Member Info for Actuary63

The numbers look good, but I hope they know what they're doing with their big investment in the Active Care Group. Does anyone have information about this? It looks like the interest on the debt is being capitalised and they aren't expected a payout until they restructure the group and sell it. They own most of the equity too, which currently has negligible value.

UKW's debts are multuiple loans with a range of different maturities including short-term loans that are continually being repaid. This creates a similar cash-flow profile to the "self-amortising" debts of other trusts. The dividend cover for 2024 was calculated after allowing for a £30m net repayment of debt.

November NAV report: Low net interest income compensated by 0.29p from share buybacks. If share buybacks were to continue at this rate and at these prices (not saying they will), they would add 3.48p to NAV per annum, which is more that half the annual dividend.

Sooner or later the share price has to move up - when it does, I suspect it will be quite fast.

An initial dividend of 9p per HICL share, where the TRIG shareholders receive 0.714 of a HICL share for every TRIG share. Hence the annual dividend for the TRIG shareholder will be cut to 9p X 0.714 = 6.4p. I make that a reduction of about 15%.

Another solid monthly report, with a good increase in the NAV. Once again, not sure whether capitalised interest is included in capital movements or net interest income. Recent loan redemptions means the fund has over £100 million in cash, which explains the sharp rise in recent share buybacks. The only thing to worry about with this stock is loan defaults. The last one was at the start of the year and NAV has been on a natural upward progression since then.

Voting for discontinuation now would be a classic case of cutting your nose to spite your face. My hope is that the NESF board will agree to a merger with FSFL before shareholder discontent leads to such desperate measures. A merger with associated cost savings will be a much better option for generating value for both group of shareholders.

Interest net of expenses lower than last month, but still well above that required to cover dividend. Good news about recovery on Bulb loan and early redemptions. Par value per share = 96.77p with average term to redemption of 3.1 years. I'm collecting dividends while waiting patiently for the share price to reflect reality.

David Turver is not an objective source. His X-account is a non-stop barrage of propaganda against wind and solar energy.

Interest income net of expenses up to 0.78 in August, returning to the average figure for the last couple of years. Could this be because they have returned to including capitalised interest in interest income (rather than capital movements)? Who knows?

Weighted average term of debt now down to just 3.1 years and net asset value alllowing for pull-to-par is over 96p. Struggling to see how anyone buying at this price is going to regret it.

Although I'm glad I recently increased my holdings in this trust, I have to say their accounts are less transparent than those of the renewable trusts. On page 30, the NAV return merges actual investment income with the impact of changes in various assumptions, so it's impossible to say whether their assets have really performed better than expected. The stable dividend cover of 1.1 suggests that performance is basically turning out as expected. Obviously the trust is undervalued like many other income trusts, with its price extremely sensitive to changes in gilt yields. Waiting patiently for inflation and gilt-yields to fall should produce very positive results for those who are buying at this price.

Reduction in NAV entirely down to lower revenue projections from both solar power and batteries. Quarterly revenue was above target as expected because of high solar irradiation.

Well, it seems they deducted this month's dividend from the July NAV because the ex-dividend date was 24 July. They deducted February's dividend from the January NAV for the same reason. (However, May's dvidend was deducted from the May NAV because the ex-dividend date was 1 May. )

NAV update includes a dividend deduction although no dividend paid in July! Expect them to issue a correction.

Increase in NAV was the most positive since January. Pull to par of 4.4p indicates face value of net assets is 96p plus this month's dividend. Average term of debt down to 3 years. Will be interesting to see when share price is restored to reality!

Even if you favour a wind-up, the best way of doing it would be through share buy- backs . If some shareholders are happy to sell at a discount, why give them NAV?

The fall in NAV over the last 6-months was almost entirely due to lower power price forecasts. Nothing the management can do about that.

Dividend cover is before amortisation of debt. Retained cash is almost exactly equal to debt amortisation, implying no cash available for growth. On the other hand, a dividend yield of over 8% offers a high enough return without growth.

Hi Guitarsolo,

Very rapid growth, but solar still only generated 6.3% of UK electricity over the last year, which is much less than wind. No doubt this percentage will increase, and the latest CfD prices do indicate it produces cheap energy, but its future does seem to depend on the government continuing with the CfD scheme (or does it?). And construction of new solar farms has to overcome the rampant Nimbyism in all parts of this country.

The game-changer for renewables would be more cost effective method of storage (I don't think batteries will be more than a small part of the solution). Maybe a breakthrough involving electrolysis and hydrogen? Who knows?

The link works fine, Guitarsolo.

The debate over renewables is very polarised. The opponents say "If it's cost-effective, why the subsidies?". And a lot of people just don't like wind turbines or solar panels over farm land. The proponents say the subsidies are for legacy projects and the new projects produce electricity more cheaply than fossil fuels. And then there's the China, investing more heavily in renewables than any other nation. But what about intermittency and back-up costs? But are the back-up costs real, given that gas prices would be higher without renewables?

I'd love to hear a neutral voice on this, but unfortunately the issue has become a political football, and as investors we're going to have to evaluate the political risk of a Reform government.

Monthly interest net of expenses is down to 0.52p, the lowest it's been for at least a couple of years. But capitalised interest is now being included in "capital movenents", which makes it less easy to see what's really going on.

But average remaining debt term of 3.3 years and pull-to-par of 4.3p means this stock is still very undervalued. If they just let all their debts mature without making another investment, the payout to the shareholders would surely be above 90p (being pessimistic about future defaults).

Hello Guitarsolo,

Information about dividends is given in page 50 of the propectus.

The full-year dividend is actually going to fall from from 24.7p per share to 22.3p per share. But that's a 5% increase after allowing for the inflated number of shares following the rights issue.