Baillie Gifford Global Income Growth Fund Factsheet
In plain words
This fund update shows Baillie Gifford's Global Income Growth fund trailed badly: over the past year it returned 5.6% while the MSCI ACWI index (a broad global stock benchmark) gained 28.2%. The fund tilts toward defensive consumer staples like Coca-Cola and away from the biggest US tech names, so it's basically underweight the recent tech rally. Top holdings include TSMC (the chip maker), Apple, and Coca-Cola, though the report gives only a snapshot, no buy or sell moves. It also warns about emerging-market volatility and that fees may be taken from capital.
The Baillie Gifford Global Income Growth Fund report shows that the fund aims to achieve income and capital growth over a rolling five-year period and deliver a return higher than that of the MSCI ACWI Index. As of June 30, 2026, the fund had assets of £293.65m, held 57 stocks, with an active share
This Month's Report Card
6-month return 3.8%, versus 13.0% for the MSCI ACWI Index over the same period, underperforming by 9.2 percentage points; 1-year return 5.6% versus 28.2%, underperforming by 22.6 percentage points. The fund significantly underperformed across all comparable periods in the reporting period.
| Basis | 6 months | 1 year | 3 years (annualized) | 5 years (annualized) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fund Class B-Inc | 3.8% | 5.6% | 5.3% | 5.0% |
| MSCI ACWI Index | 13.0% | 28.2% | 18.5% | 12.4% |
| IA Global Equity Income sector average | 9.8% | 20.0% | 13.3% | 9.9% |
On a rolling-year basis, the fund beat the index in only one of the five complete years (2022/23: 12.4% vs 11.9%) and lagged in the other four; in 2025/26 it lagged the index by 22.6 percentage points (5.6% vs 28.2%), the largest single-year gap in the reporting period. The fund also consistently ranked near the bottom of the IA sector: 52/57 over 6 months, 51/56 over 1 year, 49/53 over 3 years, and 44/48 over 5 years. Note here the details of the performance basis: share-class returns are calculated at the 10:00 a.m. price, while the index is calculated at the closing price, resulting in slight measurement differences.
Portfolio Holdings and Positioning
Top 10 holdings account for 32.7% of assets; the report provides only a holdings snapshot and discloses no buy/sell direction, with no explicit position increases or reductions for any holding.
| Holding | % of assets |
|---|---|
| TSMC | 5.3 |
| Apple | 4.0 |
| Atlas Copco | 3.3 |
| Alphabet | 3.1 |
| Coca-Cola | 3.1 |
| Procter & Gamble | 2.9 |
| Analog Devices | 2.9 |
| Microsoft | 2.8 |
| Roche | 2.7 |
| Watsco | 2.6 |
At the sector level, the largest deviations stem from concentration in defensive sectors: consumer staples overweight by 10.1 percentage points (14.8% vs 4.7%), industrials overweight by 5.2 percentage points (16.3% vs 11.0%), and consumer discretionary overweight by 3.6 percentage points (12.3% vs 8.7%); information technology underweight by 8.8 percentage points (23.3% vs 32.1%), with energy and materials underweight by 2.3 and 2.5 percentage points, respectively. Geographically, the US is underweight by 19.3 percentage points (44.4% vs 63.6%), with overweights concentrated in Taiwan (+3.6%), France (+4.7%), Switzerland (+4.2%), and Sweden (+4.5%). The table lists only the top 10 regions, totaling 87.6%, with the remaining approximately 12.4% of assets distributed across countries and regions outside the top 10.
| Sector | Fund % | Index % | Difference % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information technology | 23.3 | 32.1 | -8.8 |
| Financials | 16.9 | 16.2 | 0.7 |
| Industrials | 16.3 | 11.0 | 5.2 |
| Consumer staples | 14.8 | 4.7 | 10.1 |
| Consumer discretionary | 12.3 | 8.7 | 3.6 |
| Healthcare | 6.7 | 8.3 | -1.6 |
| Communication services | 6.6 | 7.8 | -1.2 |
| Energy | 1.2 | 3.5 | -2.3 |
| Utilities | 1.1 | 2.5 | -1.4 |
| Materials | 1.1 | 3.6 | -2.5 |
| Cash | -0.2 | 0.0 | -0.2 |
| Region | Fund % | Index % | Difference % |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 44.4 | 63.6 | -19.3 |
| Taiwan | 7.0 | 3.3 | 3.6 |
| France | 6.8 | 2.1 | 4.7 |
| Switzerland | 6.2 | 2.0 | 4.2 |
| United Kingdom | 5.8 | 3.0 | 2.8 |
| Sweden | 5.2 | 0.7 | 4.5 |
| China | 4.1 | 2.3 | 1.8 |
| Hong Kong | 3.0 | 0.4 | 2.6 |
| Denmark | 2.7 | 0.4 | 2.3 |
| Germany | 2.4 | 1.9 | 0.5 |
On strategy constraints, the report reiterates that the portfolio typically holds 50–80 stocks, new positions are generally built at 1–3% of the portfolio, and no single stock's capital or income contribution exceeds 5% at the time of purchase. Cash is -0.2%, which the report explains as arising from timing differences between shareholder subscriptions/redemptions and unsettled trades; it does not represent a bank overdraft, nor does it amount to an active reduction in net exposure.
Fund Facts
Fund size £293.65m, holding 57 stocks, Active Share 85% (relative to MSCI ACWI), annual turnover 14%, with the number of holdings at the lower end of the 50–80 guidance range. The fund has an OEIC structure, was established on 1 March 2010, and is co-managed by James Dow and Ross Mathison. On fees: management fee 0.50%, Ongoing Charges Figure (OCF) 0.54%, historical yield 2.29%. The report also notes that the fund is suitable for long-term investors who can tolerate losses and have an investment horizon of more than five years, and is not suitable for those focused on short-term volatility. The risk warnings focus on emerging-market custody risks and China-related risks, including market volatility, political and economic instability, market suspensions, settlement, and corporate governance — given the portfolio's combined allocation of 7.1% to China and Hong Kong, this warning is directly relevant to the holdings structure.
Continuation Analysis: A Deep Dive into the Fund's Legal Disclosures and Third-Party Ratings
I. The Progressive Logic of Three Core Risk Warnings
Core operating profit forecast shows Q4 2024 net revenue of €25.02 billion and Q1 2025 of €23.31 billion
The three risk warnings at the beginning of the continuation appear routine, but in fact form a complete risk transmission chain from external environment → fund holdings → internal management. This structural arrangement merits in-depth analysis:
| Risk type | Risk source | Transmission mechanism | Actual impact on investors |
|---|---|---|---|
| Currency risk | External macro environment | Exchange-rate fluctuations → changes in the translated value of foreign-currency assets | Even if underlying asset prices rise, adverse currency moves can still push the local-currency NAV lower |
| Share-price volatility risk | Underlying holdings | Individual stock price movements → fund NAV volatility | The fund's pricing mechanism amplifies the impact costs of frequent trading |
| Fee capitalization risk | Fund management decisions | Fees deducted from capital (rather than income) → erosion of net asset value | Capital value declines over time even when the income side performs normally |
The third point — "fees deducted from capital" — deserves particular attention. This mechanism is uncommon among income funds, and its implicit logic is: the fund seeks to maintain stable distributions and therefore shifts the fee burden onto the capital side. This means investors evaluating the fund should track two metrics simultaneously — the dividend yield and the rate of capital depletion — rather than focusing only on the former. If the fund sustains a high fee-capitalization ratio over multiple years, total actual returns (distributions + NAV changes) may be significantly lower than the nominal dividend yield.
II. Multi-Country Legal Disclosures: A Geographic Cross-Section of the Global Distribution Network
The legal statements for the five countries (Israel, Colombia, Chile, Peru, Mexico) listed in the continuation are, on the surface, standardized compliance text, but three key pieces of information can be extracted:
1. The fund's distribution strategy focus
The common feature of these five countries is that they are all non-UCITS mainstream markets and all use the private placement/qualified-investor exemption path. This indicates that the fund's sales strategy does not pursue broad retail coverage, but rather precisely targets high-net-worth and institutional investor channels. The geographic span (Middle East, South America) also suggests that the fund reaches end investors through international private-banking networks and regional distribution partners.
2. Legal text details reflect differences in regulatory maturity across markets
| Country | Regulatory basis | Exemption mechanism | Depth of disclosure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Israel | First Schedule to the Securities Law 1968 + First Schedule to the Investment Advice Law | Dual eligibility: Sophisticated Investors / Qualified Clients | Relatively brief |
| Chile | General Rule NCG N°336 | Unregistered securities exemption | Most detailed (includes full Spanish text) |
| Colombia | National Securities and Issuers Registry | Public offering prohibited | Medium (includes FX and tax compliance notes) |
| Peru | SMV Public Registry | Institutional investors only | Medium |
| Mexico | Article 8 of the Securities Market Law | Private placement exemption | Relatively brief |
Among these, Chile's disclosure text is the most complete, containing five explanatory notes (including the disclaimer that it "does not constitute an investment assessment or recommendation"). This is consistent with the increasingly stringent regulatory trend in the Chilean market for foreign fund distribution — the CMF has in recent years issued a dense series of guidelines targeting cross-border fund distribution, and fund managers are raising disclosure standards in response to such scrutiny.
3. What "unregistered" means
All country statements emphasize their "unregistered" status. This is not a negative signal, but rather the standard operating path for offshore funds in strictly regulated markets — avoiding lengthy registration and approval processes in exchange for time and flexibility. Investors should be aware, however, that being unregistered means there is no local public disclosure obligation; the primary ongoing monitoring responsibility falls on sales intermediaries, and the actual completeness of the information investors receive depends on the diligence of their intermediaries.
III. Rating Information: The Signaling Value of Independent Third-Party Endorsement
The three rating sources listed in the continuation reflect different evaluation dimensions:
| Rating agency | Rating type | Evaluation focus | Target user |
|---|---|---|---|
| Morningstar | Medalist Rating™ (analyst-driven, 100% coverage) | Comprehensive forward-looking rating based on analysts' qualitative judgment | Professional advisors and institutions |
| Dynamic Planner | Risk Profile / Premium Rated | Risk-profile fit | Financial advisors |
| Rayner Spencer Mills | Research Rated Fund | Independent research recommendation | Intermediaries |
Key observations:
- Morningstar data analysis: The 100% analyst-driven coverage indicates that this fund's rating is not derived from quantitative models, but rather from deep coverage and continuous tracking by Morningstar's analyst team. This ratio is on the higher end of Morningstar's rating system — many funds have only partial coverage or no analyst coverage at all.
- Dynamic Planner's "dual presence": Being both labeled "Risk Profile" and awarded the "Premium Rated" designation shows that the fund is not only compatible with Dynamic Planner's risk-profiling framework in terms of risk characteristics, but also passed its additional quality-standard review. This has practical significance at the portfolio-construction level — for advisors using Dynamic Planner for asset allocation, the fund can be seamlessly embedded into their risk framework.
- Rating time-lag: The ratings data are as of 31 May 2026, while the fund overview date is 30 June — a one-month lag. Investors should be mindful of the timeliness of the ratings when interpreting them, particularly in periods of drastic market change.
IV. An Overlooked Detail: Information Asymmetry in Contact Channels
The continuation provides two distinctly different sets of contact channels:
| Contact channel | Audience | Implication |
|---|---|---|
| 0800 toll-free line + email | Intermediaries | Distribution-support-oriented, emphasizing call convenience |
| +44 (0)131 paid international line + dedicated email | Institutional investors | International-business-oriented, implying large-scale/customized services |
This dual-track contact system further confirms the sales-strategy assessment above — distribution and direct sales operate in parallel, but with different service tiers. In addition, the standard disclosure that "calls may be recorded for training or monitoring purposes" has become industry-standard practice amid increasingly stringent financial compliance.
Taken together, the "tail content" of this fund overview — risk disclosures, multi-jurisdiction legal statements, rating information, and contact channels — collectively paints a portrait of a mature fund product precisely positioned for institutional and high-net-worth clients, backed by a global distribution network and underscored by rigorous regulatory compliance. For professional investors, the completeness and granularity of these disclosures is itself a signal of confidence.