Despite dire predictions to the contrary, Britain’s economy held up very well in the second half of last year in the aftermath of the vote to leave the EU. With the 0.6% rise in gross domestic product in the fourth quarter reported by the Office for National Statistics, the performance exceeded the expectation of 0.5%. And, while last year’s growth rate was the weakest for three years, it was the strongest in the G7 and far better than the overwhelming majority of economists expected in the immediate aftermath of the referendum. The figures are a vindication for those who said that, while the medium and long-term consequences of Brexit would be significant, the impact on growth in 2016 would be negligible.
In the final quarter of 2016, and indeed in the second half of the year, buoyant consumer demand led to strong growth in the dominant service sector of the economy. That the service sector is dominant — its output in the final quarter was 1.8% up on the April-June quarter — was a good thing. Had we relied on manufacturing, overall industrial production, construction or agriculture, the economy would be in the doldrums; all ended 2016 with lower output than in the second quarter.
Consumers have started 2017 with renewed confidence in their personal financial situation but remain concerned about the wider economy, despite record high employment and the UK economy growing faster than any other G7 nation in 2016. The GfK consumer confidence index rose two points in January to reach a balance of -5, having plunged to -12 in July after the Brexit vote. The index was pushed up by confidence in personal finances, with expectations for the year ahead in this area rising three points from a balance of zero in December. Yet people remain deeply pessimistic about the general economic situation over the next 12 months, with no change this month from a balance of -23 in December.
A quarter of Britons expect to be better off in 2017 than last year, despite rising inflation and fears of a “hard” Brexit, according to PwC. Its consumer survey suggests that positive sentiment is marginally up on last year, when only 21 per cent of those polled expected to be better off. However, 26 per cent of those polled said that they expected conditions to worsen over the next 12 months.
Factories have also started 2017 on the front foot, with total orders climbing to their highest level in nearly two years and optimism about future prospects surging well above average. The CBI industrial trends survey found that a balance of 5 per cent of companies had a rise in orders in January, the best reading in 23 months. Manufacturers added that they were investing and hiring as optimism levels in the quarter to January hit 15 per cent, a two-year high and much better than the survey average of -7 per cent. The weak pound since the UK’s vote to leave the EU was partly behind the strong showing, but domestic orders were also solid. The quarterly balance for new orders from UK clients was 16 per cent, the highest reading since July 2014.
The manufacturing industry is at its most optimistic in almost two years as business confidence picks up across the economy, according to recent surveys. A monthly business trends report from BDO, the accounting firm, and a quarterly business confidence monitor from the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (‘ICAEW’) both show companies becoming more upbeat about their prospects. The surveys add to evidence that the UK is weathering the after-effects of the EU referendum and the election of President Trump better than expected.
What else do we know? Employment growth has flattened in recent months and inflation is on the up. The Resolution Foundation think tank says the recent mini-boom in living standards has ground to a halt because of rising inflation. But household borrowing, currently rising very strongly, could limit the spending slowdown. We will not know for some time. Similarly, the extent to which businesses will reduce investment and recruitment, or maintain them, depends on whether they are reassured or concerned by the prime minister’s greater clarity on her Brexit plans. Article 50, and the invoking of it, has been seen as a significant moment for business. We will soon know whether it is.
Meanwhile, official figures have confirmed that Britain grew at the fastest pace of all G7 leading nations last year and the economy did not skip a beat after the Brexit vote. The gross domestic product (GDP) expanded by 0.6 per cent in the final three months of 2016, the same rate of growth as in the previous two quarters, in stark contrast to the Treasury’s warning before the referendum that the country would slip into recession if it voted to leave the EU. Over the year as a whole, Britain grew by 2 per cent, down from 2.2 per cent in 2015 but better than estimates for growth in the rest of the G7, including the US. Britain has now topped the world’s leading economies for two of the past three years.
In terms of the UK’s future prospects, a leading forecaster has predicted that the economy will grow at a faster rate than that of the eurozone and will be beaten only by the United States out of the G7 nations this year, 18 months after the vote to leave the European Union. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research has revised up its UK growth expectation for 2017 thanks to the resilience of the economy since the Brexit vote. The think tank, whose analysis is closely monitored by the Treasury and the Bank of England, said that the economy would grow by 1.7 per cent this year because of the “carry-over” of its encouraging performance in 2016. The figure is 0.3 percentage points higher than the institute’s estimate in October and 0.7 percentage points higher than in August. The institute also said that growth would rise to 1.9 per cent in 2018.
Unsurprisingly, City economists are performing a collective U-turn on the impact of Brexit, echoing the Bank of England’s sharp revision to its growth forecast. The latest survey from Consensus Economics shows the average forecast for 2017 growth is now above 1.4%, from a low of 0.6% in August, as the resilience of consumers continues to confound analysts in the Square Mile. City economists are still gloomier than the Bank, which on Thursday pencilled in growth of 2% this year. Yet several large upgrades are now expected after the hefty revision announced by Mark Carney, the Bank Governor, last week. UBS and Credit Suisse on Friday raised their 2017 predictions to 1.4% and 1.3% respectively. Credit Suisse, one of a number of investment banks to predict a recession, had pencilled in a 1% contraction in the aftermath of June’s Brexit vote.
Similarly, the European Commission has been forced to admit that projections for a rapid slowdown in the British economy after the Brexit vote were wide of the mark. Officials in Brussels said yesterday that the economy would grow by 1.5 per cent this year as they tore up their November forecast for a growth rate of only 1 per cent, saying the UK had yet to experience the slowdown originally expected. As well as upgrading growth forecasts, the economists said that Britain performed better last year than they had thought, growing at 2 per cent rather than a projected 1.9 per cent. “The impact of the vote . . . on growth has yet to be felt,” said the EC, which kept its forecast for growth of 1.2 per cent next year unchanged. It added: “Given the lag between decisions to invest and actual investment, the impact of the result of the EU referendum is expected to become apparent later in 2017.” However, it said that Britain’s growth remained “unbalanced” and warned that the economy was too skewed towards domestic demand. It added that as local demand dropped over the year, export growth, helped by the fall in the value of the pound, would offset some of the fall.
“The increase in domestic demand reflects strength in private consumption and a modest rise in business investment. Private consumption has been supported by a reduction in saving,”
Meanwhile, according to pro-Brexit economists, Britain could record a 4 per cent bounce in GDP if it stripped away tariffs on imports after leaving the European Union. In a paper published earlier this month, the group, led by Patrick Minford, a former adviser to Margaret Thatcher, said that abolishing all trade barriers would strengthen the economy and make it more competitive.
A free trade deal with the United States would not come close to making up for the loss of the single market even if combined with agreements with the EU and other big economies, a study says. The volume of goods and services would be £197 billion lower in the long-term outside the EU, a report says. That is on the optimistic assumption that the government could sign agreements with the EU, the US, growth economies including China and Russia, as well as Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Monique Ebell, author of the study for the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, said her research gave an even starker view of Britain’s post-Brexit prospects than the Treasury’s pre-referendum forecast that painted a rosy picture of how the services sector would fare outside the EU. The study predicts that exports and imports with Europe would fall by 22 per cent, or 30 per cent with a “hard Brexit”. A free trade agreement with the Brics nations — Brazil, Russia, India, Indonesia, Russia and South Africa — would add 2.2 per cent to trade, while a deal with the “Anglo-American” economies of the US, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa would add 2.6 per cent.
Consumer prices in the United Kingdom rose by 1.8 percent in the year to January 2017, following an 1.6 percent gain in the previous month but below market expectations of 1.9 percent increase. Still, it was the highest inflation rate since June 2014, mainly boosted by rising cost of fuel.
Monthly inflation rate figures for the United Kingdom are reported by the Office for National Statistics .
Main upward pressure came from: Transportation (5.7 percent from 3.7 percent in December) boosted by motor fuels (16.8 percent from 10 percent); recreation and culture (0.9 percent, the same as in December); restaurants and hotels (3 percent from 2.8 percent); housing and utilities (0.6 percent from 0.4 percent); and miscellaneous goods and services (0.8 percent from 1 percent).
By contrast, prices of food and non-alcoholic beverages fell 0.5 percent, the smallest drop since July 2014, following a 1.1 percent decline in December.
On a monthly basis, consumer prices went down 0.5 percent after rising by 0.5 percent in December and in line with market consensus. Prices fell sharply for: Clothing and footwear (-4.2 percent); furniture, household equipment and maintenance (-2.5 percent); recreation and culture (-0.7 percent); and transport (-0.6 percent).
The core index which excludes prices of energy, food, alcohol and tobacco increased by 1.6 percent on the year, the same as in December and below market consensus of 1.8 percent gain.
Consumers should brace themselves for a sharp rise in the price of everyday goods in the coming weeks as retailers’ hedging contracts against a fall in the pound come to an end, analysts warn. About 75 per cent of the currency hedges put in place by retailers and wholesalers, which offer short-term insurance against swings in sterling, had expired by the end of last year, according to World First, the foreign exchange company.
With growing inflation, the Bank of England could start the process of “normalising” interest rates this year. The economy has been notably stronger than it expected when it made its emergency post-referendum cut in Bank rate to 0.25% in August. Since then, it has revised up its 2017 growth forecast more than once and has also been forced to reverse its forecast that unemployment would rise after the Brexit vote, cutting its estimate for the number of jobless. The upward revision, and the prospect of sustained above-target inflation, could provide the Bank with an excuse to reverse last August’s rate cut. Will it do so? Well the Bank’s monetary policy committee (MPC) should hopefully recognise that the economy is not suffering from demand-pull inflation caused by over-exuberant consumer spending; it is cost-push inflation, caused by higher oil prices, increasing energy costs, rail fares, Council Tax bills and higher import costs generally due to the fall in the value of sterling. Consumers aren't pulling up prices through increased demand for petrol, electricity, train seats or Council services. Increasing interest rates would only compound consumer misery by reducing even further disposable income - it would have no impact on the price inflationary policies of greedy energy companies, rail companies, local Councils or OPEC. Also, an early rate rise would be interpreted by critics of the Bank governor Mark Carney as an admission that last August’s decision was a mistake. So it would be sensible not to expect a rate hike for a while yet, or a sustained productivity revival.
Companies listed on the London stock market paid out record dividends of £16.6 billion in the last three months of 2016, buoyed by the weak pound, figures show. According to Capita Asset Services’ UK dividend monitor, the amount paid out was 11.7 per cent more than in the same period a year earlier and a fourth-quarter record. The £16.6 billion collected by shareholders took total dividends for the year to £84.7 billion, up 6.6 per cent on 2015, although Capita said that the growth had not been driven by regular dividends. Of the £5.2 billion increase last year, £4.8 billion was due to the pound’s weakness as sterling’s fall lifted the 40 per cent of UK dividends paid in dollars and Euros. There was also an increase in special dividends to £6.1 billion, more than double the amount paid out in the previous year. Excluding special dividends, underlying dividends grew by 2.6 per cent for the full year. Without the exchange rate gains, they would have fallen by 3.7 per cent.
Job growth in Europe has hit a nine-year high, with the unemployment rate falling below 10% for the first time in seven years. A series of business surveys published this month suggests the eurozone as a whole is growing at its fastest rate since 2011. Spain is leading the way, notching up growth of 3.2% last year. Terrorist attacks across north Africa have diverted Europe’s tourists back to the Costas; a record 75m foreign visitors went to Spain last year, according to UN figures released last month.
Although France and Italy posted relatively sluggish growth of 1.1% and 0.9% respectively, the German powerhouse continued to chart a respectable 1.9%. Inflation has even returned to the eurozone, hitting 1.8% in January. That’s a mixed blessing, of course, although a sign of relative normality for a region that was threatening to slip into a deflationary spiral only a year ago.
A booming Europe is good news for Britain, due to our extensive trade links — and, of course, the economic rent the City of London extracts from the Continent as its financial centre. Should a German company decide to buy a Spanish one in the next few months, to cash in on the country’s improving prospects, there’s a good chance part of that deal will be handled in London. This is what irritates our European neighbours most about the City.
The eurozone’s trade surplus rose to a record high in 2016 with exports rising towards the end of the year when the euro fell against the dollar. Exports exceeded imports by €273.9 billion, up from €238.7 billion in 2015, according to Eurostat, the statistics agency. The trade surplus widened in December to €28.1 billion from €24.4 billion in 2015. The trend continued last month despite expectations of a decline. Businesses exported €24.5 billion more goods and services than they imported in January — €2.5 billion more than the previous month. There are worries that a weaker pound could make it harder to sell to the British market from the eurozone and there are anxieties about US trade policies under President Trump. Peter Navarro, head of Mr Trump’s National Trade Council, has said that German exporters are at an advantage because of the weak euro.
Inflation soared to a five-year high in the United States last month, far more than economists expected, boosting the chance that the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates next month. Prices rose by 0.6 per cent in January compared with December, double the expected gain. This pushed headline inflation to 2.5 per cent on an annual basis, from 2.1 per cent in December. This is above the US central bank’s 2 per cent threshold. The futures market put the chance of a rate rise at the Fed’s March policymaking meeting at about 40 per cent after the publication of the report. Before its release, the probability was about 27 per cent.
A jobs boom that began under President Obama continued apace during the handover to Donald Trump last month, with American employers hiring considerably more staff that expected. Private employers outside of farms added 227,000 jobs to their payrolls in January, a substantial improvement on the 157,000 gain the month before. This was the best non-farm payrolls figure since June and marked a 76th straight month of gains, continuing the best stretch since 1939. The figures indicate that the American labour market is at or close to full capacity, one of the triggers for the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates. Since the presidential election, American businesses, particularly small ones, have indicated that they intend to increase hiring rapidly.
A further sign of strength in the US labour market came with figures that showed an unexpected drop in the number of Americans who claimed unemployment benefits for the first time. The fall in initial jobless claims to 246,000 from 260,000 meant that the figure was below the 300,000 threshold for 100 consecutive weeks, the best run since 1970, when the labour market was far smaller. Economists say that a figure below 300,000 indicates health in the labour market. The fall also ensured that the four-week average held below 250,000 for three consecutive weeks for the first time on record.
A headlong flight to safe havens has pushed the demand for gold to a four-year high, even as buyers of bars, coins and jewellery flee the market. Jewellery demand fell to a seven-year low, while net purchases by central banks were at their lowest since 2010, although 2016 was the seventh year in a row that central banks bought more gold than they sold.
A flow of money into exchange-traded funds that mirror the price of gold added 660 tonnes to demand last year. This more than offset the lowest demand in years among jewellers, central banks and investors in physical bullion, according to figures published recently by the World Gold Council.
The graphics illustrate that the surge in investment in gold-backed exchange-traded funds offset lower jewellery sales last year, to lift overall gold demand by 2 per cent to 4,309 tonnes, its highest since 2013.
Prices rose by 8 per cent during the course of the year, despite a sharp fall after the election of Donald Trump in November, which sparked a rally in the dollar and in US stock markets.
The council, which represents gold miners, said that the main factors behind investors’ moving into gold were negative interest rates and bond yields, the gradual postponements in expectations of a US interest rate rise and global political uncertainty.
Demand in India slumped after the country’s shock demonetisation policy, which removed 500 rupee and 1,000 rupee notes from circulation. There was an initial spike in demand as customers sought to convert their cash into another store of value, but it then plummeted amid the cash drought. Indian demand was down 21 per cent for the year, while in China it fell by 15 per cent. In the past, investors in China and India have proven to be highly sensitive to price rises.
The reaction to the election of President Trump has been similarly inconsistent. At first, gold fell as stock markets reacted warmly to the promise of booming infrastructure spending. However, it has begun to climb in response to heightened political and economic uncertainty since he has taken office.
Donald Trump’s presidency began with a series of hard-hitting measures, causing uncertainty for investors who fear their portfolio could bear the brunt of some major economic upheaval. One of Mr Trump’s first acts was to scrap the world’s largest free-trade deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership. He will also pull out of trade deals with China, Canada and Mexico, and has threatened home-grown companies with a “heavy border tax” if they refuse to bring manufacturing back to the US.
Investors are scaling back the initial optimism that emerged shortly after the US election. Consequently, some investors have moved money into gold, which has a reputation for providing safety during turbulent times. Gold bullion jumped to $1,219 a troy ounce, more than 10 per cent higher than it was a year ago. There are reports that wealthy people are topping up gold in their portfolios as a hedge against potential falls in stock markets. Gold pays no dividends, has no practical use, and is almost solely valued as a store of wealth — an insurance policy for bad times.
US stock indices, however, including the technology-focused Nasdaq; the Dow Jones, which lists the titans of American business; and the S&P 500 index have climbed to record highs since Mr Trump became president, partly because of hopes that his plans will boost construction, materials and energy companies and partly because of the good results this week posted by US companies.
Gold prices fell too. But not all investors believe that Mr Trump’s plans will be good news. They are “unlikely to produce the sustained growth that he claims he will provide”, says Ben Inker, the head of asset allocation at GMO, a fund manager. “If we do achieve the growth Trump is calling for, it is not obvious that it will be the boon to the stock market that investors think.”Gold could be the biggest beneficiary of any economic uncertainty. “We think investors are scaling back the optimism that emerged shortly after the US elections,” says Joni Teves, a precious metals strategist at UBS, a wealth manager. “There are signs that sentiment is warming to gold, but given the lack of clarity across other parts of financial markets, most investors are holding off from investing heavily,” she says. “We think this is warranted and see room for gold to extend upwards as markets digest uncertainty around US fiscal policy.
”It is not only uncertainty that has pushed up the price of the metal. Mr Trump also advocates policies that tend to create inflation.
“When inflation strikes, real or physical assets are often the first port of call for investors, because they tend to rise in line with prices. Physical assets such as gold, diamonds, property, land, wine and art have been positively correlated with inflation, while large-cap stocks and government bonds have been negatively correlated,” says Tom Stevenson, the investment director at Fidelity International, a fund manager.
“The price of gold may benefit now and again from the uncertainty generated by Mr Trump and Brexit, but we still think it is likely to end the year lower than it is now,” says Simona Gambarini, a commodities economist at Capital Economics, a research consultancy. The World Bank predicts that gold bullion will fall by 8 per cent this year, and Ms Gambarini forecasts prices will be about $1,050 down before the year is out. She cites a stronger dollar and potential interest rate rises that will make gold seem relatively less attractive as an investment. Demand from global governments and Indian and Chinese consumers is also likely to be subdued this year.
Claims that house price growth was easing because of a post-Brexit slowdown were thrown into doubt after official figures revealed an acceleration at the end of last year. The average price of a home rose by 7.2 per cent to £220,000 in the year to December, £15,000 more than in the same month the previous year and £3,000 more than in November, the Office for National Statistics said. December’s figure was up from a 6.1 per cent rise in November and October and marked the first acceleration in house price growth since June when prices were affected by the referendum vote and changes to stamp duty. Housing experts had said that price growth was beginning to slow on the back of economic uncertainty around the Brexit vote but the robust performance of the UK economy, low interest rates and a shortage of housing stock appears to have helped speed up price growth in December.
The long-anticipated white paper, Fixing our broken housing market, was published this month. The white paper was generally received with disappointment by the property sector, although there were some points of interest for those who want to buy or rent.
The Treasury announced earlier this month that anyone planning for retirement can withdraw up to £1,500 from their pension pots tax-free to pay for financial advice. The Pension Advice Allowance rules, which come into effect from April, mean people of any age can withdraw £500 a year to put towards the cost of retirement planning. You can do this a maximum of three times, to allow you to seek advice at different stages in your life. The money can be redeemed against any regulated financial advice and is available to holders of defined contribution or hybrid schemes, although not for those with defined benefit or final salary schemes. The Treasury, which first raised plans for the allowance in the autumn statement, cited research that showed people who took financial advice saved £98 more a month into their pensions.
Research shows that £8.6 billion of savers’ cash is languishing in poorperforming investment funds. The Spot the Dog report from Bestinvest, an online investment service, found 41 investment funds that can be classed as “dog funds” — those that have not only failed to beat their own benchmark for three consecutive years, but also fell short by 5 per cent or more during that time. For an investor, this poor performance by fund managers is compounded by the impact of fees and charges, which managers take regardless of whether they do well or not, is corroding returns.
“Fund companies and financial advisers are always talking about the top funds and what is attractive, but rarely do they mention the funds that have not worked out,” says Jason Hollands, the managing director of Bestinvest. “A lot of money is invested in poorly performing funds, whether through people’s inertia, or them not being aware of how a fund is doing.
”The biggest investment fund on the list is the Schroder UK Mid 250, which holds £1.16 billion of savers’ cash. It has lagged its benchmark by 13 per cent over three years. Schroders says that over a five-year period the fund is up 110.4 per cent against its benchmark, and it recognises that there will be short periods of underperformance. Last year the bad patch was due to its broad exposure to domestic stocks, which suffered because of the result of the EU referendum in June. “These are now recovering quickly as earnings and dividends come through as expected,” a spokesman says.In the past year stock markets on both sides of the Atlantic have risen to record highs, including the FTSE 100, S&P 500, Dow Jones and Nasdaq. So many of these dog funds will have made investors money, but compared with their own benchmarks of success they are still underperforming.
Aberdeen Asset Management, the fund giant and owner of Scottish Widows, has the most funds in the doghouse. Its European Smaller Companies, UK Equity and UK Equity Income and North American Equity funds are all lagging.
“The 2013-15 period was tough for value-oriented managers, such as Aberdeen. Quantitative easing drove most asset prices indiscriminately higher,” says a company spokesperson. “Last year the environment started to change. Brexit and Trump, among other factors, led to increased market volatility, which was beneficial to our fundamental approach to investing, which is focusing on company balance sheet strength, quality management and durability of the business model. Our fund performance improved across the board and many outperformed last year.
”Nine of the dog funds are invested in the US, which is a notoriously difficult place for stock- picking fund managers to outperform. The worst is the Neptune US Opportunities fund, which had a bad 2016, leaving it down 21 per cent against its own benchmark over three years.
One of the big problems with the US market is that only a few big companies have been making the bulk of the returns over the past couple of years. They include Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Google, Starbucks, Nike, O’Reilly Automotive and Home Depot. Neptune says it appointed a new manager, Robin Milway, for this fund in August 2016 and it believes he can turn performance around. “Robin has a tried and tested philosophy and process, and comes to Neptune with a wealth of experience successfully running US mandates. We are encouraged by the start that he has made already.
”Investors should assess investments over the long-term, and a bad patch is not necessarily a reason to drop a fund from your portfolio, says Mr Hollands. “Some funds have distinctive styles or investment approaches that can go through periods that are deeply out of step with current markets, but could be about to come back into favour.”This was the case with M&G, the investment manager, which had a large chunk of savers’ cash in dog funds, including the M&G Global Basics, M&G Recovery and M&G Global Dividend funds. Recently stock markets have shifted in their favour, and they have left the doghouse.Fund managers are also under a lot of pressure from their bosses to perform, so often a weak spell is followed by a spurt of strong returns as the managers try their hardest to turn things around. Even Neil Woodford — regarded as the most successful fund manager in the UK — has had bad years.“Performance tables are OK, but it is the context around them that matters. Three years’ performance doesn’t tell you anything,” says Ben Yearsley, the co-founder of Wealth Club, an investment company.
Diversification is crucial. Savers need to have their money invested in a variety of ways, so that all parts of a portfolio are not rising at the same time. There is also the old adage “buy low, sell high”.Knowing when it is time to call it quits with an investment is difficult. Savers need to review their portfolios at least annually, and take note of whether a fund manager is just ticking over or really doing his job, making you money after his fees are deducted.Speak to a financial adviser. “Surprisingly many investors continue to put up with weak or pedestrian performance and it’s the fund management companies that benefit,” says Mr Hollands.
IN THE DOGHOUSE
- Fidelity, two dog funds, £1.05 billion
- Schroders, one dog fund, £1.16 billion
- Columbia Threadneedle, two dog funds, £744 million
- Aberdeen, four dog funds, £682 million
- Neptune, three dog funds, £482 million
- Investec, two dog funds, £479 million
- BNY Mellon/Newton, three dog funds, £472 million
- Henderson, two dog funds, £445 million
- Jupiter, two dog funds, £374 million
- Halifax, one dog fund, £367 million
Reeves IWM Static Model Balanced Portfolio
The performance of the default/benchmark Reeves IWM Balanced portfolio is summarised below and illustrates an overall impressive and consistent performance for our clients.
Version 17c Balanced Portfolio
For some technical reason, the performance figures produced by Morningstar didn’t include a full range of statistics for Tritax Big Box and the system cannot produce statistics for the two Exchange Traded Fund Securities included in our model portfolio (ETFS Brent Oil 1 month ETC & ETFS Physical Gold)
All of the individual holdings recommended in our model Balanced Investment Portfolio have produced positive returns over the past month and 3 months. The annual returns produced by our long-term holdings are very pleasing and will have benefitted most of our clients.The composition of the above model portfolio has since been reviewed by the Reeves IWM Investment Team on Wednesday 22 February 2017, and the agreed strategic changes are summarised in our brief Monthly Market Outlook report.
Clients that are making regular contributions to their Transact portfolio will receive a emails with our specific investment proposal.