This is £14bn in size and is bottom quartile over five years, having returned 30 per cent during that period, compared with 45 per cent for the average fund in the peer group. It is managed by Los Angeles Capital and State Street Global Advisers.
This fund has been subjected to increased monitoring, but SJP concluded its fees "remain appropriate" and its poor performance compared to the MSCI ACWI can be attributed to its requirement to have a lower carbon footprint relative to its benchmark.
Another large fund which was found not to have delivered value is the St James Place Global Growth fund, which is bottom quartile over three and five years, but top quartile over one year.
On a five year basis, it has returned 29 per cent, compared with 45 per cent for the peer group.
That fund is £7.6bn in size and different parts of the fund are run by different managers, with Artisan Partners, WCM, Sands Capital and Edge Point Capital all running slices of money.
However SJP said that following management changes made in 2022, the fund is well-positioned to deliver value over the next five years.
Meanwhile the SJP Global Quality fund, a £9.9bn mandate which has returned less than half of the peer group average over the past five years, was deemed to have suffered because it has been signficantly underweight US equities and technology.
The fund is managed by Ninety One Asset Management, JO Hambro Capital Management, Select Equity fund managers, Impax Asset Management and Sands Capital.
The management of £375mn SJP Japan fund, which was deemed to be delivering poor value having been bottom quartile over three and five years, changed in 2023 and is now in the hands of Comgest and Dalton Investments.
david.thorpe@ft.com
