We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
aims to provide a high level of dividend as well as capital appreciation from a diversified portfolio
Find out MoreLondon South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Stop the whinging
There are plenty of other investment trusts available.
Bott
''The matters which most concern me are the high turnover of the portfolio and the continuing issue of new shares. The former, which cannot be explained by the latter, needs more explanation''
I cannot believe that so called investors cannot understand the workings of a fund that they have invested in. How many times has the same thing have to be said.
HFEL is an income fund.
New shares that have been issued have been at a PREMIUM to NAV and so therefore of benefit to shareholders.
HFEL are NOT a buy and hold fund. They are active to achieve the objectives of the fund.
Simple enough for most to understand. If any investor doesn't like HFEL or as it appears have no understanding, there is a sell button.
To GS
I am not inclined to pursue matters with Mike Kerley myself, at least at this time. Others are welcome to, in which case I would hope that the Q&A are posted here, for all to see.
The matters which most concern me are the high turnover of the portfolio and the continuing issue of new shares. The former, which cannot be explained by the latter, needs more explanation than has so far been offered, to satisfy those who suspect that, while it may assist dividend aggregation, it may also be contributing to a falling NAV. As to the latter, I fail to see how it can ever – in an investment trust – benefit those who are already invested in the trust: that idea is nonsense.
Hfel
'' to ensure existing shareholders revenue is not diluted.''
GS/others
What is it that you do not understand from this
Hfel
'We are not buy and hold investors''
absolutely nothing wrong with that
Many investors simply buy and hold for an eternity.
Personally I am a frequent trader of shares - it has served me well
Gs
I had already read what he said carefully.
'' it is why I say it is close to an admission, not an admission.''
once again - nonsense.
Dividend washing is selling stock immediately after going xd.
New money coming in for new shares was being invested in existing holdings.
Issuance of new shares have been made when at a premium to NAV. The shares have been at a discount for quite a while now, so no topping up of holdings.
Dividend washing is selling stock after going xd
Gs
'' uses funds from new issuance to invest in existing holdings.''
hfel
''the investment of monies received from share issuance is included in these turnover numbers. These are invested into existing positions with a focus on companies about to go ex dividend''
just as I said - new money invested for income - that is the point of HFEL.
I see you still can't help yourself, can you LTI? Read the full answer from Mike Kerley:
"We are not buy and hold investors......We also top up holdings into ex-dividend dates to ensure maximum revenue generation...... Finally, the investment of monies received from share issuance is included in these turnover numbers. These are invested into existing positions with a focus on companies about to go ex dividend to ensure existing shareholders revenue is not diluted. This combination of style, revenue maximisation and share issuance is responsible for the relatively high turnover."
So the fund tops up going into ex-dividend dates, and then uses funds from new issuance to invest in existing holdings. MK has specifically split the two actions. If it was just the funds from new issue looking for stock about to go ex-dividend why refer to the same practice when discussing the 100% turnover of stock? I expect MK is choosing his words carefully and it is why I say it is close to an admission, not an admission.
But if Bott is prepared to follow up with MK there is a chance to pin him down about it.
Gs
'' this is close to an admission of what some will call dividend washing''
?, what nonsense.
New money coming in for new shares - it is an income fund - money is invested to get income.
Nothing to do with selling stock immediately after going xd.
Mr Guitarsolo
Before you get all excited other income funds also engage in some of the same tactics but perhaps not to the same extent.
Mr Guitarsolo
"So my follow up question would be to ask how much that practice contributes to the falling NAV (and therefore share price".
This is easy yield 12% - estimated yield on holdings around 5% = 7% all things being equal. You can possibly add another 1% for the annual management charge.
Some is generated from options writing which muddies the numbers a little.
If I can count.
You think the managers will ever quote those numbers?
Bott,
The part of Mike Kerley’s response that jumped out to me was; “We also top up holdings into ex-dividend dates to ensure maximum revenue generation”.
Combined with an acceptance that stock is rotated continuously (100% turnover) this is close to an admission of what some will call dividend washing. So my follow up question would be to ask how much that practice contributes to the falling NAV (and therefore share price).
Also, if HFEL intends to continue with this practice, how does MK think the fund will not continue to fall in value?
GS
Ade2a
Yes, if those who ask questions share them and the answers on this chat board, that should be of benefit all round. Small issues should be avoided, I suggest, as Kerley is not going to spend his time dealing with trivia, but significant matters such as how will the trust deal with an invasion of Taiwan would be good to know.
LTI
You are right the share price peaked at around 380 roughly in 2018.
Bott
Many thanks.
I myself will not be contacting the company. I feel I have all the information I need about HFEL but many on this board see value in getting a response from the company representatives hopefully they can use this information.
LTI
You are a pathetic attention seeker can only reply to anyone with an insult.
Ade2a
No, but you could do this, to Colleen Sutcliffe, she being the conduit for Gould's and Kerley's responses to me. The address is Colleen.Sutcliffe@janushenderson.com.
Dam
''are destroying our capital''
NAV per share increased by about 70% from Jan 2006 to peak price.
Stock markets and the businesses on them go up and down in asset valuations.
A Morningstar article from 4th May 2006:
https://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news/59764/henderson-far-eastern-promise.aspx
Can you believe that at the time of writing the article in 2006, the NAV of this trust was 231.3p. The NAV was 14% higher, 17 years ago!
Michael Watt, if you are dead, I hope you are not rolling in your grave. The fund managers who succeeded you are total clowns and are destroying our capital !! They think it's okay to have weak conviction, with 100% portfolio turnover creating large transaction costs, and believe that by trading in to cum-dividend companies they are getting something for nothing. But apparently according to them, this is okay. It's "style".
To NAV currently
Ad
''You posted these 2.''
and?
you are a pathetic attention seeker
The get Ade2a board.
LTI
"HFEL can only distribute from income generated - they do not control what the underlying companies wish to do regarding dividend payments in the future."
"HFEL do not have a policy whereby dividends can be paid from borrowings or capital returns - the dividends are currently fully covered from income. If there is a shortfall then they have the dividend reserve available as a backup."
You posted these 2.
Ad
''You post two different comments with different meanings and claim they are the same.''
What the F are you talking about? - I have not claimed anything. I have made straightforward statements.
AD
''An Investment Trust can distribute more than the earnings on its equity holdings OEIC or open ended funds cannot.''
This was your response to how I said HFEL was run- completely off piste.
This is the HFEL board.
To make it clear to you , HFEL has been set up in a way that dictates the policy of dividends being made out of income and NOT borrowings and NOT from capital.