View more on these topics

Rathbone and Liontrust income funds join ‘blacklist’

Rathbone and Liontrust have both seen their flagship income funds added to the black list of underperformers in Principal Investment Management’s latest income study.

The £465m Rathbone income fund, managed by Carl Stick, and the £341m Liontrust income fund, managed by Gary West and James Inglis-Jones, have joined the likes of £2.3bn Jupiter income fund, managed by Tony Nutt, and George Luckraft’s £187m Axa Framlington equity income and £108m monthly income funds.

The new entrants mean that £5.5bn of funds currently sit in the black list which Principal IM highlights as a sign for consistent underperformers.

Principal IM investment manager Chris Ganney says Liontrust income’s inclusion is due to the poor performance prior to the departure of Jeremy Lang early in March 2009. However, he says there are larger concerns with both the Jupiter and Rathbone offerings.

He says: “People do need to start to look elsewhere when it comes to Jupiter income, Tony Nutt has been a good manager but it has been five years since the fund has been performing.

“Rathbone was a white list member in the past, but the good numbers have dropped off the track record and it is style issue. It is not a terrible fund but there are better funds out there.”

Liontrust is on a hold, while Jupiter and Rathbone’s income funds have a switch status.

Liontrust says the income fund has been first quartile since the West and Inglis-Jones took on the fund in March 2009.

Meanwhile, Principal have also removed Robin Geffen’s £1.1bn Neptune income fund from its white list of 14 funds. Also leaving the list is the £64m Rathbone blue chip income growth fund and the £207m CF Walker Crips equity income fund. Joining the list are the £41m Neptune quarterly income fund, £33m Unicorn UK income and the £238m Threadneedle UK equity alpha income funds.

Funds in the white list have, over five years, proved their ability to deliver a rising level of income alongside long-term capital growth.


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. All this is doing is look at outcomes and then extrapolating that the same performance is likely in the future without looking at the nature of the funds, their composition, the skills (or not) of the managers etc. I could go on

    What escapes me is that all the financial press can do this basic number crunching yet they wait for someone else to do it. Principal’s reasons are clear, loads of column inches and good luck to them

Leave a comment