Baillie Gifford Global Alpha Growth Fund Factsheet
In plain words
This factsheet reports that Baillie Gifford’s global growth fund gained 11.7% over the past year, far behind its benchmark, the MSCI ACWI world stock index, which returned 28.2%; it also underperformed over six months and longer periods. The managers give no explicit market outlook, but they keep big bets on growth companies: TSMC (6% of assets, the top holding), Nvidia (5.1%, benefiting from AI-chip demand) and Alphabet (3.7%). The fund is underweight U.S. stocks and overweight Taiwan, Brazil and Ireland, and it says it invests on a five-year horizon in firms with above-average profit growth.
Baillie Gifford Global Alpha Growth Fund is an actively managed global equity fund that aims to outperform the MSCI ACWI Index over a five-year rolling period after costs, investing in 70–120 high-profit growth companies globally and holding them for the long term. As of June 30, 2026, the fund's si
This Month's Scorecard
For the past 6 months (as of 2026/06/30), the fund returned 3.0% versus 13.0% for the MSCI ACWI benchmark, underperforming by 10.0 percentage points; over the past year, 11.7% versus 28.2%, underperforming by 16.5 percentage points—the fund lagged the benchmark across all rolling periods.
| Metric | 6M | 1Y | 3Y (annualised) | 5Y (annualised) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fund Class B-Acc | 3.0% | 11.7% | 10.4% | 2.8% |
| MSCI ACWI Index | 13.0% | 28.2% | 18.5% | 12.4% |
| Excess | -10.0pp | -16.5pp | -8.1pp | -9.6pp |
| IA Global sector average | 10.1% | 21.4% | 13.4% | 8.1% |
By discrete annual periods, the fund lagged in all five years, with the largest underperformance in the most recent year:
| Year ended 30 June | 30/06/22 | 30/06/23 | 30/06/24 | 30/06/25 | 30/06/26 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fund Class B-Acc | -23.9% | 11.8% | 14.5% | 5.3% | 11.7% |
| MSCI ACWI Index | -3.7% | 11.9% | 20.6% | 7.6% | 28.2% |
| IA Global sector average | -8.8% | 10.8% | 14.9% | 4.6% | 21.4% |
| Excess | -20.2pp | -0.1pp | -6.1pp | -2.3pp | -16.5pp |
In the IA Global sector ranking, the fund ranked 485/578 over the past 6 months and 382/441 over the past 5 years. Note: fund units are valued at the 10am price, while the index is calculated at the closing price, so the comparison is subject to valuation timing differences.
Holdings and Allocation
The top ten holdings account for 29.5% of total assets, with TSMC and NVIDIA together at 11.1%; the report does not disclose attribution of individual stock contributions/detractions, only period-end position weights.
| Holding | % of Total Assets |
|---|---|
| TSMC | 6.0 |
| NVIDIA | 5.1 |
| Alphabet | 3.7 |
| Amazon.com | 3.2 |
| Samsung Electronics | 2.3 |
| Tencent | 2.0 |
| Martin Marietta Materials | 1.9 |
| Mastercard | 1.9 |
| Microsoft | 1.8 |
| Meta Platforms | 1.6 |
At the sector level, the largest overweights were consumer discretionary (+4.0pp), communication services (+2.7pp), and materials (+1.7pp), while the largest underweights were financials (-3.0pp), information technology (-2.7pp), and consumer staples (-1.6pp):
| Sector | Fund % | Index % | Difference pp |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 29.4 | 32.1 | -2.7 |
| Financials | 13.2 | 16.2 | -3.0 |
| Consumer Discretionary | 12.7 | 8.7 | +4.0 |
| Industrials | 11.8 | 11.0 | +0.8 |
| Communication Services | 10.5 | 7.8 | +2.7 |
| Health Care | 8.5 | 8.3 | +0.3 |
| Materials | 5.2 | 3.6 | +1.7 |
| Energy | 3.4 | 3.5 | -0.1 |
| Consumer Staples | 3.1 | 4.7 | -1.6 |
| Real Estate | 1.3 | 1.6 | -0.3 |
| Cash | 0.9 | 0.0 | +0.9 |
By region, the most significant overweights were Taiwan (+3.6pp), Brazil (+3.2pp), and Ireland (+3.2pp), while the United States was underweighted (-5.8pp):
| Region | Fund % | Index % | Difference pp |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 57.8 | 63.6 | -5.8 |
| Taiwan | 6.9 | 3.3 | +3.6 |
| Japan | 5.3 | 5.0 | +0.3 |
| China | 4.3 | 2.3 | +1.9 |
| Brazil | 3.6 | 0.5 | +3.2 |
| Ireland | 3.3 | 0.1 | +3.2 |
| South Korea | 3.1 | 2.9 | +0.2 |
| Canada | 2.3 | 2.9 | -0.6 |
| Sweden | 2.0 | 0.7 | +1.3 |
| United Kingdom | 1.7 | 3.0 | -1.3 |
| Top 10 total | 90.3 | 84.4 | - |
This report does not disclose any monthly buy/sell transactions; the above reflects period-end holdings. Active share is 79% (relative to the MSCI ACWI Index), annual turnover is 36%, and cash is only 0.9%, implying net equity exposure of approximately 99.1%; the report does not disclose any leveraged or hedged positions. The report likewise provides no attribution data, so the specific contribution of overweights/underweights to performance during the period cannot be determined.
Fund Details
Fund size is £1,499.54m, with 93 stocks held (guideline range 70-120); all three fund managers are partners.
- Fund managers: Malcolm MacColl, Helen Xiong, Michael Taylor (Partner); the fund was established on 8 March 2010, has an OEIC structure, and is classified in the IA Global sector.
- Objective (quoted verbatim: "To outperform (after deduction of costs) the MSCI ACWI Index, as stated in sterling, over rolling five-year periods" — after deduction of costs, in sterling, to outperform the MSCI ACWI Index over rolling five-year periods); the managers also consider the IA Global Sector to be an appropriate performance benchmark. The report explicitly acknowledges that the objective is not guaranteed and that actual short-term returns may deviate.
- Fees: Class B-Acc and Class B-Inc each have an annual management fee of 0.57%, an OCF of 0.59%, and a historic yield of 0.10%.
- The investment proposition is as described by the fund itself: it focuses on companies with above-average profit growth, with a five-year investment horizon, and the three dedicated managers build the portfolio by combining their own research with that of the firm's internal investment teams; readers should note that this is product-page language, and this report offers no explanation for the consecutive underperformance.
- Risk warnings are standard boilerplate: investment values may fall as well as rise, investors may not get back the amount invested, emerging markets involve custody and trading liquidity risks, and the fund does not provide capital protection.
The following is supplementary analysis of the subsequent content, focusing on details of risk disclosure, cross-border compliance, rating information, and distribution channel design:
I. Risk Disclosure Uses a "Progressive" Structure, Balancing Statutory Disclosure and Investor Guidance
The risk warning on this page does not stop at the generic "investing involves risk" level; instead, it employs a two-tier progressive structure:
1. Lists core quantifiable risks: It explicitly cites foreign exchange rate volatility (currency risk) and fund share price volatility (price volatility), corresponding respectively to macro-environmental risk and underlying asset market risk.
2. Points to complete disclosure documents: It directs investors to the Key Investor Information Document (KIID) and the Prospectus, emphasising the authoritative nature of the statutory documents. This is consistent with standard practice for UCITS or similarly regulated funds.
A notable detail: the date is stated as 30 June 2026, while the rating data is as of 31 May 2026, implying a natural one-month time lag. This means that the "current" information covered by the risk warning is in fact based on market assessments from roughly one month earlier—a common convention in the monthly fund report industry, but professional investors should be aware of the boundary on data freshness.
II. The "Regulatory Adaptation Matrix" for Cross-Border Private Placements: Compliance Strategy Under Five Jurisdictions' Rules
The fund makes differentiated statements in Israel, Colombia, Chile, Peru and Mexico respectively, which in essence constitutes a multi-jurisdictional private placement exemption compliance system. The following compares each country's core regulatory requirements and investor restrictions:
| Jurisdiction | Legal Basis | Investor Type Restrictions | Regulatory Filing Status | Key Constraints |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Israel | Schedule One of the Securities Law 1968 + Schedule One of the Investment Advice Law | Must satisfy both "Sophisticated Investors" and "Qualified Clients" dual qualifications | Not publicly registered | Private placement only |
| Colombia | National Securities and Issuers Registration System | No explicit type restriction, but public listing and trading are prohibited | Not registered | No public offering; may not trade on the Bolsa de Valores de Colombia |
| Chile | Financial Market Commission (CMF) General Rule No. 336 (NCG 336) | No specific investor type required, but emphasis on non-public offers | Not registered with local or foreign securities registries | Securities are not regulated by the CMF; no public disclosure obligations |
| Peru | Public Register of the Capital Market (Registro Público del Mercado de Valores) | Institutional investors only | Documents not reviewed by SMV | Non-institutional investors should avoid participating in private offers |
| Mexico | Article 8 of the Securities Market Law | Qualified and institutional investors | Not registered with the National Securities Registry | Private placement only; no public sales permitted |
Additional observations:
- This statement model is essentially standardised wording for "reverse solicitation + private placement exemption"—the fund does not actively sell to the public in each country, but rather investors themselves confirm their eligibility.
- Chile fully repeats the disclosure requirements in Spanish, indicating that local law requires qualifying statements to be made in the official language. This shows respect for local language compliance and implies that a failure to provide a Spanish version could create legal deficiencies.
- Both Colombia and Peru particularly emphasise that "non-institutional investors should avoid participation", showing that the fund's main audience in Latin America is strictly limited to institutional capital.
- Mexico's exemption is based on the "private placement exemption" rather than "investor classification", differing from Chile and Peru, and reflecting variations in how each country's securities laws define a "public offering".
III. Rating Information: Dual Confirmation of the Fully Analyst-Driven Model and Data Coverage
The rating section provides two key data points:
- Morningstar Medalist Rating™ 100% Analyst-Driven: This means the fund's rating is entirely composed of Morningstar analysts' subjective judgments, rather than based on quantitative models or a blended methodology. For institutional investors who trust in-depth human research, this is a positive signal, but it also implies that the rating outcome may be influenced by analysts' subjective preferences.
- Data Coverage 100%: This indicates that 100% of the fund's holdings have complete data histories, allowing the rating model to calculate based on the full portfolio, with no blind spots caused by missing data.
In addition, the fund has also received the "Recommended Fund" designation from the Fund Research Centre (part of Embark Group). Note that this rating is aimed at professional advisers and intermediaries and explicitly states that it is "not a buy recommendation"—the simultaneous appearance of a third-party recommendation and a disclaimer is a common practice in the UK retail distribution environment.
Comparative perspective: Morningstar's Medalist Rating typically has three possible compositions: Analyst-Driven (fully human), Quantitative (fully algorithmic) and Combo (blended). This document discloses 100% Analyst-Driven, meaning the fund does not use purely algorithmic rating. This may be because its global growth strategy is relatively complex, and human input is better able to capture quality factors.
IV. Contact Information and Channel Segmentation: Service Design for Different Capital Profiles
The contact details at the bottom of the page are set out separately for two types of clients:
| Client Type | Phone | |
|---|---|---|
| Intermediary Enquiries (intermediaries/advisers) | 0800 917 2113 (UK freephone) | enquiries@bailliegifford.com |
| Institutional Enquiries (institutional investors) | +44 (0)131 275 2000 | Institutional.Enquiries@bailliegifford.com |
This reflects the "dual-track" distribution channel: the intermediary channel uses a freephone number to lower the barrier to engagement, while the institutional channel uses an international direct line and a dedicated email address to facilitate deeper contact. It also notes that "calls may be recorded for training or monitoring", which is consistent with the recording requirements of the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).
In addition, the copyright notice includes the reference number `Ref: 10064197`, an identifier for fund document version control that facilitates tracking and audit—a detail that, while minor, provides necessary traceability for compliance-conscious institutions.
Summary: The content on this page is not merely an accompanying note; it further demonstrates Bailee Gifford's country-specific legal document strategy in cross-border private placements, tiered guidance on risk assessment, and service arrangements for different investor groups. Together, these elements form a compliance safety net for professional investors when making decisions.