CMPG/CMPI offer exposure to best-in-class managers in the investment company universe.
Overview
CT Global Managed Portfolio Trust provides exposure to attractive investment themes through two Portfolios of investment companies via two share classes: CMPG, which aims to deliver capital growth, and CMPI, which focuses on income. Since June 2025, the trust has been managed by Adam Norris and Paul Green, who succeeded long-standing manager Peter Hewitt, who will retire at the end of October. Together, the new managers bring 35 years of investment experience.
Since taking over, Adam and Paul have increased exposure to themes where they see strong opportunities, including US and emerging market equities, which they expect to deliver robust earnings growth. They have also added to private equity-focused investment companies where realisations are emerging, such as Oakley Capital Investments (OCI) in the growth share class. Finally, the managers have identified attractive total return potential in the AIC Infrastructure sector, topping up their holding in Pantheon Infrastructure (PINT) in both CMPG and CMPI portfolios.
Moreover, while the basic strategy remains unchanged, Adam and Paul aim to adopt a higher-conviction approach, holding fewer investment trusts in larger size positions. They also plan to increase the allocation to global equities while reducing the UK weighting. In fact, this process is already underway, with additions to JPMorgan Global Growth & Income (JGGI) across both share classes and the exit of Lowland Investment Company (LWI) and Finsbury Growth & Income (FGT) from CMPG’s portfolio.
Assuming no unforeseen circumstances, the board expects CMPI to pay a Dividend of at least 7.6p for the current financial year, implying a prospective yield of c. 6.5%. At the time of writing, CMPG and CMPI were trading at Discountsof 3.3% and 2% respectively.
Analyst’s View
The new managers’ plan to increase the allocation to global equities and to build higher-conviction portfolios over time is, in our view, an exciting development. This should enable both share classes to capture a broader opportunity set, particularly in faster-growing regions, while the stronger emphasis on the managers’ best ideas could enhance long-term performance and reduce overlaps, albeit with greater sensitivity to the performance of individual holdings.
CT Global Managed Portfolio Trust offers exposure to promising themes, including US and emerging market equities, which are expected to deliver robust earnings growth, as well as private equity strategies benefiting from realisations. In fact, Adam and Paul see significant pent-up value in private equity-focused closed-end funds, which could be unlocked when IPO activity resumes and M&A activity picks up. While CMPI captures these opportunities to a lesser extent due to its income mandate, we think it offers an attractive prospective yield of c. 6.5%, well above that of the FTSE All-Share Index and the average constituent of the AIC Global Equity Income and UK Equity Income sectors.
Finally, we note that several closed-end funds are still trading at wide discounts, particularly those focused on alternative assets. While this reflects the challenges these sectors have faced over the past three years, it could also mean that both CMPI and CMPG portfolios are well positioned to capture a potential recovery. In particular, we believe that closed-end funds in more interest rate-sensitive areas, such as renewable energy infrastructure, could benefit from a more supportive rate environment.
Bull
Higher-conviction portfolios and greater global diversification could boost returns
Offers exposure to promising growth themes
Could benefit from a recovery in alternative-focused sectors
Bear
Retirement of long-standing manager
Trust of investment companies approach results in high overall cost of investment
Gearing on underlying trusts and income share class can exaggerate
Source: Columbia Threadneedle Investments, as at 31/08/2025
The new managers also see strong total return opportunities in the infrastructure space and have introduced Pantheon Infrastructure (PINT) into both CMPG and CMPI portfolios. PINT provides exposure to infrastructure assets across North America, Europe, and the UK through co-investments. With its focus on areas such as data centres and other digital infrastructure, Adam and Paul see significant growth potential in PINT’s portfolio and believe that future realisations could be supported by private equity capital. Adam and Paul have also introduced Cordiant Digital Infrastructure (CORD) into CMPI’s portfolio. As of 16/09/2025, CORD holds six companies that own infrastructure assets embedded in the digital economy, including communication towers, fibre-optic networks, and data centres, primarily in Europe. The investment company follows a ‘buy, build and grow’ approach, aiming to acquire companies, develop them to increase revenues, and expand their asset base. Adam and Paul note that CORD is highly cash-generative, which has enabled the company to increase its dividend each year since its launch in 2021 (offering a yield of c. 4.5% at the time of writing), while also reinvesting to grow its capital base, providing attractive NAV growth prospects. Given its strong total return potential, Adam and Paul do not rule out introducing CORD into CMPG’s portfolio in the future.
Finally, the new managers have increased CMPI’s holding in BioPharma Credit (BPCR), which specialises in providing loans to companies in the life sciences industry. These companies have struggled to raise capital through equity, as investor appetite for higher-risk, speculative ventures has waned amid a higher interest rate environment. They have also faced regulatory and political risks, including the Trump administration’s plans to introduce drug price controls and the vaccine scepticism of Robert Kennedy Jr., the new Secretary of Health and Human Services. As a result, companies in the life sciences sector have become more reliant on debt. Adam and Paul also note that BPCR charges high interest on its loans, incentivising companies to repay early and incur substantial prepayment fees, which have historically been used to pay special dividends. At the time of writing, BPCR offered a prospective yield of c. 7%.
Having skin in the market is often a good way to build up your knowledge of Investment Trusts, so could be a starter option.
CMPG Higher risk as TR only.
CMPI Lower risk as even if your timing is wrong you still have the dividends to re-invest.
Or you could have a 60/40 split and re-balance as profit/losses occur.
The Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF offers a dynamic covered call strategy, delivering a 10.42% yield and strong total returns since inception.
GPIQ’s flexible overwrite approach allows active adjustment of call coverage, capturing elevated option premiums during volatility while retaining upside exposure.
Tax-advantaged distributions and a tech-heavy portfolio position GPIQ as a compelling income vehicle, particularly in uncertain or volatile markets.
I remain bullish on GPIQ, adding to my position as its structure thrives amid elevated volatility and upcoming earnings uncertainty.
PM Images/DigitalVision via Getty Images
I have been investing in and writing about income-producing assets for a long time now. I have an entire segment of the portfolio structured around generating cash flow from equities. I spend quite a bit of time tracking and analyzing my income producing assets and I believe that the current market environment is an attractive entry point for long-term investors into income producing assets. The big thing about covered call strategy ETFs that people trend to glance over is that they are not conservative vehicles for people afraid of stocks just because they have a large distribution yield. They are structured to pay out a large amount of income for capping some of your upside during periods when nobody knows what is coming next.
I believe that the Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) is built for this exact moment. The Iranian conflict has caused the flow of roughly 20% of global oil supply to become constricted as the Strait of Hormuz has become the most important global choke point. We’re headed into the heart of Q1 2026 earnings with big banks setting the stage for big tech later in the month. The market is going to demand proof that Big Tech AI spending is translating into real revenue causing uncertainty which could translate to increased options premiums. GPIQ is paying a distribution of $5.33 which is a yield of roughly 10.42% at a time when GPIQ is only down -2.7% for the year. I think that GPIQ will continue to generate low double digit or high single digit yields while returning positive appreciation throughout the year.
Seeking Alpha
Following up on my previous article about GPIQ
Back in November I had written an article on GPIQ (can be read here) and since then the total return is 2.82% due to the large distribution compared to the S”&P 500 gaining 1.69%. I felt that GPIQ offered a compelling blend of capital appreciation and double-digit yield as the dynamic covered call strategy left the upside partially uncapped. This allowed GPIQ to benefit from market appreciation while producing a large recurring income stream for investors. Despite the evolving Fed policy GPIQ’s distribution rate has been stable and I felt it had become more attractive in a failing rate environment. I am following up with a new article on GPIQ because I feel the current environment is creating opportunities for covered call ETFs especially with how uncertain the geopolitical landscape has been. In my opinion, GPIQ is built for periods like this as it can generate large amounts of recurring income when the market falls and follow the market higher on green days since a portion of the portfolio is uncapped.
Seeking Alpha
What GPIQ Actually Is And How It Works
GPIQ launched in October 2023, so it does not have as long of a track record as some of the other covered call ETFs such as the Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD). While this isn’t a long enough timeframe for some investors what GPIQ does have is a clear and well executed strategy backed by Goldman Sachs Asset Management, and results that speak for themselves. GPIQ has constructed an equity portfolio that mirrors the Nasdaq-100 index. The top holdings look exactly like what you would expect with Nvidia Corporation (NVDA) representing 8.74% of the portfolio and Apple (AAPL) coming in at 7.67%. The tech sector makes up roughly 51% of the portfolio, with communication services at about 15% and 104 positions.
Seeking Alpha
Where GPIQ gets interesting is the overlay segment of its strategy. It sells call options on anywhere between 25% and 75% of the underlying holdings which is the key differentiator. This is what Goldman calls a dynamic overwrite strategy which is significantly different than covered call ETFs operating at fixed percentages. QYLD writes calls on 100% of its portfolio every month while the JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF (JEPQ) utilizes equity-linked notes which have their own structural limitations. GPIQ can actively adjust how much of the portfolio is being overwritten based on market conditions which is what I like about it.
When volatility spikes and premiums expand, GPIQ has the ability to overwrite a larger portion of the portfolio. This allows them to collect larger premiums and deliver more income to shareholders. When the market trends higher GPIQ has the ability to reduce the overwrite percentage and let more of the underlying equity appreciation drive the share price higher. That flexibility is why GPIQ has managed to deliver both a double-digit yield and better total returns than most of its peers. GPIQ also utilizes FLEX options through the CBOE which are customizable exchange-traded option contracts. This gives the portfolio managers the ability to tailor strike prices and expiration dates in ways that standard listed options cannot match.
The taxed advantaged income profile is a benefit for income investors
GPIQ has paid $5.33 in distributions over the trailing twelve months (TTM) which is a 10.42% yield. The part that doesn’t get enough attention is the tax treatment of these distributions. A large portion of the distributions get treated as return of capital because GPIQ uses index options that qualify for Section 1256 tax treatment. The gains are split on a 60/40 basis between long-term and short-term regardless of holding period. When I considered this against ETFs that are taxed as ordinary income GPIQ looks increasingly favorable especially at the end of the year when Uncle Same gets is fair share. For some investors this aspect can become extremely favorable especially when you have larger amounts of income being generated from the underlying investment.
Seeking alpha
Since the end of 2023 GPIQ has paid 29 monthly distributions which have amounted to $12.26 of income. GPIQ opened at $38.78 and since 2023 has appreciated by 32.70% while producing another 31.71% in monthly distributions. Since it went public GPIQ has generated a total return of 64.32%. When I look at the characteristics of GPIQ the dynamic income approach looks very appealing as the monthly distribution has averaged $0.42 over the past 29 months which is a monthly yield of 0.82% based on the current share price. From an income perspective this works in my portfolio and I am very bullish on GPIQ going forward because its structure will benefit when the geopolitical tensions finally get sorted out while maintaining an attractive yield compared to the risk free rate of return.
Why Earnings Season Makes The GPIQ idea Timely
Q1 2026 earnings season is about to get started as JPMorgan Chase (JPQ) will set the tone on Tuesday 4/14. Big tech will come right as we have the April FOMC meeting at the end of the month. The consensus expectations for the S&P 500 are about 13.2% YoY earnings growth for Q1. Technology has seen its YoY earnings growth rate increase to 45.1% from 34.3% on December 31st. The market is looking for another strong quarter from the names that dominate the Nasdaq-100 which would be beneficial for GPIQ. The March washout shook out a lot of the speculative froth causing a repricing of mega-cap tech. It looks like there has been a lot of AI fatigue and the market wants proof that the amount of capital being spent on CapEx is going to pay off. I think were setting up for a scenario where the companies that deliver strong results are going to get rewarded and we’re going back to good news is good news and bad news is bad news. This kind of dispersion would be beneficial for GPIQ’s covered calls strategy because it keeps implied volatility elevated across the index.
If the Magnificent 7 come in and report strong Q1 numbers, GPIQ would participate meaningfully in the upside because it can dial back its overwrite percentage. If earnings come in mixed and the market chops sideways or pulls back further it still has the ability to generate that 10% plus yield that everyone loves collecting. This is a setup where the fund gets paid either way and the only question is how much capital appreciation comes along with it. The reality is that nobody except the management teams know what these companies are going to produce and more importantly what they will guide for. What we do know is that the implied volatility embedded in Nasdaq-100 options right now is elevated relative to where it was for most of 2024 and early 2025. This has become a direct input as to how much income GPIQ can generate. When the VIX was sitting at 13 or 14, covered call funds had to work harder for their yield and now with the Vix over 20 the premiums are significantly larger.
GPIQ is outperforming it’s peers since inception and it’s not even close
I compared GPIQ to the Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ), the SPDR S&P 500 Trust (SPY), QYLD, JEPQ, and the Neos Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF (QQQI) since it’s first day of trading and the results were overwhelmingly bullish. The metrics that I track are the starting price, todays price, how much appreciation was generated, the amount of income produced, and what the total return was. All of the data is in the table below. I am not as shocked as some may be to learn that GPIQ has almost doubled the total return of QYLD and been able to maintain a total annualized return that has almost matched the market.
Steven Fiorillo, Seeking Alpha
Since inception GPIQ has generated $12.68 of capital appreciation while producing $12.68 in distribution income. This has led to a total return of 64.32% from a combination of 32.70% appreciation and 31.62% in distribution yield. The annualized return on GPIQ has been 22.37%. SPY which is the benchmark has a total return of 64.76% over this period with a 22.50% annualized return. GPIQ’s performance is within a half of percent of SPY. QQQ which is the benchmark for the Nasdaq 100 has a total return of 71.97% with an annualized return of 24.65%. When I look at JEPQ, QQQI, and QYLD there is a huge drop off in total return since GPIQ hit the market. JEPQ has a total return of 53.18% while QQQI and QYLD both have the same total return at 36.30%. The data is clear and GPIQ is holding its own against the market and currently superior to its peers.
The risks to investing in GPIQ
Even though I am bullish on GPIQ there are several risks to consider. The first risk is concentration considering over 50% of this fund is in technology. If the Tech sector doesn’t perform this earnings season we could experience a multi-quarter bear market in tech which will impact GPIQ’s share price. The premium income provides a cushion but it’s not going to save investors from a large step down in Nasdaq 100. . During the April 2025 tariff shock, GPIQ fell roughly 25% peak to trough before recovering. Next, if we get a ripping bull market due to the geopolitical tensions easing then GPIQ will underperform QQQ as the The covered call overlay inherently caps some upside. That is the trade-off as investors are trading some capital appreciation potential for current income. If your goal is pure growth maximization GPIQ isn’t the right investment for you. The reality is that GPIQ has only been in existence for 2.5 years and we have not seen it navigate a prolonged recession or a sustained bear market. The dynamic overwrite strategy looks great in a volatile but ultimately recovering market but there is no data as to how its overwrite strategy will perform during a genuine downturn. Investors should do their own due diligence and make sure this strategy is right for them.
Conclusion
One of the things I think about is if I was going to build building an income-focused portfolio from scratch today would I want a vehicle that gives me exposure to the best companies while paying a double-digit yield that is tax-advantaged? The answer is yes and GPIQ checks off all the boxes especially in this market environment. We are in a market where volatility is elevated and earnings season is about to inject a fresh round of uncertainty. The Fed is not likely to cut rates and the geopolitical landscape is a mess. All of those factors push implied volatility higher which pushes option premiums higher and positively impacts GPIQ’s distribution income. GPIQ doesn’t need optimal conditions or a rising market to work and it’s built for the types of uncertain environments we’re living through. I am still bullish on GPIQ and adding to my position.
This article was written by
Steven Fiorillo
I am focused on growth and dividend income. My personal strategy revolves around setting myself up for an easy retirement by creating a portfolio which focuses on compounding dividend income and growth. Dividends are an intricate part of my strategy as I have structured my portfolio to have monthly dividend income which grows through dividend reinvestment and yearly increases.
Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of GPIQ, QYLD, JEPQ, QQQI, NVDA, AAPL either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
Disclaimer: I am not an investment advisor or professional. This article is my own personal opinion and is not meant to be a recommendation of the purchase or sale of stock. The investments and strategies discussed within this article are solely my personal opinions and commentary on the subject. This article has been written for research and educational purposes only. Anything written in this article does not take into account the reader’s particular investment objectives, financial situation, needs, or personal circumstances and is not intended to be specific to you. Investors should conduct their own research before investing to see if the companies discussed in this article fit into their portfolio parameters. Just because something may be an enticing investment for myself or someone else, it may not be the correct investment for you.
Seeking Alpha’s Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.
Comments
Thanks @Steven Fiorillo for this article. I manage my portfolio a little differently than I used to as I now maintain at least one year of personal distributions (sometimes 2 years) in SGOV/JAAA. Then I set my investments to DRIP and mostly leave them alone. Sometimes, I’ll trim some of my CEFs to harvest a discount-premium swing and I’ll put those monies into my savings bucket.
For 2025 I invested in QQQIQDVO and SPYI. They did well and I had some nice gains but for 2026 I changed it up and exited QQQIQDVO entirely and put everything into GPIQ and SPYI.
So far GPIQ has been doing just as well as my previous split. SPYI is lagging a little YTD but I turned DRIP off in January for this fund to help add to my SGOV bucket since I took a distribution
Proof-point Clues and Clueless Views The Oak Bloke Apr 12
Dear reader
Last week down -17% since its inclusion in the OB25 for 25, I declared I’m going to go in large here with proceeds from my imaginary “25 for 25” portfolio. 20% of the 25 for 25 makes it the largest single idea. A bold move. Or brash too? Brash? £1k bought at 50p in 2025 and £10.3k added at 42p in 2026 means I’m in at a 42.6p average buy. I’m pretty happy with that.
Days later SEIT declares it’s going into wind down.
Readers have asked what do you think about that OB?
Beyond the obvious disappointment that it has come to this, the present reality is still that it is a share you can buy for 42p which is yielding a 6.36p dividend per year, so delivering a 15% yield 92% covered by actual earnings (topped up by capital returns) and is delivering a growing cash income where the “fair value” noise (in blue below) is blinding people to the growing income stream. If inflation rises, as seems likely, these energy assets generate inflation-linked income. Debt is fixed.
Meanwhile the negative “fair value” has essentially been driven by a growing discount rate taking this trust to a levered discount rate of 9.7% far beyond that of its peers. Hiding about £300m or 28p per share of NAV if the trust was valued at its discount rate in 2021 (while the assets are broadly identical to those of five years ago).
Five years ago 20% of the world’s Oil wasn’t cut off in the Persian Gulf. Energy is arguably far more valuable in a world where Oil and energy is on the cusp of a massive rise – in my opinion.
But we also now need to consider the wind down and the inevitable question:
How Easy will it be to Sell?
1 Red Rochester £246m or 23p a share
Proof Points:
Enwave is a district energy system which sold for a huge premium to NAV in 2021 (at the height of the market) for $2.8bn to Brookfield.
Vicinity Energy another district energy sold in October 2022 for 12X EBITDA
Vauban Infrastructure acquired Coriance in France in June 2023 at 15X EBITDA.
Antin acquired Veolia’s district energy business this month April 2026 for $1.25bn so at a 12.5X EBITDA.
According to Finerva valuations are rising, EBITDA multiple are rising.
EV/Multiples for green energy are back at 16X EV/EBITDA according to Finerva research.
Consider the growing EBITDA at Red-Rochester where even a 12X EBITDA implies a $500m price tag so a 50% premium to the gross portfolio value of $330m (as at 30/09/25).
Yet the market values Red Rochester at a 50% discount so at $114m + $102m debt = $216m
And $216m/$43.5m is a 5X EV/EBITDA.
Wait what?
Moving to views in the chattersphere where even getting 42p back is said to be “very difficult” and instead “we are going to have a fire sale”. Any evidence to that? No, just a haha.
2 Onyx £222.2m or 20p a share
We should consider Onyx as a developer-owner-operator so as three elements for sale.
2.1. The “YieldCo” (The Operational Portfolio) This is the “safe” part of Onyx: 1,300+ operational projects across 30+ US states.
Primarily rooftop solar and carports for “Blue Chip” names like Walmart, Amazon, and Primo Brands. These have 15–20 year contracted Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with inflation-linked escalators.
Portfolio GAV Value $580m, project debt -$346m; NAV $233.8m or £187m
The portfolio is 211MW with 50% energised at the prior update September 2025, so an average value of $2.75m GAV per MW.
2.2 The “DevCo” (The Pipeline & Platform) The Asset: Onyx has a ~500MW+ pipeline of projects in various stages of sign off and commercial business development.
Valuation: £35.2m or $47m.
Market Proof: In June 2025, Onyx secured a $260M financing facility (expandable to $350M). You don’t get a quarter-billion-dollar credit line from major banks unless your pipeline and platform have real, audited value.
2.3. The “New Frontiers” (Storage & EV Charging) Onyx is no longer just “Solar Onyx.” It has moved heavily into BESS (Battery Energy Storage Systems) and EV Fleet Charging.
The Opportunity: Solar-plus-storage projects have higher EBITDA margins (often 10–15% higher) than standalone solar because they can “shift” energy to peak-price periods.
The Proof: The Maine project energised in Feb 2026 explicitly highlighted its “behind-the-meter” non-export design, which is the high-value sweet spot for industrial users.
2.4. Reduction (-$83m/-£63m/-5.8p) Arguably you could say that with SEIT in wind down, Onyx will be unable to fund any development after 2027. This is described as -5.8p a share for SEIT (the -2.5p is part of the -5.8p before you let detractors double count).
It’s not necessarily a foregone conclusion when Onyx can (and has) borrowed from other parties, potentially extend facilities (keeping debt to EBITDA in proportion) and also can recycle cashflow into new projects theoretically but let’s assume it can’t and that its owner SEIT shall suck all cash flow out. We are in wind down now.
So Onyx is worth only 14.2p or £159m net of the -5.8p per share development platform aspect and boasting a 211MW portfolio the PPA’s are valued at £0.75m NAV each MW and £2.4m ($3.2m) per MW GAV.
The US C&I (Commercial & Industrial) solar market is currently seeing a wave of consolidation. Big “aggregators” are buying smaller portfolios to get scale. C&I are very lucrative containing SREC (solar renewable energy certificates – which are State level subsidies – nothing to do with Trump) selling energy at a retail price $90/MW not wholesale price ($30/MW).
Notice the vast difference in revenue per MWh for retail solar vs utility solar which this detractor invested heavily in making “substantial loses”. As I said 12 months ago Ecofin is not a good proof point to Onyx. It’s a very different business model – even if both are “solar”.
Better – and recent – examples of C&I/retail deals are Altus Power December 2025 buying 234MW at $2.8m per MW, TPG in April 2025 buying 1.3GW at $3m per MW
So ironically, the above values suggest that while the development platform might wipe -5.8p from the NAV the current portfolio if it sells for $3m per MW (net of costs) would be worth $633m. Minus paying off the -$346m debt such a deal leaves SEIT with $287m or £215m which is an overall -2.9% haircut vs today’s NAV.
So the operating portfolio is worth MORE than its NAV on a read across basis.
That further assumes the Onyx development platform really is worth zero and essentially ceases trading in April 2026.
2.5 The Counter View
Of course the alternative explanation from that “heavy loses” detractor is that Onyx is a “landmine waiting to explode”.
How do energised solar panels and battery storage on a 20 year PPA which generate contracted returns explode? The detractor doesn’t explain his peculiar view. Just that EBITDA is “tiny” and the business is capital hungry. The business is building capital equipment and providing those at a retail rate below that of retail grid power (Solar Energy Assets and Power Storage). Surely that person understands that assets under construction do not generate EBITDA – which is the majority as at the 1H26 results.
So yes, there is initial capex, and a delay to seeing EBITDA results, it’s true. But once energised how capital hungry are solar and BESS assets? About $15 per KW per year consisting of monitoring, inspections, panel cleaning, inverter replacement and corrective repairs so for a 100KW rooftop system that’s $30k over two decades per MW.
Assuming 1500 MWh generation per MW and $100 per MWh that’s $150k per year or $3m. SREC adds $10 per MWh so $15k or $0.3m on top over 20 years. EBITDA is highly attractive at those rates.
Does a post-construction capex spend equal to 1% of revenue make Onyx’ operational portfolio “capital hungry”?! Remember we’re assuming no development at Onyx wiping -5.8p per share for no new development.
So as projects in construction are energised capex reduces to a tiny 1% trickle and yes it pays its own way. So the “landmine” is a little box that flaps up a little boom flag. Onyx becomes more boon than boom.
Why do you think Infrastructure Funds buy up these energised portfolios? They are hugely cash generative and you can apply leverage to generate substantial returns. Go and read the $ trillion dollar accounts of those large funds – I have.
3 Primary £222m or 20% of NAV
Nippon Steel has undertaken to invest $3bn into US Steel, Primary’s customer. Nippon is wholly reliant on the continuation of Primary to operate its US mill in Indiana. It is an essential asset.
We already established district heating is valued at 12X EBITDA+ and EBITDA is $40m implying a $480m GAV minus -$150m project debt implies $330m or £250m. So about 10% higher than the NAV.
At a -50% discount the market is valuing Primary as being worth £110m + £110m debt so 6.8X EV/EBITDA
That valuation makes no sense.
4 Driva £82m or 6% of NAV
There are several comparatives we can use.
4.1.Solör Bioenergy / E.ON Vallentuna (July 2025) – In mid-2025, Solör Bioenergy (a major Nordic aggregator) acquired the district heating network in Vallentuna (just north of Stockholm) from E.ON. This is ~67 GWh network serving 240+ customers. M&A Insights cited an implied EV/EBITDA multiple of 12.0x.
Vallentuna is geographically adjacent to Driva’s Stockholm-centric assets and shares the same “alternative pricing” model where prices are benchmarked against electricity costs.
4.2.Strängnäs Municipality (Solör Acquisition) – Though older (2021), this remains the anchor for municipal-to-private transactions in the Stockholm region. The deal was at EV/EBITDA Multiple: 11.4x.
Why Driva is Higher: Driva is a private platform (not a single municipality utility), which carries a “Private Ownership Premium.” As highlighted in the Lundin (2025) study on Swedish heating pricing, private firms charge roughly 7% more on average than municipal ones, leading to higher margins and, consequently, higher valuation multiples (12x–14x).
4.3. Stockholm Exergi (March 2026) is the “Giant” of the region (80% market share). Its 2025 Year-End Report (published March 2026) provides the secondary market data used to value Driva.
Projected EBITDA (2026): SEK 3.3bn – 3.5bn.
Enterprise Value (Market Derived): Based on recent private stake valuations (AP6/Ancala), the implied multiple for a premium Stockholm asset is 14.5x – 16.0x EBITDA.
BECCS Premium: A portion of this multiple is driven by Bio-CCS (Carbon Capture). Since Driva is smaller and more localized, it trades at a 2-3 turn discount to Exergi, placing Driva firmly in the 12.5x – 13x range.
Driva generated SEK84m in 2025 (annualising the 1H25 result). That’s £6.7m. Taking £82m NAV and £54m debt that’s a £136m GAV so a 21.9X EBITDA valuation.
Typically for regulated assets valuation is at 1.2x to 1.5x its regulated asset value.
But let’s assume 12X EBITDA and that EBITDA cannot grow from the £3.35m result in 1H25. That implies a -68% haircut and again assumes zero growth and zero valuation to the growth which we see at Driva’s website such as new wins in 2026 like Nordquist’s coffee facility
5 Oliva
Oliva’s EBITDA profits have varied between $6.2m (1H25 annualised) and $68.8m (FY23) and its base-load power is sought after in the current market. The £35m valuation implies a 0.7X to 7X EV/EBITDA.
It will be good to see the FY26 results to March 2026 to understand the outcome of the turnaround at Oliva.
6 Other Holdings (the Non-Top 5)
LEDs provided under a PPA to large corporates, co-gen, solar, BESS, EPCs, biomethane, energy saving – these aren’t unusual assets that are difficult to sell.
They are all valuable assets particularly in a world of higher energy prices. Year on year electricity is 20%-30% higher across most of Europe. With Data Centers and AI electricity is no longer dirt cheap in the USA either.
£250.7m NAV and £18m non-big 5 project level debt means an EV of £268.7m and £19.1m EBITDA is a 14X EV/EBITDA. Based upon read across from the recent sale of similar assets this is “about right”.
At a 50% discount £125m +£18m debt the market values this at £143m EV/EBITDA so at an EV/EBITDA of 7.5X.
7 Conclusion
Yes, you could potentially point to certain assets where a slight haircut to NAV is possible. And yes, there are going to be sale costs of a few percent, and yes perhaps in the interests of winding things up speed vs return will be balanced.
But there are plenty of proof points backing the majority of assets and clearly we are in a world in 2026 where energy has grown in importance.
There are plenty of asset realisation examples valued at at least 12X EV/EBITDA. Reasons to think more than 12X is possible too. Show me where sales are going through at 6X EV/EBITDA? You can’t, because they aren’t any.
Landmines? Fire Sales? Give me a break. Try putting together a serious case that backs up your view.
Sales may not materialise overnight and SEIT have not been able to rapidly sell assets until now, but deals are being done out there for assets not dissimilar to those held by SEIT. To describe them as having “no strategic value” reflects more on such people’s understanding of strategy than on the assets.
Do I regret picking SEIT shortly before the news of the wind down? Not at all. Bring it on. Meanwhile SEIT can continue to deliver a strong dividend although if they announce they are focusing on paying down the RCF I for one, won’t be displeased. Once the RCF is gone they could engage in vast buy backs and those or tenders will be hugely accretive given the 50% discount – or the 65% discount if you agree with the harshness of SEIT’s 9.7% discount rate.
Regards
The Oak Bloke
Disclaimers:
This is not advice – you make your own investment decisions.
Micro cap and Nano cap holdings might have a higher risk and higher volatility than companies that are traditionally defined as “blue chip”
Disclosures:
I have no commercial connection nor receive any remuneration from any company I write about.
Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Markets are very dangerous at the moment, as anyone investing is likely to see a loss of capital but for anyone starting out to acquire knowledge to build their Snowball, your Snowball should be different from the SNOWBALL, out of adversity comes opportunity.
As prices fall yields rise and as dividends rise, the yield you buy at should gently increase over time as long as you hold the share.
When you start your journey, the amount you can invest may be limited but compound interest takes a while to make a noticeable difference so that should be treated at a positive not a negative.
If you use the above table a dividend income Snowball yielding 7% would provide a retirement income of £21,474.00. Hopefully your yield could be higher, much higher.
Note: The last 5 years earns income nearly as much as the previous 20, one reason that a ‘retirement glide path’ is such a bad idea, if you have a dividend re-investment Snowball. If your Snowball is TR it might be a very good idea.
Using the 4% rule, the retirement income would be £12,270.00
Diversification.
Currently the SNOWBALL only invests in Investment Trusts as many currently trade at discount to NAV so the yield is enhanced. The Trusts currently held are from the Watch List updated most Saturdays although as the fcast income is ahead of the plan the SNOWBALL has bought some Trusts with a lower yield as a holding outside from the Renewable sector.
IF the price rises and the yields fall, the buying yield is still locked in but the earned dividends could be re-invested into ETF’s but that problem, as there are usually unloved sectors of the market, is not in the foreseeable future.
Have you ever thought about including a little bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is fundamental and everything. But imagine if you added some great images or video clips to give your posts more, “pop”! Your content is excellent but with pics and videos, this site could certainly be one of the greatest in its niche. Wonderful blog!
Tks for taking the time to post a reply. Investing for anyone’s retirement is a very serious endeavour as their Snowball has to outlive them to be worth the effort. Personally I’m not a fan of videos as the world is a wash with them.
The Market’s Panic Is Our Payday: 5 Cheap CEFs Yielding Up to 12.9%
Brett Owens, Chief Investment Strategist Updated: April 10, 2026
We contrarians love a good panic. Dividends are on sale!
The closed-end fund (CEF) aisle is where we do our best bargain shopping. Wall Street ignores CEFs, creating obscurity that we feast on. Discounts, mispricings and high yields are here.
Why the bargains? CEFs routinely go on sale. Thanks to their low profiles, supply and demand imbalances routinely disconnect a CEF’s price from its underlying assets.
When the value swings heavily in our favor, we buy.
And we have some dandy discounts now, with some big divvies attached! These five yields have soared to levels between 6.3% and 12.9%.
Plus, they are trading at discounts up to 12%. Which means we can buy these assets for as little as 88 cents on the dollar.
General American Investors (GAM)
Distribution Rate: 10.8%
General stock-market volatility is likely to draw out some of that inefficiency I just mentioned, so let’s start with a couple broader-market funds.
General American Investors (GAM), for instance, is a large-cap growth CEF that has more than a quarter of its assets invested in the banged-up tech sector, as well as double-digit exposure to the reeling financial and consumer discretionary sectors. Top holdings such as Alphabet (GOOG), Microsoft (MSFT), and Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) have been down to downright dreadful so far in 2026.
While it targets growthier stocks, GAM is technically a “large blend” fund, so we can horse-race it against the S&P 500—and the fund’s managers aren’t afraid to, either. Here’s a look at the fund’s performance versus the venerable index through the end of 2025:
Consider this: Only about 10% of large-cap mutual fund managers have been able to beat the index over the trailing 15 years. GAM boasts a performance edge over the past half-century. That’s an enviable track record.
The real draw of General American Investors, though, is how we receive those returns. An S&P 500 fund today will only deliver a little more than 1% of its annual performance in the form of dividends; however, GAM’s distributions—which admittedly are taxed somewhat differently because of their makeup—would deliver closer to 11% based on today’s distribution rate.
But this is where we need to be careful about valuation. Yes, GAM currently trades at a discount of nearly 12% to its net asset value (NAV). In many cases, that would represent a screaming bargain—but over the past five years, GAM, on average, has traded at a 15% discount. So it’s a nominal deal, but a relative premium.
Liberty All-Star Equity Fund (USA)
Distribution Rate: 12.9%
A stock CEF with far better relative value is Liberty All-Star Equity Fund (USA)—the first of two 12%-plus yielders on my radar.
This is another “blend” fund, but unlike GAM, it tilts toward value. Its roughly 140 stock picks have been selected by five teams of managers—three value-oriented and two growth-oriented, reflecting its typical 60/40 value/growth split.
The top holdings include many of the blue chips names every large-cap fund seems forced to hold—Nvidia (NVDA), Alphabet, Microsoft—but it has also elevated names such as Capital One (COF), Charles Schwab (SCHW) and Fresenius Medical Care (FMS).
Like with GAM, the bulk of USA’s returns come from its massive distribution. Performance hasn’t been as good, but over the long term, Liberty All-Star Equity has been pretty competitive with the S&P 500. A modest amount of debt leverage (where the fund borrows money to invest even more in its pick) has generally led to amplified gains in up markets, but deeper dips in down markets.
But USA’s chart has gotten really interesting of late.
This Is a Big Deviation From Liberty All-Star Equity’s Norm
For a few months in the back half of 2025, USA seemed to completely disconnect from the market in a bout of severe underperformance. But part of that was an implosion in its valuation. USA has long traded roughly in line with its net asset value, but it’s currently trading at a 10% discount to NAV—about as big a sale as shares have offered in the past five years.
Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ)
Distribution Rate: 8.4%
Let’s start to shift toward fixed income with the Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ): a straightforward do-it-all CEF that owns both stocks and bonds.
Specifically, CSQ management is tasked with investing at least 50% of its assets in equities, and the rest in “convertibles and fixed-income securities deemed beneficial during periods of high volatility.”
But despite the current volatility, CSQ is plenty aggressive right now, featuring a roughly 65/35 blend of stocks and bonds. The equity side is about 115 stocks wide, concentrated in blue chips like Nvidia (NVDA), Apple (AAPL), and Eli Lilly (LLY). On the debt side, its 500-plus holdings include convertibles, corporate bonds, bank loans, and other fixed-income instruments.
It’s difficult to provide a long-term comparison against similar ETFs. That’s because most of the players in that space are global (read: U.S. and international) funds—like the iShares Core 60/40 Balanced Allocation ETF (AOR) illustrated below—while CSQ’s assets are virtually 100% U.S.-based. And historically speaking, domestic funds have a significant performance edge.
But long-term, CSQ’s stock-bond portfolio has been enough to even beat the all-stock S&P 500. That’s in part because CSQ’s liberal use of leverage, currently 30% as I write this, has helped super-charge bull-market returns.
But There Is a Tradeoff
“Balanced” strategies are expected to have lower volatility than an all-stock portfolio because of the fixed-income holdings. CSQ, however, is a much wilder ride than the S&P 500, let alone plain-vanilla allocation funds.
On the plus side, Calamos Total Return prioritizes a consistent monthly distribution—indeed, the payout has changed just five times since 2011, and all of those changes (including the most recent one, in 2026) were raises.
But perhaps the biggest deal is the big deal we’re getting on CSQ right now. The fund typically trades about 1% to 2% below its net asset value (NAV). Today? Its 10% discount means we’re paying 90 cents on the dollar for this broad portfolio.
BlackRock Muniholdings (MHD)
Distribution Rate: 6.3%
We’re getting a similar discount from a much different portfolio in the BlackRock MuniHoldings (MHD), which owns about 900 tax-advantaged municipal bonds.
About the only places we’re getting a 6%-yield from ETF-land is junk funds and emerging markets strategies. But here, we’re getting fat monthly checks from high-quality municipal debt connected to transportation, utilities, health, housing, school districts, and more. Some 80% of assets are investment-grade, and the majority of that is in bonds rated AA or above.
By the way, that yield is even better than the headline figure indicates. Remember: Muni income is exempt from federal taxation, and sometimes state and local depending on where the bondholder resides. MHD’s distribution isn’t always entirely made up of tax-exempt income, but off the cuff, someone in the highest (37%) tax bracket who also pays NIIT (3.8%) would likely need a yield of around 8.5% from taxable bonds to get the same amount of take-home income.
This isn’t necessarily a defensive income haven, however. The bulk of MHD’s holdings are also on the very long end of the maturity spectrum, with 70% of assets invested in bonds that mature in 20 years or more. Tack on a moderate amount of debt leverage, and we get a CEF that can really take flight—or careen into the ground. It all depends on the environment for munis.
It’s Better Than a Muni Index Long-Term, But Its Slumps Can Be Significant
Unsurprisingly, it pays to pay attention to relative valuation. On that front, MuniHoldings’ almost 11% discount to NAV is nice, but it’s not very wide compared to its five-year average discounts of about 9%.
There’s also the open question of how the fund fares without its longtime helmsman. Walter O’Connor, who worked in municipal bonds for four decades and managed MuniHoldings for roughly half that time, stepped down in March 2026. He’s succeeded by five managers that joined between 2022 and 2023.
Nuveen Floating Rate Income Fund (JFR)
Distribution Rate: 12.8%
Another monthly-paying bond CEF, Nuveen Floating Rate Income Fund (JFR), is an extremely “junky” portfolio of about 425 corporate floating-rate bonds. Only a little more than 10% of assets are allocated to investment-grade bonds, and those are on the bottom tier of BBB. Another quarter is in junk’s top drawer (BB), and the biggest slice of the pie (about 50%) is in B-rated debt.
Between that and heavy leverage of nearly 40% as I write this, we’re looking at a bond fund that swings big and yields big.
Floating-rate bonds feature variable interest rates that adjust periodically based off a benchmark rate, so they’re generally less productive in declining-rate environments, but they offer protection against rising rates. Rates still seem likelier to head lower than higher over the next year or so, but that’s not the relationship I’m most interested in.
Near the end of 2024, I warned that JFR was trading near the historical high end of its price spectrum. My chart at the time:
That thin discount yet again played out poorly for JFR.
But the Tables Are Turning in New Money’s Favor
Nuveen’s floating-rate fund now trades for a 12% discount, so we’re getting these bonds at 88 cents on the dollar. That’s a good deal cheaper than the fund’s five-year average discount of about 7%.
2026 Is a Mess. My Favorite 11% Dividend Can Help You Clean Up.
But if I’m going to take a swing on a double-digit yield, I’d prefer to do it on a fund that won’t be swimming upstream against the Fed.
Right now, one of my favorite home-run dividendsis a heavily diversified, brilliantly built bond portfolio that yields 11% but is also set up for stock-like gains.
This fund checks off just about every income box I can think of:
It pays a whopping 11% in annual income!
It has increased its dividend over time!
It doles out special dividends on the regular!
And it pays its dividends each and every month!
On top of that, Morningstar previously named this fund’s manager a Fixed Income Manager of the Year. He’s been inducted into the Fixed Income Analysts Society Hall of Fame, too.
That’s about as good a resume as we’ll find, and his fund will pay us $1,100 for every $10K we invest.
Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-B) maintains a 9.32% stake in Coca-Cola. The holding company itself pays no dividend, preferring to reinvest earnings and buy back stock, yet generates significant dividend income across its equity portfolio.
How Much Buffett Is Collecting From Coca-Cola
Berkshire Hathaway owns approximately 400 million shares of Coca-Cola. With Coca-Cola paying an annual dividend of $2.04 per share, that stake generates roughly:
400,000,000 shares × $2.04 = $816 million per year
That breaks down to about $204 million every quarter flowing from Coca-Cola to Berkshire.
For a single stock position, that level of income is extraordinary. Coca-Cola has effectively become a steady cash-producing asset inside Berkshire’s portfolio, sending more than three-quarters of a billion dollars annually to the conglomerate without requiring Buffett to sell a single share.
The Power of Yield on Cost
Buffett’s long-term investment approach with Coca-Cola demonstrates the compounding power of dividend growth over decades. The stock’s market value has multiplied many times over, while the dividend growth illustrates the compounding machine Buffett built through patient capital allocation.
Coca-Cola has raised its dividend for 63 consecutive years, earning Dividend King status. The most recent increase came in 2025, when the quarterly payout rose 5.2% from $0.485 to $0.51 per share. Over the past five years, the dividend has climbed from $1.60 in 2019 to $2.04 in 2025 – a 27.5% cumulative increase.
The SNOWBALL pays no dividend, preferring to reinvest earnings and buy back stock, yet generates significant dividend income across its equity portfolio.
If you think that you know better than W.B. and Benjamin Graham. GL
