Baillie Gifford [discussion] 📃


Baillie Gifford logo.svg

A thread dedicated to Baillie Gifford.

Baillie Gifford is an investment management firm that is wholly owned by partners, all of whom work within the firm.

Founded in 1908, 112 years ago.
Headquarters Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

6 Likes

@phixion I just saw the S&P vs NASDAQ vs SMT/BG USA charts you shared. The more I read about Baillie Gifford the more it makes sense to throw money at them.

4 Likes

This is my new exclusive BG Pie: https://trading212.com/pies/l7AEABFEhiIMD1Jgw82DWV9aJxvp

2 Likes

And Bitcoin :sweat_smile:

I chose the same funds as well as Edinburgh worldwide growth. Great picks :nerd_face:

1 Like

I’m unsure as to whether it’s worth holding both SMT and USA.

It turns out there’s currently 20 duplicates. SMT has ~92 holdings where USA has ~61 holdings.

Bear in mind it’s hard to get an exact figure as the funds hold a number of the same stock at varying weights, so this is just a rough number.

I may choose to focus on one rather than spread my investment over both of them.

USA & PHI have no overlap from what I can tell.
SMT & PHI have 4 shared holdings: Alibaba, KE Holdings, Meituan Dianping and Tencent.
SMT holds NIO, PHI holds Xpeng, so if you are bullish on Chinese EV SMT/PHI are a good mix.

I would like to see BGCG holdings to compare those.

What does everyone think between bgcg and phi?

I really wouldn’t let duplication prevent me from investing in one of them - I’d focus on performance.

I get what you’re saying, if one is down, with that kind of duplication they’ll both be down, but the stats speak for themselves: SMT is a winner and although I’m not sure why USA has such poor historic performance, the recent figures suggests that its turnaround in fortunes might be because it created that overlap in holdings.

Still… splitting your holdings across both or lumping more allocation into just one of them… difference is likely to be marginal.

@Joey_Fantana, which past performance? :thinking:

@phixion I’m thinking of adding PHI to the mix and allocating 10+10 with BGCG.

1 Like

There you go and I think that correlates to @phixion’s analysis sheet as well. They almost hedge each other.

The real pinch point comes when we do hit that rotation into value when the vaccine actually hits in a few months, but these are actively-managed Trusts, so I would trust the team to either A) have the confidence in their overlapping companies to ride through or bounce back, or B) adjust the holdings accordingly.

But these are growth Trusts, so they won’t be rotating into value with the market.

1 Like

SMT;

1 Like

BGCG;

unless i’m missing something fundamental here, don’t all baillie gifford funds and trusts only release data monthly (unlike ARK)? essentially what i’m trying to say is sin’t all your data at least 1.5-2 months behind?

Do Ark release their performance figures daily? Or is that just their trades?

i believe just trades but i’m sure you can work out performance figures easily with the daily price info. or i use tradingview’s stock screener to do literally the same thing

Ach I don’t think daily performance is going to be helpful. Quick way to high blood pressure! :wink:

Same way an IFA would tell you not to look at your SIPP holdings more than once a year - need to let your investment go to work.

Perhaps @Dougal1984 can provide some information (not advice) in what the internal regulations are around this. Obviously when one of the ITs invest in a new company this is documented internally but the public only sees the change in holdings as at month end when the Factsheet etc. are updated.

Are there internal regs that prevent BG from sharing the information prior to month end do you know? Or are new trades as transparent (perhaps upon request) as Ark’s ETFs?

Thanks

Good regular outputs from BG;

I have the following portfolio

Scottish Mortgage - 20%
Manchester & London - 20%
Monks - 20%
Edinburgh Worldwide - 15%
Baillie Gifford China Growth - 15%
Baillie Gifford European Growth - 10%

Prob is I bought in on BGCG on Mon as it has risen significantly and continually over the past fortnight and now I’m down 15%

Can anyone tell me what a good price point is to top up SMT and EWI?

ISA is with HL at the moment, waiting for T212 to allow in specie transfer, but doesn’t seem on the horizon

especially agree with the blood pressure remark, ha!

i don’t think there would be regulations preventing dissemination of info, if anything they’d give them a minimum time period of making that info public.

ARK funds - you can work out trades easily from the daily csvs so you can literally mirror the fund but BG makes sure you’re at least 1.5-2 months behind them. i’d do that too if i wanted to maintain a competitive advantage to be fair.

and like you mention, i’m letting my BP go high while i’m young, only to deduce a method of monitoring my funds actively, so that i can rest when i’m older knowing i have a strategy with an acceptable level of risk :stuck_out_tongue:

If this is a long term investment, in which you will invest regularly, what does the price point matter? You’ll cost average along the way.

If you really want to find a decent entrypoint, I’d suggest the T212 YouTube channel as they have videos designed to educate on exactly this sort of thing. All the technicals. Really good watches.

1 Like

Think about it this way - when you invest a fund, investment trust or whatever, you are paying other people to manage your money against a set of objectives.

Every time the ‘management’ bought or sold securities in the portfolio they manage on your behalf, if they openly advertised these trades, what would be the point of investing in the fund - you could simply just wait and copy their trade instructions, and not pay their fees?

Normally funds holdings are released at up to a 1-6 month lag.

You shouldn’t make any investment decisions imo based on past performance. Make it on a set of your own principles. These could be, but not limited to - what are you looking to get out of your investment, what types of assets are you happy to invest in, what is an acceptable risk level for yourself?

1 Like