A new chapter at Mid Wynd International


Mid Wynd is one of a small group of investment trusts set up to manage the fortune of a wealthy family, but there was some surprise when earlier this
[See the full post at: A new chapter at Mid Wynd International]


I think that ‘capital preservation’ has become a rather overused term and is the ‘new black’ of the investment world. Realistically, how many fund managers are there that are happy to state that they are happy to see their funds’ assets fall in value in falling markets? No many, I would have thought.

I don’t see how a long-only single-asset class fund can truly be described as capital preservation - and a limit of 20% on holding cash is low enough for me to think of MWY as single asset. Capital preservation makes me think more of multi-asset funds, the ability to hold short positions, or buying sizeable put options. (This is more of a gripe with the investment industry in general, rather than with this specific fund or management company. I have seen some funds described as Cap-Pres simply because they fell less than peers during a downturn. But a fall of 30+%, even if less than peers, does not translate into capital preservaion in my book).

What would be a shame is if MWY turned into just another global large-cap focussed fund. Plenty of these already, and a rather limited selection of global smaller-cap ITs - perhaps an opening for a new launch - or re-focus - from some enterprising fund management company…?



P.S. Didn’t realise that Myd Wind originated from 18th century Scottish biotech - or should that have been ‘linen’…? :wink:


P.P.S. Apologies for my own overuse of the term capital preservaion in this post…!


The family still have a large holding here, and I’m sure they would have been instrumental in selecting the Artemis team which I find interesting because I’m sure it would have been as a result of a very careful consideration for them.

I suspect (though i don’t know) they were keen to get away from Baillie Gifford not because they are bad per se but because a tiddly little £66m million trust didn’t warrant attention form them when they have trusts with assets in the hunderds of millions or billion pound plus.

On another point…I completely agree with @arkwelder stop beeding claiming you’re about Capital preservation when you’re nothing of the sort!


You always have something interesting to say @arkwelder and @Benedict and you obviously have some interest and knowledge about investing so why don’t you start writing articles on here. They say they’re looking for more writers.


Thank you, that is very kind @MumKnowsBest but although I do greatly enjoy investing and I’m sure I would enjoy the challenge of writing about it I simply don’t have time to take on the take right now.

Perhaps we could persuade @arkwelder who I agree often have very interesting things to say :slight_smile:


I agree @charles I wouldnt buy it right now either but I do find the change interesting and I agree with @Benedict that the family would have thought long and hard about this move.

I’d like to know more about the reason the managers give for the performance of the OEIC as it hasn’t been too good.


We would certainly welcome contributions from creative investors like @Benedict and @ArkWelder. We enjoy their contributions to the forums too.


Why did they move it from Baillie Gifford to Artemis if they don’t have a very good track record?


I wonder if there’s something we’re missing?


I was reading this yesterday on the train and I saw @arkwelder’s comment about Capital p[reservation and I remember thinking what is he on about, exaggerating too much. I don’t remember seeing it written much at all.

Fast forward 24 hours and he is right it is used a lot. I’ve read it several times in Bloomberg, the FT and Citywire.

I agree with @charles too, I wouldn’t buy this right now. I don’t think I’ve got a grasp about what the new guys will do that is not only different but adds something we don’t already have.


Thanks, @MumKnowsBest, @Benedict and @dice2dice. I wouldn’t rule out trying to knock something up at some stage, but I do see myself more as reacting to observations rather than being a creative thinker. Perhaps an activity for later in the year when there is less to do outdoors!


Baillie Gifford manage Edinburgh Worldwide, and the investment policy of this trust was changed at the start of the year from a relatively concentrated and unconstrained approach to on that focuses more on global smaller companies. In effect, MWY has moved in the opposite direction.

Perhaps the board of MWY want a wider investment remit due to expectations of where the best returns might be made in the future. BG might want to run an IT that complements their other offerings. Artemis have a presence in Edinburgh, which might have appealed to the board. Artemis run just the one other IT (excluding VCTs) so adding another broadens their horizons a bit. And the size of MWY might have put off other fund houses. All speculation, of course, but I doubt that the reasons for moving are too far away from being relatively mundane.