KIDs

[UncleEbenezer]

Following comments on KIDs in the Foresight and Pembroke threads, I've just looked at the KIDs for some of my VCT holdings. And I find them utterly inconsistent.

Looking about some of the top performers of recent years, their projections are indeed a lot more appetising than the above two. Though not in a consistent manner: Northern (I forget which) offers ten year projections of £10k turning into between £0 (stress scenario) and £55k (favourable). All with a risk rating of just 3 on a scale of 1-7, which would put it at lower risk than many mainstream ITs! NVM is the only stable among those I just visited to offer ten-year projections, and that's in itself confusing because their 1-5-10 year table looks exactly like the 1-3-5 year tables seen elsewhere.

In another twist, most of them claim zero trading costs (from them, not necessarily from intermediaries), which means they must be addressing secondary market investment. By contrast, Beringea assumes subscribing in an offer, so there is an up-front transaction cost, making for eye-watering headline fees. At least they don't also claim the tax break for their own performance!

Based on such summary evidence, I have a couple of conclusions:

1. Past performance is a guide to projected future performance.
2. If KIDs were meant to offer a comparison of different products, they're failing.

[UncleEbenezer]

This isn't really a forum to discuss the EU.

But isn't this EU regulation one of the many ideas originating in the UK and pushed through (at least primarily) by the British?

[scotia]

As Uncle said

This isn't really a forum to discuss the EU.

Agreed!

[scotia]

Inv35t said

Wrong on both counts.

Ok - how about being a bit more constructive and educative
Uncle suggested that the KID may be using past performance to project future performance. I suppose past performance could be used to estimate the risk level and possibly the various performance levels. Is this not so? How does a fund estimate its risk level? I don't know - I'm simply interested in being better informed.
Uncle also proposed that

If KIDs were meant to offer a comparison of different products, they're failing.

I'm not sure which part (or both parts) of this proposal you state is wrong. So could I split it up - are KIDS not meant to offer a comparison of different products? And for the second part, are you maintaining that they are not failing in this respect?

[UncleEbenezer]

Inv35t said

Wrong on both counts.

Ok - how about being a bit more constructive and educative

I must be wrong because I deflated his attack on the EU.

We're not accustomed to such brilliant levels of reasoned argument on this board. I shall suggest to the mods that this thread be locked.

[tjh290633]

You can suggest all you like. My feeling about KIDs is that the EU has directed that they be set out in a specific way, which has no connection with reality. The more people are reminded of that fact, the less credence they will attach to them.

TJH

[scotia]

TJH - There are a lot of old timers on this board, and the content is usually constructive and educative. I'm afraid this KIDs (as applied to VCTs) discussion has departed significantly from the norm - hence Uncle's request. Some of the content would best be redirected to "Polite Discussions".

[UncleEbenezer]

TJH - There are a lot of old timers on this board, and the content is usually constructive and educative. I'm afraid this KIDs (as applied to VCTs) discussion has departed significantly from the norm - hence Uncle's request. Some of the content would best be redirected to "Polite Discussions".

Thanks for saying that.

I've no doubt that in the usual company here, my having not merely written but also emphasised the word projected in the original post would make it clear what I wasn't saying. Alas, it seems my subject line was a keyword that dragged in something of an altogether different character, with which reasoned argument is utterly futile. So my response provoked an attack, and your challenge to it provoked those ridiculous strawmen.

My feeling about KIDs is that the EU has directed that they be set out in a specific way, which has no connection with reality.

Well, console yourself that since Lord Hill resigned as EU commissioner for financial matters, the *direct* pipeline for such EU legislation is now closed.

[Vulgaris]

Having lived, traded, and survived thru' 1987, 2000, 2007/8, seen interest rates at 15% and 0.25% I'm inclined to treat all future forecasts as tosh. And, as for the nannying of KIDS, the UK is quite as likely to devise it for itself as in the awful EU.

What does nark me is the uselessness of Barclay's Smarter Investor, which is presently unwilling to let me buy a wide range of Investment Trusts, or even to admit to their existence, and provide a quote, because they haven't sent a KID or, in many cases, haven't sent one that satisfied Barclay's compliance. They have truly become the most useless sharedealing platform I can buy through Chas Stanley Direct, with whom I have direct holdings, but not Barclays, with whom I have the SIPP.

Utterly totally useless company.

[scotia]

Having lived, traded, and survived thru' 1987, 2000, 2007/8, seen interest rates at 15% and 0.25% I'm inclined to treat all future forecasts as tosh. And, as for the nannying of KIDS, the UK is quite as likely to devise it for itself as in the awful EU.

I couldn't have expressed it better!