top fund manager talent revealed

Jupiter, Schroders and Henderson were among those fund houses awarded multiple FE Alpha Manager ratings for 2012, marking them out as top of the talent pool.

top fund manager talent revealed

|

In total 160 portfolio managers were given the rating, representing the top 10% of managers of IMA unit trusts and Oeics.

Over 50 of this year’s Alpha Managers received the award for the fourth year in a row, achieving top performance each year since the ratings were launched in 2009.

Jupiter and Schroders each had four managers with a four-year alpha record, while Henderson, M&G and Newton had three apiece.

"These managers have proved their ability to add alpha consistently over the long-term, in both rising and falling markets", said FE.

It scores managers on three components: risk-adjusted alpha; outperformance of their benchmark; and the consistency of outperformance or underperformance in all market conditions.

Managers are judged on their track record from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2011, regardless of how many investment houses they have worked for.

The only qualifying hurdle to being rated is they must have a minimum track record of 30 months. The top 10% are then awarded FE Alpha Manager status.

Top performers

Over three years to 31 December Deryck Noble-Nesbitt, a manager new to the list, ran the two best performing funds managed by an FE Alpha Manager. His Close Special Situations Fund returned 267.9% over the period, while Close Beacon Investment saw returns of 205.7%.

Crispin Odey’s Odey European was the best performer over five years, up 126%.

Mike Jones, head of publishing and ratings at FE, said: "It is a huge achievement to obtain and then keep hold of an FE Alpha Manager Rating. Portfolio Managers’ risk-adjusted alpha is incorporated into their scores, so only those managers who are able to navigate all phases of a market cycle will stand a chance of becoming and then retaining the status.

"The methodology looks at performance since 2000, which will go some way towards smoothing out the impact of last year’s volatility, especially form managers with longer track records. This makes the ratings more reliable so they are not swayed by managers who have a comparatively lucky year or conversely whose style temporarily falls out of favour. "

MORE ARTICLES ON