Charles Stanley's Stephen Peters considers the pros and cons of selecting two very different investment styles and their potential performance
Closed-ended funds are said to be ‘better’ than open-ended funds for a variety of reasons. They include: Lower fees; Better performance; Better management; Fees more aligned with shareholder interest; Semi-permanent capital structure allows more illiquid strategies to be used. These claims are usually countered by criticisms investment trusts are illiquid, higher-risk vehicles with a limited choice of funds and several major sectors and asset classes with little to no coverage. In contrast, there are a large number of open-ended funds in most sectors, and units can be bough...
To continue reading this article...
Join Investment Week for free
- Unlimited access to real-time news, analysis and opinion from the investment industry, including the Sustainable Hub covering fund news from the ESG space
- Get ahead of regulatory and technological changes affecting fund management
- Important and breaking news stories selected by the editors delivered straight to your inbox each day
- Weekly members-only newsletter with exclusive opinion pieces from leading industry experts
- Be the first to hear about our extensive events schedule and awards programmes