News

News round-up: 21 November 2025

The biggest investment stories of the past seven days

Valeria Martinez
Valeria Martinez

HICL will swallow The Renewables Infrastructure Group in a move that has major implications for shareholders. Val Cipriani reports.

Infrastructure trusts HICL Infrastructure (HICL) and The Renewables Infrastructure Group (TRIG) have set out plans to combine their assets, merging into a £5.3bn infrastructure giant.

Under the proposal, TRIG will be wound up and holdings transferred to HICL, which will then invest in a broader range of infrastructure assets. The new strategy will span “the full spectrum of infrastructure, including core and renewables sectors, opening access to new growth assets and subsectors aligned with key infrastructure megatrends”.

The merged entity will target a net asset value (NAV) total return of 10 per cent a year over the medium term and aim for a “progressive” dividend, starting at a target of 9p per share.

Together with International Public Partnerships (INPP), HICL is one of two trusts investing in ‘core’ infrastructure, with a focus on lower-risk assets backed by the government, such as in the education and health sectors. Meanwhile, TRIG invests in a range of renewable energy projects, with the majority of the portfolio in the wind generation sector.

TRIG shareholders will be offered a partial cash exit, but this will only be for 11 per cent of the shares in issue, at a 10 per cent discount to the 30 September NAV.

HICL shares fell more than 8 per cent on the morning of the announcement, while TRIG shares were up about 3 per cent. Prior to news of the merger, as at 14 November, HICL was trading on a discount of 23.6 per cent, while TRIG’s was 33.8 per cent.

Stifel analysts questioned whether smaller shareholders would be happy with the deal. “There is clearly quite a significant overlap of shareholders in both companies, particularly private wealth managers who will be exposed to both, and they may find it administratively more convenient to own one larger entity, with no doubt arguments made about liquidity,” they said.

“On the other hand, we think other shareholders want exposure to either renewables or [core] infrastructure, but not both,” they added. “We need to see the detail, but we also think the dividend on the new entity will be lower for TRIG shareholders than the current level.”

Renewable energy trusts have been struggling this year, due to a combination of lower wind generation and power prices. They are generally considered riskier than core infrastructure investments and have been trading on higher discounts.

TRIG and HICL expect to complete the merger in the first quarter of 2026, subject to shareholder approval.


WH Smith (SMWH) chief executive Carl Cowling has resigned with immediate effect after an independent review by accountancy firm Deloitte found that revenue in the travel retailer’s North America business had been overstated since 2023.

Cowling, who had been chief executive since November 2019, said he recognised the “seriousness of this situation”. Until a new boss is found, WH Smith’s UK division chief executive Andrew Harrison has taken the reins on an interim basis.

It is unsurprising that Cowling has fallen on his sword. As a result of the Deloitte review, covering 2023 to 2025, adjustments to prior-year supplier income figures are expected to be £13mn for 2024 and £5mn for 2023 on a net basis.

The review found that accounting issues at the US unit stemmed from a “backdrop of a target-driven performance culture and decentralised divisional structure”. It flagged “a limited level of group oversight of the finance processes in North America”.

WH Smith again cut its North America headline trading profit guidance for the year to 31 August 2025, to £5mn-£15mn, after reducing its forecast to £25mn in August. The reduction from original guidance of £55mn includes one-off costs of £20mn related to inventory.

Deloitte found that supplier income accounting at the division “was not consistent with the group’s stated accounting policy” or the relevant accounting standards. However, overstatements were to do with timing rather than the existence of revenue.

The review came after WH Smith shares plunged more than 40 per cent in August, when a shock profit warning disclosed recognition issues with supplier income in the US.

The group expects to post headline trading profit of £130mn for its UK division in FY2025, a figure slightly better than City expectations, and £14mn for its rest of world business. It also anticipates net debt of around £390mn and a leverage ratio of 2.1 times.

WH Smith is due to release preliminary annual results on 16 December. CA


Ocado’s (OCDO) shares plunged to their lowest levels since 2013 this week after US partner Kroger (US:KR) dealt a major blow to the company’s technology licensing business.

Kroger, the largest supermarket chain in the US, said it would close three warehouses that use Ocado distribution technology in January. The closures in Maryland, Wisconsin and Florida are expected to wipe $50mn (£38mn) off Ocado’s tech fee revenues for this financial year.

The news comes after a strategic review at Kroger found the three distribution centres to be underperforming. The original deal between Ocado and Kroger was first signed in 2018, with ambitions for up to 20 tech-enabled warehouses.

Kroger confirmed it will take a $2.6bn hit on the closures. The company is shifting its focus towards its relationship with capital-light grocery delivery group Instacart (US:CART).

Ocado said it will receive $250mn in compensation for the move, which Bank of America said essentially represents lost future customer fulfilment centre revenue. The remaining five sites under the partnership will continue to operate.

The broker expects the termination fee to be paid in 2026, boosting the group’s near-term liquidity. “The Kroger partnership is still able to return to growth through potential 2026 openings and smaller-scale Ocado solutions,” said analyst Adam Gildea.

Analysts at Shore Capital warned that Ocado risks being “marginalised” as the economics of its American order fulfilment centres fail to convince, and raised questions about Ocado’s surviving total addressable market in the US. EW


The Competition and Markets Authority has launched investigations into online pricing practices used by eight businesses, including electrical products retailer Marks Electrical (MRK) and ticket resellers Stubhub (US:STUB) and Viagogo.

The CMA is looking into a range of practices that fall foul of its new Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act, such as ‘drip pricing’ (where an initial price quoted for a product is then inflated by mandatory charges) and the use of “misleading countdown timers” aimed at pressuring shoppers into buying.

Other companies being investigated include the AA Driving School, BSM Driving School, Gold’s Gym, Appliances Direct and Wayfair.

The CMA said it was also taking a “two-tier” approach to its work by sending advisory letters to 100 more businesses in 14 sectors spelling out their responsibilities under the new act.

These are the first enforcement cases the authority is carrying out under new powers that allow it to decide whether laws have been broken, rather than having to take cases through the courts. It can then order remedies such as compensation payments to affected customers or fines that can reach more than 10 per cent of a company’s global turnover.

Marks Electrical said it prides itself on “transparency, clear pricing and providing services that customers consistently value”, including offering optional services such as packaging removal, recycling and old-appliance collection services.

It added that it has one-click options to remove add-ons, and has “already taken proactive steps” to align its pricing with what the CMA expects under the new act.

Marks Electrical listed on Aim in November 2021. Since then, its shares have more than halved in value. Last week, the company reported a 10 per cent decline in revenue for the six months to September of £53mn, but halved its operating loss to £543,000. MF


Smiths Group’s (SMIN) board has approved a £1bn buyback following the £1.3bn sale of its Smiths Interconnect business to Molex Electronics Technologies.

The engineering group, which is hiving off two of its four main divisions following pressure from activist investors, said the buyback would start once its current £500mn programme of repurchases ends in December.

The company added that its three remaining businesses achieved organic growth of 3.5 per cent in the three months to October and reaffirmed its full-year target of increasing revenue by 4-6 per cent, “with continuing margin expansion”.

Smiths Group announced its ‘value creation plan’ in January after activist investors argued that the group was being valued at a discount to the sum of its parts. 

Following the sale of the Interconnect arm, the company is planning to sell or demerge its Smiths Detection business, which makes scanning equipment used in airports and at security checkpoints. 

This will leave it with two core units: John Crane, which sells seals and filtration systems; and Flex-Tek, a maker of components used for heating and moving liquids and gases. MF

Companies

Impax Asset Management & Compass Group: Stock market week ahead – 24-28 November

A summary of key company announcements expected in the coming week

Mark Robinson
Mark Robinson

Interims: DSW Capital (DSW)

Finals: Cerillion (CER)

AGMs: Supermarket Income Reit (SUPR)

Companies paying dividends: Aeorema Communications (3p), Foresight Solar Fund (2.025p)


Trading updates: Intertek (ITRK), Kingfisher (KGF)

Interims: Accsys Technologies (AXS), AO World (AO.), Cordiant Digital Infrastructure (CORD), Cranswick (CWK), GB Group (GBG), Intercede (IGP), Molten Ventures (GROW), Sosandar (SOS), Supreme (SUP), Telecom Plus (TEP)

Finals: Compass Group (CPG), Marston's (MARS), Renew Holdings (RNWH)

AGMs: Aura Energy Limited (AURA), Seraphim Space Investment Trust (SSIT), Transense Technologies (TRT)

Companies paying dividends: ITV (1.7p), Dunelm (28p)


Economics: Autumn Budget

Interims: Cake Box Holdings (CBOX), Helical Group (HLCL), Pets At Home (PETS)

Finals: Auction Technology (ATG), Impax Asset Management (IPX)

AGMs: Altona Rare Earths (REE), Avation (AVAP), Celsius Resources (CLA), Coral Products (CRU), Fidelity Asian Values (FAS), Seed Capital Solutions (SCSP), Seeing Machines (SEE), Sutton Harbour (SUH)

Companies paying dividends: Hays (0.29p), Strategic Equity Capital (4.25p)


Interims: ActiveOps (AOM), First Property (FPO), Latham (James) (LTHM), Schroder Real Estate (SREI), Vp (VP.)

AGMs: Aptamer (APTA), Atlantic Lithium (ALL), Bellway (BWY), Bradda Head Lithium (BHL), EnSilica (ENSI), JPMorgan UK Small Cap Growth & Income (JUGI), Litigation Capital Management (LIT), Petra Diamonds (PDL), Wellnex Life (WNX)

Companies paying dividends: Octopus Aim VCT 2 (1.8p), Tritax Big Box Reit (1.915p), JD Wetherspoon (8p), PZ Cussons (2.1p), Tetragon Financial ($0.11)


Economics: Nationwide house price index

Interims: Foresight Environmental Infrastructure (FGEN)

AGMs: Berkeley Energia (BKY), Cap-XX (CPX), New Frontier Minerals (NFM), Synergia Energy (SYN), Wishbone Gold (WSBN)

Companies paying dividends: AEW UK Reit (2p), Anpario (3.6p), Bankers Investment Trust (0.686p), Bloomsbury Publishing (4.08p), CQS Natural Resources Growth & Income (6.02p), CQS New City High Yield Fund (1p), CVC Income & Growth (2.3125p), Diverse Income Trust (The) (1.35p), Dunedin Income Growth (4.25p), Ecofin Global Utilities & Infrastructure Trust (2.125p), EJF Investments (2.675p), Greencoat UK Wind (2.59p), Henderson Far East Income (6.25p), Hilton Food (10.1p), JD Sports Fashion (0.33p), Marwyn Value Investors (2.265p), ME Group International (3.85p), PRS Reit (1.1p), Sanderson Design (0.5p), Target Healthcare Reit (1.508p), Taylor Maritime (1.519184p), Abrdn UK Smaller Companies Growth Trust (9.5p), Fonix (5.9p), McBride (3p), Thorpe (FW) (5.36p), City Of London Investment Trust (5.4p), Custodian Property Income Reit (1.5p), ICG Enterprise Trust (9p), Octopus Renewables Infrastructure Trust (1.54p), Picton Property Income (0.95p), Seplat Energy ($0.075)

Companies going ex-dividend on 27 November
Company Dividend Pay date
Hill & Smith 18p 07-Jan
Michelmersh Brick 1.6p 08-Jan
Pan African Resources 1.52071p 09-Dec
Craneware 18.5p 18-Dec
Imperial Brands 40.08p 31-Dec
Tristel 8.52p 18-Dec
YouGov 9.25p 09-Dec
Alliance Witan 7.08p 31-Dec
Focusrite 2.1p 07-Jan
Marks and Spencer 1.2p 09-Jan
Braemar 2.5p 13-Jan
Fidelity Special Values 6.84p 13-Jan
Worldwide Healthcare Trust 0.7p 09-Jan
International Consolidated Airlines € 0.048 01-Dec
Oxford Instruments 5.4p 09-Jan
AVI Global Trust 3p 02-Jan
Volex 1.6p 08-Jan
Castings 4.21p 06-Jan
3i Group 36.5p 09-Jan
Land Securities 19p 09-Jan
Economics

A behemoth Budget? Economic week ahead: 24-28 November

Will Rachel Reeves go one step further next Wednesday?

Dan Jones
Dan Jones

The mass hypothesising will come to an end next Wednesday when the 2025 Autumn Budget finally arrives. Last week’s seeming U-turn on income tax means a range of other options are on the table – the word ‘smorgasbord’ has been mentioned more than once by government insiders in the days since.

That makes it more likely that chancellor Rachel Reeves will speak for longer than the 78 minutes she racked up last year, which was itself the longest Budget speech since Ken Clarke’s effort in 1996.

The 90s Budgets were lengthy affairs in general, albeit not to particularly auspicious ends. Clarke’s was the last of the Conservative era. The most extended effort of the decade, Norman Lamont’s 1 hour and 53 minutes in 1993, was hailed by Prime Minister John Major as “the right Budget, at the right time, from the right chancellor”. Major replaced his chancellor two months later.

Monday 24 November

US: Dallas Fed manufacturing index


Tuesday 25 November

US: Consumer confidence, Richmond Fed manufacturing index


Wednesday 26 November

Japan: Leading economic index

UK: Autumn Budget

US: PCE inflation, Q3 GDP (preliminary)


Thursday 27 November

Eurozone: Consumer confidence, industrial confidence, M3 money supply

Japan: Industrial production, unemployment rate


Friday 28 November

Japan: Construction orders

UK: Nationwide house price index

Funds

What the best-performing European funds are buying

Value stocks are driving the European rally. These funds are taking advantage

Val Cipriani
Val Cipriani

It has been a highly successful year for European markets, with the MSCI Europe ex UK index returning more than 24 per cent between the beginning of January and 14 November. But not all sectors and strategies have benefited equally.

“It has been deep value areas such as financials and industrials that have led the charge, leading to a wide disparity between funds taking a contrarian approach and those with more of a focus on growth and quality,” sums up Rob Morgan, chief investment analyst at Charles Stanley. Meanwhile, growth strategies such as the one deployed by BlackRock Greater Europe (BRGE) have struggled.

A look at the top-performing funds makes this apparent. The table below lists the best-performing European funds over the past year. It covers open-ended funds and exchange traded funds (ETFs) in the Investment Association’s Europe excluding UK sector, plus investment trusts in the Association of Investment Companies’ (AIC) Europe sector.

Top-performing European funds
Fund/trust 1-year 3-year 5-year 10-year
MSCI Europe ex UK 23.2 43.3 62.4 159.8
Artemis SmartGARP European Equity (GB00B2PLJD73) 50.1 107.2 163.1 237.2
iShares Euro Dividend ETF (IDVY) 47 51.5 72.1 128.2
First Trust Eurozone AlphaDEX ETF (FEUZ) 44.6 67.4 80.9 189.2
Invesco Euro Stoxx High Dividend Low Volatility ETF (EUHD) 43.4 64.1 86 //
JPMorgan European Growth & Income (JEGI) 42.5 76.1 125.2 172
UBS MSCI EMU Value ETF (UB17) 41.2 73.7 104.4 172.2
Xtrackers Euro Stoxx Quality Dividend ETF (XD3E) 40.5 68.2 83.7 177.4
WS Ardtur Continental European (GB00B4Z7BS85) 39.4 68.8 146.3 264.7
iShares MSCI Europe Mid Cap ETF (EMID) 36.7 53.5 60.6 169.5
Amundi Prime Eurozone ETF (PRIZ) 31.8 58.5 83.2 //
Sterling total returns to 14 November. Source: FE.

The table includes a variety of ETFs with a focus on dividends or a value strategy. Although their top holdings are quite different, one thing that many of these funds have in common is high exposure to financials. Among the highest are the weightings in the iShares Euro Dividend ETF (IDVY), the UBS MSCI EMU Value ETF (UB17) and Artemis SmartGARP European Equity (GB00B2PLJD73), at a respective 51 per cent (as at 14 November), 43 per cent (as at 30 September) and 40 per cent (as at 30 September). By comparison, the MSCI Europe ex UK index had just 23 per cent in the sector as at the end of October.

The table includes some active funds that have also done very well over longer periods of time. Artemis SmartGARP European Equity, WS Ardtur Continental European (GB00B4Z7BS85) and JPMorgan European Growth & Income (JEGI) are the sector’s top performers on a five-year basis, with the first two also faring very well over a decade.

SmartGARP is a software tool that Artemis uses in a range of funds, to good effect, as we have previously discussed. The tool looks for “growth at a reasonable price” by scoring companies according to eight factors, such as valuation and momentum; fund managers then consider the highest-scoring companies for inclusion in their portfolios.

Harry Eastwood, product specialist for Artemis’s US equity and SmartGARP strategies, said last month that Artemis SmartGARP European Equity continues to be “significantly overweight” to both banks and insurers. He believes they have further to run, among other reasons because profit forecasts in the sector have recently been upgraded and valuations remain attractive – although stock selection is still vital, he notes.

UniCredit (IT:UCG) has been a fantastic performer since 2021 but has more recently fallen into line with its sector, whereas Société Générale (FR:GLE), a laggard until late last year, is attractively valued with improving fundamentals,” Eastwood says. “As such, we switched a large proportion of our UniCredit exposure into SocGen in February, and it has been one of the biggest contributors to our performance this year.”

Interestingly, it looks like the tool behind one of the ETFs in the table might somewhat disagree on this bullish stance on financials. First Trust Eurozone AlphaDEX ETF (FEUZ) had just 22.7 per cent of its portfolio in the sector as at 14 November, a steep decline from 40 per cent at the end of September. This ETF tracks an ‘enhanced’ index created by Nasdaq, which ranks stocks based on both growth and value factors.

JPMorgan European Growth & Income is a little different from some of the other funds in the table. It offers a core, all-weather portfolio of European equities, aiming for growth but also paying out 4 per cent of net asset value (NAV) in dividends – partly from capital – and focuses on value, quality and momentum. As at the end of September, it was only marginally overweight banks and insurers. Instead, its top holdings were semiconductor company ASML (NL:ASML), pharmaceuticals business Novartis (CH:NOVN) and German software company SAP (DE:SAP).

In July, Kepler analysts argued that the trust’s strong performance over the past year was linked to a partial shift away from global companies listed in Europe and towards slightly smaller, domestically oriented businesses. “This is not a sudden lurch into small caps,” they say, “but a consequence of the team finding more opportunities in domestically orientated businesses rather than in the megacap global companies that have dominated European equity portfolios for several years.”

It is hard to say which areas will outperform next, and whether growth strategies will recover. Broadly speaking, analysts point to attractive valuations in Europe and potential catalysts for further improvements.

“Several potential triggers for a more sustained reversal in sentiment have been suggested, ranging from a benign resolution to trade frictions, resolution and reconstruction in Ukraine, German fiscal easing and intensified Chinese stimulus,” Charles Stanley’s Morgan says. “However, it is very difficult to predict what might move markets as the catalysts usually only become clear after the event. What we can say with more confidence is that Europe is about as cheap as it has ever been versus the US for the past 20 years.”

In this environment, Morgan likes BlackRock European Dynamic (GB00BCZRNN30), for its flexible approach and strong performance in different market conditions in the past. “The past year has been a trickier period for the strategy due to significant holdings in chipmaking specialist ASML and luxury goods giant LVMH (FR:MC), which have lagged. The fund also largely missed out on the key market driver of a resurgence in banks,” Morgan admits, but he still thinks the “process should shine through over the longer term”.

As for investment trusts, Mick Gilligan, head of managed portfolio services at Killik & Co, notes that those that sit in the AIC Europe sector are quite highly valued at the moment, with the average discount to NAV across the sector standing at just 3 per cent.

“The only trust we would consider buying right now for European equity exposure is European Opportunities Trust (EOT), although this also invests in the UK,” he says. “This one has few fans right now, which is why the discount is almost twice the sector average. Recent performance has been poor, not helped by a large position in Novo Nordisk (DK:NOVO.B) . . . However, that is history, and what I see when I look forward is a punchy portfolio of stocks with high returns on invested capital, which trade at very reasonable valuations.”

Novo Nordisk shares had been riding high on its weight-loss drug capabilities in recent years, but a dramatic fall from grace in the context of increased competition and a sky-high valuation has seen its share price almost halve in 2025. European Opportunities was the worst affected among investment trusts, but Stifel analysts were unimpressed by the fact that Baillie Gifford European Growth (BGEU) had no Novo position in early 2024 prior to the stock’s rally, only to add a small one later.

“The fact the position size was never too large has been helpful over the past 12 months or so,” they said. “However, in our view, it is not a good look that a fund which is a specialist in finding those companies that can become multi-baggers had no exposure to Novo’s impressive rally while peers did, and then only bought in around the time the price peaked.”

Companies

The beautiful game – the ugly investment

Football has been a terrible source of returns – so why do investors bother?

Julian Hofmann
Julian Hofmann

Billy Connolly once joked that he grew up believing his local side were called “Partick Thistle nil”. It is the sort of fatalistic humour that comes naturally to football supporters but less naturally to investors. Yet a surprisingly persistent group of shareholders has long been willing to buy shares in publicly listed football clubs.

The mismatch between sporting passion and investment logic creates a curious corner of the market – one where romance routinely overwhelms rationality. For those who follow the numbers rather than the league table, the results have been remarkably consistent: football clubs make strikingly poor public companies.

Football’s engagement with public markets stretches back to 1983, when Tottenham Hotspur became the first sports club in the world to list its shares. The club remained quoted until it delisted from Aim in 2012, nearly 30 years later.

Spurs were followed by several other European names: AFC Ajax listed on Euronext Amsterdam in 1998; Borussia Dortmund floated in Frankfurt in 2000; Juventus joined Borsa Italiana in 2001; and Manchester United was listed in London between 1991 and 2005 before taking a 10 per cent slice of equity to the New York Stock Exchange in 2012.

The logic for these clubs was clear enough. Public markets offered capital, visibility and a mechanism for owners to sell down holdings. Manchester United raised roughly $330mn (£251mn) in New York. Borussia Dortmund raised around €130mn (£115mn) at flotation, and Juventus raised a similar amount. Clubs discovered that equity markets could be a useful alternative to bank debt – a way to finance stadium work, refinance borrowings or expand the playing squad.

But if listing solved problems for the clubs, it has rarely offered a return for investors.

Most listed football clubs have been stubbornly poor performers. A comparative review of sports-team IPOs shows European football clubs trading well below their flotation price: Juventus roughly 50 per cent lower, Borussia Dortmund around 60 per cent down, and Olympique Lyonnais nearly 90 per cent below peak. The market has been indifferent to brand power.

Manchester United, often assumed to be the outlier, is not much different. Its all-time high closing price of $26.84 in early 2023 has since drifted back to the mid-teens. Profitability has been elusive: the club recorded its sixth consecutive annual net loss in 2025 and guided for lower revenue in 2026. The share price has routinely moved on the back of results, player injuries and competition qualification.

Academic analysis reinforces the point. Studies have found that listed clubs’ share prices exhibit unusually high volatility tied to match results, and that the expected benefits of listing – more investment, more stability, better results – frequently fail to materialise. In some cases, performance deteriorates after going public.

Football clubs depend heavily on uncertain and highly variable income streams. A single failure to qualify for a European competition can remove tens of millions from the revenue line. Relegation can halve income. Even early exits from domestic cups can have a meaningful effect.

Player wages and transfer amortisation regularly account for 60-80 per cent of revenue. Clubs operate in a global labour market in which the biggest names can dictate terms, and the competitive pressure to spend is relentless. In this environment, the shareholder becomes a marginal stakeholder, not the principal one.

Many listed clubs maintain controlling shareholders or dual-class structures. Manchester United is a prominent example, with voting control retained despite public ownership. Juventus has long been part of the wider Agnelli family Exor NV empire and have publicly said that they will not sell the club.

The combination of volatile revenue, inflexible costs and misaligned incentives leaves little room for stable cash generation or dependable shareholder returns. But it isn’t like this in every sport.

To understand how unusual this is, it is helpful to look at the United States. Major American sports leagues operate closed systems: no relegation, predictable scheduling and a tightly controlled supply of sports franchises. Salary caps limit wage inflation. Revenue-sharing pools distribute broadcast and commercial income widely. The result is a far more stable stream of income for franchise owners and a clearer path to capital appreciation. The NFL, in particular, functions as a carefully managed oligopoly and franchise values have risen accordingly.

To illustrate the point, the Green Bay Packers, one of American Football’s quirkier fan-owned teams, made operating profits of $83mn on sales of $719mn for 2025, for a respectable 11 per cent operating margin. The club also has an impressive $579mn of corporate reserves.

So given the poor outcomes for shareholders, why do football clubs persist in listing? The answer is straightforward: for clubs, public markets are a flexible source of cash and profile.

However, investors who value predictable revenues, strong governance and consistent returns should look elsewhere. Those who buy football shares should do so in full knowledge that they are purchasing an emotional asset, not a rational one.

Ideas

A transformation is underway at this IPO disappointment

Poor sentiment and an unusual structure mean this rejuvenated media stock trades at an exceptionally low discount

Valeria Martinez
Valeria Martinez

It’s easy to hide inside a conglomerate, but harder to face the market on your own. The separation of Canal+ (CAN) from French media giant Vivendi (FR:VIV) last year stripped away that protective umbrella and exposed the pay TV broadcaster’s weak points: flat profitability in France, lumpy cash generation and an unconventional governance structure. 

The company arrived on the London Stock Exchange by way of a disappointing initial public offering (IPO) nearly a year ago, weighed down by what was perceived as an overly complex portfolio and, crucially, uncertainty surrounding its acquisition of MultiChoice (ZA:MCG), Africa’s largest pay-TV provider, for R35bn (£1.6bn).

Canal+ has more than recovered from its post-listing slump in recent months, but still trades below the 290p initial offer price. Its market capitalisation of £2.2bn is also nowhere near the range of between €6bn (£5.3bn) and €8bn that City bankers and Vivendi had touted the company to reach ahead of its flotation.

Canal+ bull points

  • Very low valuation versus peers

  • 80 per cent subscription-based revenues

  • MultiChoice deal adds scale and synergies

That has left the shares trading at an enterprise value (EV) to Ebitda ratio of less than two times, an exceptionally low multiple even for a mature, low-growth media company. This may well reflect concerns about the threat of ‘cord-cutting’ facing incumbent video broadcasters, but the steep discount to other legacy media peers facing similar challenges looks unjustified.

The EV/Ebitda multiple is substantially below the peer average compiled by Deutsche Bank of 10 times and Netflix’s rating of 38 times, which the broker said suggests “meaningful undervaluation” for Canal+. Analyst Silvia Cuneo called this a “transition year” valuation, and expects the effects of its strategic initiatives to show through more clearly next year.

Canal+ management hasn’t stood still over the past year in terms of addressing investors’ main concerns. The balance sheet after the spin-off looks healthy, but UBS has repeatedly stressed that erratic cash conversion is the company’s Achilles heel. Deutsche Bank agrees that its lower cash conversion rate compared to peers may partially explain its lower multiple.

Free cash flow (FCF) is often dragged down by volatile content investment cycles, leases and working capital drag, along with interest, tax and minority dividends. Starting this year, however, bosses’ own pay depends on fixing cash flow. A remuneration committee formed after the listing has explicitly linked management incentive schemes to FCF generation.  

The company expects FCF to exceed €370mn this year, mainly due to much higher cash flow from operations from a one-off phasing of payments. Although it doesn’t expect this to structurally impact cash generation beyond 2025, it is “confident that the positive cash effects of its various other initiatives will start ramping up in 2026”.

Canal+ bear points

  • Patchy cash flow record

  • MultiChoice integration risks

  • Governance and control concerns

This included forming a French tax group, which allows Canal+ to cut cash leakage and even out tax payments. In June, it settled a long-running dispute with France’s cinema regulator over a television services tax, removing the risk of a €100mn payout, although a much larger €655mn VAT reassessment by the French tax authorities is still unresolved.

Other reforms are killing two birds with one stone, helping fix both weak cash conversion and questionable profitability in France, its core market. Rather than spending heavily to chase subscriber growth there, Canal+ is deliberately rationalising its content portfolio based on consumption data to cut costs, and lowering fixed cash commitments as a result. 

The group has dropped costly Disney+ and Ligue 1 deals, as well as its Champions League sub-licensing partnership, while a new French cinema agreement cut annual commitments from €220mn in 2024 to €150-170mn annually until 2027. It also shut down its free-to-air channel C8 and took its paid channels off terrestrial TV in France this summer.

Content costs fell 6.6 per cent year on year in the first half, but the company still managed to slightly grow its retail subscribers – who buy directly from Canal+ rather than through wholesale distributors – in France. Adjusted operating margin in its European arm rose by 30 basis points on the second half of last year, to 4.9 per cent.

A redundancy plan for 250 employees and 150 external contractors in France and improving contributions from newly acquired assets GVA and Dailymotion should also lift profitability. However, most of the cash and margin benefits of Canal+’s cost cuts and new cinema deal won’t become apparent until 2027.

These reforms have laid the groundwork for the company’s next phase. Canal+ started as a single subscription-based TV channel in France, but has evolved into a global media and entertainment group. Europe still makes up the majority group revenue, with France alone still accounting for nearly 60 per cent.

In the French market, a focus on premium content, including live sports and cinema, attracts a loyal subscriber base despite competition from global streaming giants. This resilience is helped by the Canal+ app, its content aggregation and streaming platform, and by bundling third-party streaming services such as Netflix and AppleTV+ within its packages.

Growth in Europe is expected to remain muted, with Canal+ prioritising margin and cash discipline over expansion in its mature home markets. The company’s growth strategy lies elsewhere: Asia and Africa accounts for less than a fifth of total revenue, but contributes 43 per cent of group operating profit, with a 20 per cent margin.

In Africa, Bank of America has projected continued high-single digit revenue growth underpinned by a growing population, an expanding middle class, economic growth and ongoing electrification. The MultiChoice deal, finally completed in October, will push its subscriber base to 40mn across 70 countries.

MultiChoice appeared in Canal+’s third quarter accounts only as an associate, but Bernstein has estimated the acquisition should boost the group’s revenues by roughly 40 per cent and operating profits by 70 per cent once fully consolidated. Disclosures around synergies, integration plans and financial targets will arrive in early 2026. 

Bernstein thinks those synergies will be in the range of €72mn and €166mn, with each €50mn swing moving Canal+’s valuation by about 25p per share. Savings are expected from merging streaming platforms, cutting overlapping tech and infrastructure costs and taking advantage of its combined scale to win rights and attract global advertisers.

Yet making the most of that opportunity depends on turning around MultiChoice’s sprawling business. The past year was difficult, with core headline earnings dented by sharp currency devaluations and subscriber losses driven by South Africa’s fragile economy, chronic power outages and heavy investment in its Showmax streaming platform.

Integration is likely to be complex and drawn out. MultiChoice’s FCF generation has deteriorated sharply, and UBS does not expect the deal to add to consolidated FCF before 2027. The African group is also a different animal from Canal+, running a broader consumer business that also includes broadband, mobile bundles and even insurance products.

The Canal+ corporate governance structure, with the Bolloré family holding a 31 per cent stake, is also a sticking point. Deutsche Bank noted that while the group could be a potential takeover candidate, the market is unlikely to price in a premium given the absence of takeover protection rules, and the fact that the family can block or dictate terms of any deal.

This is not a straightforward equity story. But as Bernstein analysts Christophe Cherblanc and Annick Maas – who see 50 per cent upside on conservative assumptions – put it, Canal+ is a “must-consider situation” for those investors that believe “complex situations occasionally create value dislocations”.

Growth may be modest, but roughly 80 per cent of revenue is based on subscriptions, a steadier, more recurring income stream than most peers enjoy. The business is also well diversified, with its StudioCanal production arm adding balance. In a sector still heavily reliant on advertising, that alone should warrant a second look.

Company Details Name Mkt Cap Price 52-Wk Hi/Lo
Canal+ SA (CAN) £2.24bn 227p 300p / 150p
Size/Debt NAV per share* Net Cash / Debt(-)* Net Debt / Ebitda Op Cash/ Ebitda
424p -£467mn 0.7 x 60%
Valuation Fwd PE (+12mths) Fwd DY (+12mths) FCF yld (+12mths) P/Sales
11 2.2% 10.7% 0.4
Quality/ Growth EBIT Margin ROCE 5yr Sales CAGR 5yr EPS CAGR
6.6% 7.7% - -
Forecasts/ Momentum Fwd EPS grth NTM Fwd EPS grth STM 3-mth Mom 3-mth Fwd EPS change%
71% 40% -5.5% 27.4%
Year End 31 Dec Sales (€bn) Profit before tax (€bn) EPS (c) DPS (c)
2022 6.01 326 NA NA
2023 6.22 206 NA NA
2024 6.45 218 -0.03 0.02
f’cst 2025 6.37 406 0.19 0.04
f’cst 2026 6.55 536 0.28 0.06
chg (%) +3 +32 +47 +50
source: FactSet, adjusted PTP and EPS figures converted to £. NTM = Next Twelve Months. STM = Second Twelve Months (i.e. one year from now). * Converted to £, includes intangibles of £3.0bn or 308p per share
Ideas

Banks are on a bull run – but this one remains a bargain

Despite shares rising more than 150 per cent, historical issues which could soon be fixed are weighing on potential

Christopher Akers
Christopher Akers

We will have to wait and see which policies actually make the final cut in the Budget on 26 November amid never-ending leaks and rumours. However, UK banks received welcome news earlier this month when briefings suggested they would escape higher taxes.

Given strong sector profits underpinned by higher interest rates, it is no surprise chancellor Rachel Reeves has considered taking more from an area of the market still struggling with (often justified) reputational issues, almost two decades on from the financial crash.

As a result, the shares in the likes of Lloyds (LLOY) and NatWest (NWG) – the latter the poster child of financial crisis-era calamity under its former name Royal Bank of Scotland (and which returned fully to private ownership earlier this year) – are at their highest since 2008.

Barclays (BARC), the odd one out among UK players because of its hefty investment bank, is up more than 150 per cent since a strategy update in February 2024, as chief executive CS Venkatakrishnan oversees a rebalancing of the group. Ahead of annual results in February, when new group targets will be set, and after a positive recent update, it’s a good moment to take a look at a bank which trades at a discount to peers.

Barclays bull points

  • Recently improved guidance

  • Valuation is at a discount to peers

  • New financial targets could improve sentiment

The scale of Barclays’ investment banking operations means almost 50 per cent of revenue comes from non-interest income, compared with around a quarter for its peers. At the same time, divisional returns have been weak, which has dragged down group performance. Questions around the future of the investment bank have long hung over the investment case.

The unit deals in the usual range of investment banking services, from fixed-income and equities trading to M&A advisory. Barclays’ investment bank has its roots in the 1980s, but the group’s current headache stems from the move to buy Lehman Brothers’ equities and corporate finance businesses in 2008 and the poorly judged sale of its BGI investment management business to BlackRock in 2009.

Given the investment bank’s volatile record, Venkatakrishnan is cutting its proportion of the group’s more than £350bn of risk-weighted assets (RWA), which are basically loans thought about in terms of risk. As set out last year in the group’s three-year strategy, the boss wants to get this down to 50 per cent. The figure was 58 per cent in 2023, and sat at 56 per cent in September.

A glance at Barclays’ latest trading update (covering the nine months to 30 September) highlights why the board is moving to reduce exposure to investment banking. The division generated the most income and pre-tax profit in the period (47 per cent and 54 per cent of the group’s totals, respectively), but its return on tangible equity (ROTE) was well below other divisions, except the US consumer bank.

The return earned by Barclays’ investment bank is lower than many European peers. It also weakens its overall return profile against domestic competitors – the group’s ROTE was 12.3 per cent in the first nine months of the year, compared with 19.5 per cent at NatWest. Lloyds expects its ROTE to be 14 per cent this year (excluding motor finance provisions).

Pushing capital towards other areas is part of the plan, highlighted by the £600mn acquisition of Tesco Bank last year and the recent $800mn (£609mn) deal to buy US consumer lending platform Best Egg.

The Best Egg acquisition, finalised at a high-single digit price/earnings multiple, is expected to complete in the second quarter of next year. The balance sheet risk here is minimal, as loans are mostly packaged up and sold on.

Barclays bear points

  • Weak investment banking performance

  • Higher ROTE available elsewhere

There is a possibility more material M&A could play a part in hitting management’s RWA target. Barclays was keen on acquiring TSB, but lost out to Santander this year when the Spanish lender came to a £2.65bn agreement.

Shore Capital analyst Gary Greenwood sees “organic growth in the rest of the business as the most likely driver of this [reduction of the investment bank proportion of RWAs], but would not rule out another acquisition”.

“That said, with Co-op Bank sold to Coventry, TSB sold to Santander and Virgin Money sold to Nationwide, there isn’t much to go for,” he added.

There is also potential for the investment bank to be sold off if a very generous offer came along, although this appears unlikely at this stage.

At a group-wide level, the latest update was encouraging. Barclays upgraded its annual ROTE target to “greater than 11 per cent” and stuck with its 2026 target for a figure of more than 12 per cent. Excluding litigation charges, profit before tax beat consensus by 6 per cent on a strong performance from Barclays UK (the high street lender division), while cost efficiency savings of £500mn were achieved a quarter early.

Management also brought forward distribution plans with a £500mn share buyback, and confirmed a move to quarterly buyback announcements.

After the investment bank, Barclays UK has generated the most income and profit (29 per cent and 35 per cent of the total, respectively) for the group so far this year. This division deals in personal banking, loans and credit cards. Its ROTE is the second-highest in the group after the Barclays private bank and wealth management unit.

Elsewhere, Barclays UK corporate bank offers loans and payment services to larger businesses and the US consumer bank (which has the lowest ROTE) deals in credit cards and savings accounts.

Given the rise in interest rates in recent years (banks delivered the best share price return for FTSE 350 investors in 2024), Barclays has gained from higher interest income. While rates are now on a downward trend, Barclays benefits from its structural hedging programme which protects against fluctuations in rates.

Analysts at RBC Capital Markets forecast gross structural hedge income of £6.9bn, £7.6bn and £8.1bn in the next three financial years to 2028.

On the other hand, sector risks from dubious behaviour haven’t disappeared. Barclays raised its motor finance provision to £325mn with a £235mn charge in the third quarter, on an issue which has echoes of the PPI scandal. Lloyds put through an £800mn charge for motor finance commissions remediation in its third quarter.

At the same time, bankers are pushing regulators to dial back financial crisis-era regulations around capital requirements as areas such as private credit enjoy rapid growth. That could be seen as a sensible move to improve the competitive landscape and lift profits – or an avoidable risk.

Valuation is central to the bull case for Barclays. Shares trade on around 0.9 times forward price/tangible book value. By contrast, Lloyds and NatWest both sit on a premium to book value. That Barclays’ cost of equity is higher than its return on equity means the market has some major questions about the direction of travel.

Given the buyback move and strength of underlying trading, there is potential upside to guidance for at least £10bn of capital distributions between 2024 and 2026. Yet, on the capital return front, something to bear in mind is that Barclays’ dividend yield lags peers. The forward consensus yield for 2026 is 2.5 per cent, compared to 4.6 per cent at Lloyds and 5.8 per cent at NatWest.

While there are plenty of risks to consider with Barclays, its valuation deserves a higher multiple given the moves to rebase the investment bank and the potential for increased new targets, which could spur fresh enthusiasm.

Company Details Name Mkt Cap Price 52-Wk Hi/Lo
Barclays  (BARC) £57.6bn 414p 431p / 224p
Size/Debt NAV per share Net Cash / Debt(-) Net Debt / Ebitda Op Cash/ Ebitda
434p £206bn - -
Valuation Fwd PE (+12mths) Fwd DY (+12mths) FCF yld (+12mths) P/Sales
8 2.5% - 0.7
Quality/ Growth EBIT Margin ROCE 5yr Sales CAGR 5yr EPS CAGR
- - 12.9% 20.3%
Forecasts/ Momentum Fwd EPS grth NTM Fwd EPS grth STM 3-mth Mom 3-mth Fwd EPS change%
23% 17% 10.3% 9.5%
Year End 31 Dec Sales (£bn) Profit before tax (£bn) EPS (p) DPS (p)
2022 25 7,731 30.8 7.2
2023 25.4 6,848 26.9 8.1
2024 26.5 8,130 36 8.4
f’cst 2025 28.9 9,132 43.2 9.1
f’cst 2026 30.5 10,620 53.2 10.3
chg (%) +6 +16 +23 +13
source: FactSet, adjusted PTP and EPS figures. NTM = Next Twelve Months. STM = Second Twelve Months (i.e. one year from now).
The Editor

Rachel Reeves must not ignore the Budget’s main priority

Putting industry first is vital to reinvigorating the UK economy

Rosie Carr

Bar an eventful April, a few mini storms caused by tech bubble concerns and the short depressions that occur ahead of every Nvidia results announcement, the London market has turned in a solid performance in 2025. The main index has outpaced that of New York and IPOs have returned. In recent weeks the £2bn specialist lender Shawbrook Bank and the £1bn tinned foods group Princes have helped show the market is open for business. Others are expected to follow as firms conquer their fears of moribund share prices and are encouraged by new more flexible listing rules. The past few months have provided a reminder of times when flotations were commonplace and takeovers much rarer. 

But balance hasn’t quite been restored to the equity market. Too many ordinary investors have stayed away, and too many activists and predators have pitched up. That can be seen in the reshaping of the investment trust sector through consolidation and closures (a strong theme in our investment trust special report this week) and in the high numbers of companies in other sectors that have vanished from the market.

And accessing start-up and scale-up capital remains a challenge for British companies who increasingly look to the US for those vital funds, often relocating there too. IC associate editor James Norrington wrote recently about the potentially transformational technology that is quantum computing and its promise to up-end online security, science and medicine while overcoming artificial intelligence’s (AI’s) bandwidth and energy intensity issues. If Britain is not to be left behind in these types of industries of the future, it needs to develop its own strong and thriving base of expertise. But replicating the strength we have previously had in other industries is not so easy. Take PsiQuantum, an ambitious, British-born rising star dedicated to building and deploying the world’s first utility-scale quantum computer by the end of the decade.

Despite its UK origins, the company is now firmly rooted in the US – its co-founders Dr Pete Shadbolt and Professor Jeremy O’Brien met at Bristol University, where they founded the business before relocating to Silicon Valley. Shadbolt has previously acknowledged that the UK was one of the countries that took quantum computing “really seriously 20 to 30 years ago.”

Baillie Gifford investment manager Luke Ward, who believes quantum computing will become an area of comparable interest to AI, was an early backer of the company, with Baillie Gifford taking part in PsiQuantum’s latest funding round which raised $1bn from investors.

The truth is Britain is not supportive enough of its entrepreneurs and businesses. If anything, we hamper them from reinvesting in their own success. We saddle sectors going through a boom period with windfall taxes; we plan to suck money from successful family businesses through the hoover of inheritance tax, we are bitter that the self-employed don’t pay national insurance and we object to proposals to partly link generous Isa and pension tax breaks to supporting domestic firms.

Ahead of next week’s Budget, 290 business leaders from private and public companies have pleaded with the chancellor to implement changes that will help to ensure that sufficient domestic risk capital is invested in UK companies. They would like defined contribution pensions schemes to be required to allocate 25 per cent of their default funds to British investments. Their argument is that this country has all the raw ingredients – great research, world-leading innovation, dynamic entrepreneurship and no shortage of capital – to realise the government’s growth ambitions. But too little of that vital fuel – capital – is being invested in the UK just as “growing global competition is making it increasingly necessary to do so”.

The signatories of that letter to the chancellor argue that the requested 25 per cent allocation would not be mandatory (pension savers would be free to switch out of the default option), that it would align with international competitors, could deliver around £76bn of fresh capital into the economy and as much as £95bn – according to think-tank New Financial – by 2030, and that British savers will benefit from the growth they help to create.

Were it not for runaway success of the US tech sector, business leaders would almost certainly not need to plead for this support. But intervention is needed now to prevent further hollowing out of the market and to boost innovation and entrepreneurship. 

A healthy economy is an obvious way to solve the country’s fiscal predicament. For that reason alone, Rachel Reeves should not hesitate to use every available opportunity to drive essential capital back into UK companies. 

Feature

Use trusts to protect yourself from the bubble

Investment trust discounts are continuing to narrow, and there are plenty of opportunities for eagle-eyed investors

Val Cipriani

In investing, as in other parts of life, recovery is not necessarily a linear or quick affair. It can instead happen gradually, and only after fundamental change. Over the past two years, the investment trust sector has been nursing itself back to health after the bad fall experienced between 2022 and 2023.

The patient is not back in top shape yet, but looks less pale. The sector’s weighted average discount to net asset value (NAV), excluding private equity outlier 3i Group (III) and VCTs, stood at 13.5 per cent as at 3 November. This compares with 16.2 per cent one year before and 19.3 per cent in 2023, implying that things are slowly but surely improving. However, the figure was 2.6 per cent in December 2021 – the sector still needs a huge rally to get back there.

This year’s recovery can be attributed to a mix of factors. Firstly, Global investors are tentatively looking beyond the US for returns, backing markets that have long been overlooked, including the UK and emerging markets.

Investment trusts are actively managed, and the universe comprises vehicles offering exposure to a wide range of markets and sectors, so any shift away from the concentration of US stocks is helpful. A number of investment trusts are also part of the FTSE 350, meaning improving sentiment towards UK shares, as expressed via the use of tracker funds, helps them regardless of what their underlying assets do.

Finally, corporate action across the sector has continued apace, as we discuss in more detail elsewhere in this special. Buybacks, mergers and acquisitions have left the sector leaner, more accurately reflecting demand levels from investors and leaving existing shareholders better off.

Global investors are now grappling with the question of whether US tech and AI are, in fact, in a bubble. While in many cases valuations are not completely unrealistic, they do look frothy, and calls for caution and diversification are becoming more insistent. Private investors who want to create a diversified portfolio, with varied exposure across sectors, regions and styles, can find everything they might possibly need or want in investment trusts – from aggressive growth capital plays to multi-asset portfolios focused on wealth preservation.

If investors continue to consider markets beyond the US, and corporate action in the investment trust sector maintains its momentum, discounts could well narrow further.

The table below shows how discounts have moved over the past year across the main investment trust sectors, ranked from the sector where they have narrowed the most (growth capital) to where they have in fact widened the most (European property).

Discounts narrow or widen for a range of reasons, and it isn’t always easy to tell what’s driving the change. “In an ideal world, strong underlying performance should drive increased demand for shares and narrow discounts,” says Peel Hunt’s Anthony Leatham. “However, it is not always that simple. [Yet] In certain circumstances, the asset class ‘catches a bid’ and investors flock to a region or sub-sector to capture an opportunity.” Then there are discount control mechanisms such as share buybacks, tender offers, M&A activity and intervention from activist investors, all of which have been very present across the sector over the past year.

Growth capital is where discounts have narrowed the most. A good portion of this is due to the fact that the biggest trust in the sector, Petershill Partners (PHLL), saw a big boost after announcing it would delist from the London Stock Exchange.

But other growth capital trusts have also seen appetite for their shares increase on the back of strong performance: on average, the sector has enjoyed one-year share price total returns of more than 50 per cent in the year to 10 November. The most impressive performer was Seraphim Space (SSIT); its portfolio has been making notable progress but is also very concentrated, with the biggest holding, ICEYE, now accounting for 37 per cent of the NAV. The unquoted company runs a fleet of small satellites that enable clients to monitor any location on Earth.

While discounts within growth capital remain significant, they are perhaps no longer as attractive – considering that these portfolios tend to be concentrated and racy, and that various trusts in the broader private equity sector, which tend to invest in more mature and cash generative companies instead, trade at similar share price levels relative to NAV.

Emerging markets have also rebounded, partly as a result of the Chinese market’s rally and generally strong performance across the region. Templeton Emerging Markets (TEM) stands out here, its share price having gained 45.7 per cent in the year to 10 November. The trust invests in a fairly concentrated portfolio of quality companies and has a significant exposure to tech, with TSMC (TW:2330) accounting for 15 per cent of the trust as at 31 October.

An area where it is slightly surprising to see discounts narrowing is India, considering the region is one of the very few major markets to have witnessed lukewarm performance in the past year. This narrowing was once again largely driven by corporate action, as the biggest trust in the sector, the recently renamed JPMorgan India Growth & Income (JIGI), returned capital to shareholders via a tender for 30 per cent of its shares. Meanwhile, Abrdn New India (ANII) also saw its discount narrow significantly with the help of buybacks.

Towards the opposite end of the table, renewable infrastructure energy trusts saw their discounts widen by more than 8 percentage points on average. The sector has had to contend with a range of challenges, from lower power prices to below-forecast wind generation. It is now grappling with the government’s proposal to change the way it adjusts subsidies for inflation, which could result in a big hit to NAVs.

Discounts could tighten again once we have more clarity on the changes, but if you want to go bargain hunting in this area, you will need a lot of patience. For renewable energy trusts, the complexity and illiquidity of the underlying assets has meant that asset sales and corporate activity have not been quite as successful as in other corners of the investment trust universe.

Improving share prices raise the question of whether certain sectors and trusts have started to become a little pricey. But there are still a number of trusts on chunky discounts, including in areas that have performed strongly over the past year.

Kepler analyst Josef Licsauer thinks emerging markets have more room to run, adding “if we’re all being honest, I don’t think we would have guessed during ‘liberation day’, or even at the start of this year, that emerging markets would comfortably outperform most developed markets and do so with lower volatility.”

He thinks the region is shrugging off its perceived dependence on the US. He is optimistic about China and other emerging markets, including Taiwan, South Korea and Vietnam – these areas are exposed to AI innovation but at much lower valuations than their developed counterparts, he argues.

“India, I’m less convinced,” he adds. He says the sell off “has been great for those wanting to get back into the market at more attractive valuations”, but the correction might have further to go, “particularly given everyone’s sentiment is focused on China”.

He likes Fidelity Emerging Markets (FEML), whose ability to take short positions means that it can outperform in a range of environments, and whose gearing takes advantage of the wider range of strategies available to investment trusts compared to open-ended funds.

As the chart below shows, a variety of emerging market trusts are still trading well below their NAVs.

Licsauer also points at Japan and the UK as regions with further room for growth. For Japan, he suggests CC Japan Income & Growth Trust (CCJI), for its dividend record and local expertise, at a 7.8 per cent discount to NAV as at 10 November. Various Japanese trusts still trade at a discount despite the recent rally.

In the UK, some of the recent top performers such as Temple Bar (TMPL) and Aberdeen Equity Income (AEI) have seen their discounts close almost completely. But there are still cheaper options with strong long and medium-term track records, including Merchants (MRCH), Edinburgh Investment Trust (EDIN) and Lowland (LWI), at discounts to NAV of 7.4 per cent, 7.9 per cent and 10.1 per cent, respectively.

Leatham argues that healthcare and private equity are two areas that offer fertile ground for opportunities in the investment trust universe.

“In healthcare, the long-term structural drivers have been overshadowed by the cloud of tariff and drug pricing uncertainty,” he says. “There has been a significant de-rating in healthcare and biotech stocks, in line with the three other worst-hit periods in the last 35 years. Importantly, we are seeing an inflection point in news flow and fund flows, supported by M&A.” He likes Worldwide Healthcare (WWH) for its long-term record, diversified portfolio and discount (7.4 per cent as at 10 November).

Private equity trust discounts narrowed dramatically over the course of 2024, but the improvement was a little less marked this year. The sector is still struggling to exit investments, although dealmaking activity appears to be gradually picking up. Leatham likes HarbourVest Global Private Equity (HVPE) as a core holding for a diversified exposure to private equity; the trust is still one of the cheapest in its sector at a 31.5 per cent discount to NAV as at 10 November.

Feature

The best investment trusts – chosen by professionals

Four experts give us their trust picks for growth, income, wealth preservation and diversification

Holly McKechnie

When it comes to choosing an investment trust, you need to give careful consideration to its performance, cost and the discount or premium to net asset value (NAV) on which it trades. But given the array of options on offer, it can also be helpful to supplement your own research by examining where fund buyers are putting the money they manage. 

Every year we ask a selection of professional investors for their picks across four different types of investment: growth, income, wealth preservation and diversifying assets. We also take a look at how their choices from last year have performed. 

  • Richard Curling, manager of the Jupiter Fund of Investment Trusts (GB00B6R1VR15) and the Jupiter Monthly Alternative Income Fund (GB00B4WLF922)

  • Adam Norris and Paul Green, managers of CT Global Managed Portfolio Trust (CMPG)

  • Peter Walls, manager of the Unicorn Mastertrust (GB0031218018)

  • Juliet Schooling Latter, investment director at FundCalibre

Richard Curling: Literacy Capital (BOOK) 

Literacy Capital is a small private equity company that does things rather differently. It has performed very well since listing in 2021, but NAV growth over the past year or so has been flat and the board has allowed the discount to drift out to nearly 30 per cent. However, on the bright side, this presents a possible opportunity for investors to get exposure on potentially attractive terms. The founders have a substantial stake in the company, which provides proper ‘skin in the game’. The strategy is to invest in family-owned or founder businesses generating between £1mn and £10mn earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (Ebitda), which have reached a point where they would benefit from experienced external investors to create additional value. Unlike most private equity funds, there is no performance fee on top and there is a charitable objective to give 0.5 per cent of NAV every year to charities focused on educational literacy.

Adam Norris and Paul Green: Oakley Capital Investments (OCI) 

Oakley Capital Investments is a private equity investment trust that partners and invests alongside European entrepreneurs. The trust focuses on four key sectors: business services, consumer, education and technology, with Oakley Capital often backing serial entrepreneurs who have demonstrated previous successes. In a tough ‘exit’ environment, Oakley has bucked the trend, with a recent sale achieving a 300 per cent uplift to the trust’s carrying value, demonstrating there remains a competitive dealmaking environment for desirable companies.

Peter Walls: Fidelity Emerging Markets (FEML) 

The biggest growth stories of the last 15 years have clearly emanated from the vibrant US technology sector. Just about everything else in the equity universe has disappointed in relative terms, including emerging markets. However, Fidelity Emerging Markets makes good use of the investment company structure, with significant exposure to mid and small capitalisation companies and an experienced management team that uses derivatives to enhance returns.

Juliet Schooling Latter: JPMorgan Emerging Markets (JMG)

Backed by one of the largest emerging market research teams, manager Austin Forey has delivered excellent returns on this trust for more than three decades, emphatically demonstrating that his long-term approach to stockpicking has been successful, while also being able to evolve this portfolio to meet changing trends. The focus on quality underpins that success, giving investors protection in challenging periods.

Forey essentially wants to answer two questions before buying a company: Is this a business they want to own? And, if yes, what price are they willing to pay for it?

Companies are placed into four strategic categorisations: premium, quality, standard or challenged. The majority of the trust (over 90 per cent) currently sits in the premium and quality buckets. The final portfolio holds between 50 and 80 stocks, with a typically low turnover. The managers’ long-term focus is also under-represented in markets – meaning the team is happy to wait for performance in certain stocks.

Richard Curling: Greencoat UK Wind (UKW) 

Greencoat UK Wind is the largest listed renewable infrastructure fund on the UK market. It operates 49 wind farms and aims to increase dividends in line with inflation while preserving capital value. It has built an enviable record of achieving this over the 12 years since IPO. Renewable energy stocks have had a rough time recently, with unusually low wind speeds over the summer combined with lower forecast electricity prices in the long term adversely impacting NAV calculations and sentiment. Being currently out of favour, Greencoat UK Wind now trades at a 25 per cent discount to NAV and gives investors a dividend yield of over 9 per cent, which should continue to grow in line with inflation.

Adam Norris and Paul Green: TwentyFour Income Fund (TFIF)

TwentyFour Income Fund invests in floating-rate credit bonds, backed by mortgage and corporate loans across the UK and Europe. The trust’s 9.5 per cent dividend yield is not only a strong underpinning for total return, but also adds diversification to a portfolio through achieving income with limited interest rate sensitivity. This is in contrast to many high-yielding investment trust sectors which have proved correlated to interest rate changes, such as infrastructure, property and renewable energy generation.

While The Big Short is a great watch (particularly if you are feeling bearish), much has changed since the global financial crisis. The film highlights how a similar asset class brought the financial system to the brink of collapse in 2008, but investors are now afforded significantly more security and protections on their investments. The TwentyFour ABS team has a strong long term record and manages around £8bn of client assets in this area.

Peter Walls: CT Private Equity Trust (CTPE) 

Over the past couple of years, there has been an increase in the number of trusts paying dividends based on the prior year’s NAV. While such policies are not to everyone’s liking, they do open the door to investors seeking a relatively high and regular dividend from investments that are more capital growth-orientated. So, if you’re looking for exposure to private equity but still want a decent dividend, check out the long-term performance, since its launch 25 years ago, of CT Private Equity. The shares trade at a discount to NAV of around 30 per cent and yield 5.9 per cent. 

Juliet Schooling Latter: Schroder Income Growth (SCF)

This is a core UK offering which invests in 35-55 stocks on a bottom-up basis, with no specific style bias. Having managed the portfolio since 2011, Schroder head of UK equities, Sue Noffke, invests in UK companies of various sizes, with the combination creating a portfolio of high-yielding companies, together with lower-yielding businesses, with a greater focus on future growth. 

Noffke currently has a strong position in UK mid-caps, which she says are on a greater discount than their larger peers in the FTSE 100, giving them greater scope for growth. The trust has a three-decade record of growing its dividend each year, as recognised by the Association of Investment Companies (AIC) award of dividend hero status.

Richard Curling: RIT Capital Partners (RCP) 

RIT Capital Partners’ stated objective is to deliver long-term capital growth, while preserving shareholders’ capital. Performance over the past few years has been disappointing and investors have been wary of the high exposure to private equity. This has led to the discount widening out to the current 28 per cent, its widest level since the mid-1990s. There has been an extensive refresh of the managers, which seems to be gaining traction, and performance has been improving. The strategy remains to grow clients’ wealth meaningfully over the long term by investing in a well-balanced portfolio across the three main pillars of quoted equities, private investments and uncorrelated strategies. This looks like a classic mean reversion opportunity: a chance to pick up a quality trust at a wide discount, with the possible opportunity to make additional gains if the discount narrows.

Adam Norris and Paul Green: STS Global Income & Growth (STS) 

STS Global Growth & Income may not be the obvious selection for ‘wealth preservation’. However, the managers, James Harries and Tomasz Boniek, do aim for exactly that within equities: preserving and growing real wealth over the long term. Their style of investing in quality dividend payers has been somewhat of favour, with ‘defensive’ sectors trading at their largest PE discount to the S&P 500 for 25 years.

In addition, the trust runs a zero-discount policy, meaning investors are regularly able to buy and sell shares around NAV, which should cushion investors compared with other trusts whose discounts may widen in periods of market downturn. 

Peter Walls: 3i Infrastructure (3IN) 

It is difficult not to be impressed by the progression of the NAV and dividend growth that has been delivered by 3i Infrastructure. The trust invests in resilient infrastructure businesses that have good downside protection as well as growth prospects. The managers take controlling stakes that allow them to drive value-creation strategies and then recycle that capital to deliver strong returns to shareholders.  

Juliet Schooling Latter: City Of London Investment Trust (CTY)

Having grown its dividend each year for almost six decades, City of London Investment Trust aims to provide growth in income and capital by investing predominantly in larger UK companies with international exposure. It is a conservative portfolio of 80-90 holdings, with a diversified spread of sector positions and not overly concentrated stock weightings. The trust has been managed by Job Curtis since 1991 and has an excellent long-term record.

Curtis focuses on companies that can pay and increase their dividends over time. He pays close attention to valuations and is careful not to overpay when he initiates positions. Curtis also looks to provide shareholders with dividends between 10 per cent and 30 per cent higher than the average for the UK equity market. Dividends are distributed quarterly.

Richard Curling: Cordiant Digital Infrastructure (CORD) 

Cordiant Digital Infrastructure provides a diversified exposure to the core infrastructure for the digital economy and AI. This is the fastest growing area of infrastructure and consists of data centres, fibre-optic networks and communication towers. These are highly cash-generative assets, with long-term inflation linked contracts to blue-chip customers. The company follows a strategy of buy, build, grow and has delivered on all of its objectives since IPO in 2021, exceeding the target of generating total returns of over 9 per cent per annum. The manager Steve Marshall has been consistently buying shares and has significant ‘skin in the game’, owning nearly 14mn shares. The trust currently trades at close to a 30 per cent discount to NAV, which represents excellent value. 

Adam Norris and Paul Green: 3i Infrastructure (3IN) 

3i Infrastructure’s record is exceptional, with a 12.5 per cent annualised shareholder return since its refocused strategy in 2015. Its ‘private equity owner’ approach to infrastructure investing provides the manager with significant influence over portfolio companies, many of which enjoy highly contracted cash flows supporting predictable returns for investors. 3IN’s jewel in the crown is TCR, the largest independent lessor of airport ground support equipment, operating in 230 airports across more 20 countries. TCR is now rumoured to be up for sale, which has the potential to be beneficial of NAV performance, if an uplift versus carrying value can be achieved.

Peter Walls: BlackRock Frontiers Investment Trust (BRFI) 

Given the prevailing concentration and stretched valuation of the US stock market, there are good reasons to seek greater diversification, so long as it doesn’t lead to ‘diworsification’. Distancing oneself from the so-called Magnificent Seven could be achieved through a modest allocation to BlackRock Frontiers Investment Trust. As the name suggests, developed markets are excluded, as are the larger emerging markets of Brazil, China, India, Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa and Taiwan. It’s no laggard, having produced share price and NAV total returns of 114 per cent and 122 per cent respectively over the past five years, more than two and a half times the average emerging markets trust return.  

Juliet Schooling Latter: TR Property Investment Trust (TRY) 

TR Property Trust invests in the shares of real-estate companies of all sizes, typically within Europe and the UK. It will also have a small amount invested in physical property in the UK. Its managers look for well-run businesses in sectors including retail, office, residential, industrial property and alternatives (which includes student accommodation, self-storage and healthcare). A key benefit of the trust is the ability to shift quickly between assets in uncertain times.

The trust has consistently outperformed and remains on an attractive discount (-9.2 per cent). It may well be moving into a positive period having seen rates peak and M&A activity pick-up. There remain plenty of attractive opportunities to tap into both from an income and total return perspective, and the team has shown historically they are more than capable of finding them.

Last year’s top performer in share price terms was space exploration trust Seraphim Space (SSIT). Migo Opportunities Trust’s (MIGO) co-manager Charlotte Cuthbertson selected it on the basis that the trust’s portfolio was “deeply embedded in rapidly maturing industries such as defence”. 

This approach has paid off, with increased defence spending over the past 12 months has helped drive the portfolio’s returns. “The past year has marked a profound inflection point for the portfolio, shaped by the tectonic shifts in global geopolitics and the accelerating rearmament of Europe in the wake of the waning ‘Pax Americana’,” Mark Boggett, the trust’s CEO, says. 

The knock-on effect of this has been to catalyse a “new era of profitability” for some of the trust’s key portfolio holdings, such as unlisted satellite companies ICEYE and HawkEye 360, with both “now delivering consistent quarter-on-quarter profits, reflecting both operational maturity and strategic relevance,” Boggett argues. 

The three next best performers were Chrysalis Investments (CHRY), Fidelity Special Values (FSV) and HarbourVest Global Private Equity (HVPE), all of which saw their shares rise by more than 30 per cent during the period. 

Growth capital fund Chrysalis has profited from the strong performance of two of its largest holdings: Klarna (US: KLAR) and Starling. Buy now, pay later service provider Klarna went public in September of this year, while fintech Starling has launched a suite of new product offerings. HarbourVest Global Private Equity also benefited from the Klarna IPO; several of its other portfolio companies have also gone public over the past 12 months, including Figma (US: FIG) and Verisure (SE: VSURE). Meanwhile, Fidelity Special Values (FSV) is reaping the rewards of a “renaissance” in UK equities in the face of growing global economic uncertainty, according to its portfolio manager Alex Wright. 

However, two trusts, Greencoat UK Wind (UKW) and Life Settlement Assets (LSAA), saw their share price drop over the past year. 

Renewable infrastructure trusts in general have gone through a turbulent period, as low wind speeds have led to lower than anticipated levels of power generation. Greencoat UK Wind was no exception. Over the first half of the year, the trust generated 2,581 gigawatt hours (GWh), which was 14 per cent below budget. Generation improved in Q3 but was still 5 per cent below anticipated levels. 

Meanwhile, Life Settlement Assets, which holds a portfolio of US life insurance policies, is bracing for reduced cash inflows over the coming years. The trust has made a strategic decision to move its portfolio from predominantly non-HIV policies to an entirely HIV based portfolio, according to chair Michael Baines.