets.
Traditionally, investment styles fall into two broad categories: growth and value. While the end game for both is to get a return on the investment, the ways of going about that are quite different. The rivalry between the two camps can be intense, each side convinced that their method is superior.
Significant sums of money tend to follow the talented few in the world of investing. For example, six of the UK’s largest funds attracted close to 21% of total net flows during August, equating to £353 million, according to data provider Morningstar. Fund managers can quickly find themselves managing multi-billion pound funds once they have shown they can deliver superior performance and beat their rivals. But is big necessarily best?
Historically, investment trusts have delivered higher returns for lower costs than more popular open-ended funds such as unit trusts and open-ended investment companies (OEICs), but what are they and how are they different?
Should I invest in a fund managed by a computer or a human being? It’s a common question for investors although the jury is still out on which approach is best. As the debate intensifies in the industry, we dig into the pros and cons of Active and Passive investing and figure out if there is a clear winner or if it’s a case of horses for courses.