Short answer:GCP = safer, lower‑volatility, UK‑infrastructure‑heavy, lower growth.
SEQI = broader global infra debt, higher diversification, slightly higher risk, historically stronger total return. Both yield ~8–9%, but they behave differently.
📌 What GCP and SEQI actually are
Both are London‑listed infrastructure debt investment trusts, but their mandates diverge:
GCP Infrastructure Investments (GCP) Focuses on UK social infrastructure, PFI/PPP‑style cashflows, regulated assets, and long‑dated government‑linked revenues.
Sequoia Economic Infrastructure Income Fund (SEQI) Invests in global economic infrastructure debt — transport, utilities, digital infra, energy, data centres — across senior, mezzanine, and sometimes subordinated loans.
🔍 Current market snapshot (23 April 2026)
Metric
GCP
SEQI
Price
75.20p
80.90p
Dividend yield
9.33%
8.47%
P/E
34.65
15.74
Market cap
£618m
£1.19bn
52‑week range
68.14p–80.50p
74.10p–84.70p
Interpretation:
GCP trades on a higher yield but also a higher P/E, signalling lower growth expectations and more valuation pressure.
SEQI is larger, more diversified, and priced more like a credit fund.
🧠 How they differ in risk, return, and behaviour
⭐ SEQI — broader, more flexible, more return‑oriented
Global portfolio reduces UK‑specific political/regulatory risk.
This is a non-independent marketing communication commissioned by Columbia Threadneedle Investments. The report has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and is not subject to any prohibition on the dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research.
Portfolio
CT Global Managed Portfolio aims to provide investors with a long-term savings vehicle consisting of two share classes: CMPI, which aims to deliver a growing income alongside capital appreciation, and CMPG, which focusses solely on maximising capital growth. Once a year, shareholders have the option to switch between share classes at net asset value without incurring UK capital gains tax. This enables those not investing through a tax-exempt account to adjust their investments over time in line with their needs without triggering a tax liability.
Both portfolios consist exclusively of investment companies, which managers Adam Norris and Paul Green regard as best-in-class and select on a bottom-up basis. That said, they also incorporate macroeconomic views into their investment process to identify both strategic and tactical opportunities. For this purpose, they can leverage Columbia Threadneedle’s significant in-house resources, benefitting from input provided by the multi-asset team.
Adam and Paul have been increasing their exposure to risk assets in recent months. They are constructive on the outlook for corporate earnings growth, and while they remain mindful of potential headwinds, such as higher oil prices driven by ongoing geopolitical tensions in the Middle East and possible changes in trade tariff rates, they highlight supportive policy measures across several regions, including the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ in the US, alongside stimulus packages in Germany and Japan, as well as likely steps to bolster economic growth in China.
One area they have added to across both share classes is Asia and emerging markets, where they see attractive valuations, strong earnings growth potential, and a weakening US dollar as tailwinds. Since our previous update (published on 14/10/2025), they have topped up their positions in Fidelity Emerging Markets (FEML) and Mobius Investment Trust (MMIT), both held within the CMPG portfolio. They have also introduced Invesco Asia Dragon (IAD) into both portfolios, highlighting its style-agnostic approach. Its managers, Fiona Yang and Ian Hargreaves, invest in companies they view as undervalued relative to fundamentals or where they believe the market underestimates earnings growth potential. In addition, IAD funds its dividend from both capital reserves and income generated by its portfolio companies, targeting a payout of 4% of NAV per year. This gives the trust the flexibility to invest in companies offering low or no dividend yield but stronger long-term growth potential, while still being able to deliver an attractive income, making it compatible with CMPI’s mandate.
In fact, Adam and Paul favour this approach over traditional equity income strategies that pay a natural dividend, as they believe such strategies are typically constrained to a narrow pool of income-generating stocks, many of which they consider ‘value traps’ (i.e. stocks offering high dividend yields but limited total return potential). Consistent with this view, they have also initiated a position in Invesco Global Equity Income (IGET), a global equity income strategy targeting a dividend equivalent to 4% of NAV at the end of its previous financial year, using the same mechanism. At the end of February 2026, IGET was a top-ten holding across both CMPI and CMPG portfolios, as the table below shows.
TOP TEN HOLDINGS
Source: CTI, as at 28/02/2026
Conversely, Adam and Paul have continued to reduce exposure to UK equities. While these trade at a discount to their peers in other developed markets on aggregate, the managers view this as a reflection of their low growth potential and do not believe that valuations alone provide a sufficient catalyst for performance. Since their appointment, they have divested from Finsbury Growth & Income (FGT), Lowland Investment Company (LWI), Baillie Gifford UK Growth (BGUK), Law Debenture (LWDB) and Diverse Income Trust (DIVI) in the CMPG portfolio. Within CMPI, they have exited DIVI and Henderson High Income (HHI), but have retained LWI and LWDB, viewing the income stock-picking skills of James Henderson and Laura Foll — the managers of both trusts — as strong and well suited to CMPI’s mandate. While they are not seeing a broad-based recovery in UK small caps at this juncture, Adam and Paul believe there are still pockets of value within this space. To exploit these, they have introduced Odyssean Investment Trust (OIT) and Strategic Equity Capital (SEC) into the CMPG portfolio. Both strategies take sizeable positions in a limited number of stocks (fewer than 20 holdings), resulting in highly concentrated portfolios, and engage intensively with investee companies to drive improvement and unlock value.
The allocation to private equity has also been reduced since our previous update, although this was due to idiosyncratic reasons rather than a view on the asset class. For instance, Adam and Paul have trimmed their holdings in HgCapital Trust (HGT), a private equity strategy focussing on software and tech-enabled services companies, as they assessed that the type of businesses it invests in may face disruption from artificial intelligence. This concern has since materialised, with software-related businesses having experienced a sell-off in early 2026. Adam and Paul took advantage of the subsequent rebound to further trim their holdings in HGT. As a result of geopolitical uncertainty and its potential impact on the private equity market, they have not recycled the proceeds into this asset class. That said, they had added to their holdings in Schiehallion (MNTN), a late-stage private equity strategy held in the CMPG portfolio, last year. This reflects their view that clear winners are emerging within the portfolio, including SpaceX, an aerospace and space transportation company, and Bending Spoons, a company specialising in acquiring, managing, and revitalising digital apps and software businesses.
Adam and Paul have also exited multi-asset strategies such as Personal Assets Trust (PNL) and BH Macro (BHMG) in the CMPG portfolio, leading to a reduced allocation to the ‘alternatives’ category, as they are currently favouring exposure to risk assets. That said, they remain constructive on infrastructure, which also falls within the alternatives category. Since their appointment, they have introduced Cordiant Digital Infrastructure (CORD) into CMPI’s portfolio and Pantheon Infrastructure (PINT) into both portfolios. We discussed the investment theses for both CORD and PINT in our previous note.
EXPOSURE TO CATEGORIES
Source: CTI
Overall, the number of holdings has been reduced in both portfolios since Adam and Paul’s appointment, reflecting their plan to adopt a higher-conviction approach. For instance, the number of holdings in the CMPG portfolio has been cut from 39 to 30 (as of 31/12/2025). Similarly, the number of holdings in the CMPI portfolio has been reduced from 38 to 30 over the same period. As a result, concentration in the top-ten holdings has also increased across both portfolios. Concentration in the top ten holdings has also increased across both portfolios. For example, while CMPG’s top-ten holdings accounted for c. 36% at the end of May 2025, this had risen to c. 50% by the end of February 2026. In the CMPI portfolio, the weight of the top-ten holdings increased from c. 42% to c. 46% over the same period.
The CMPI Snowball is different to the SNOWBALL as it invests more for the chance of capital gains but as you wait it pays a yield around 6%.
The SNOWBALL invests for higher yields and uses those higher yields to buy more shares that pay a higher yield, until you want to use those dividends to pay your bills.
This is a non-independent marketing communication commissioned by Columbia Threadneedle Investments. The report has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and is not subject to any prohibition on the dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research.
Increased geographical diversification and a punchier approach make CMPI/CMPG a new proposition.
Overview
The managers of CT Global Managed Portfolio (CMPI/CMPG), Adam Norris and Paul Green, have significantly increased the concentration and global diversification across both Portfolios of investment companies since taking over in June 2025, seeking to create leaner portfolios with punchier performance potential. By the end of last year, the number of holdings in both the growth and income share classes decreased to 30 from 39 and 38.
In recent months, the managers have increased exposure to equities. Although mindful of potential headwinds such as higher oil prices due to ongoing tensions in the Middle East, Adam and Paul are constructive on the outlook for corporate earnings. They highlight supportive policy measures across several regions, including the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ in the US, the stimulus package in Germany, and likely steps in China to bolster economic growth.
Asia and emerging market equities are one area where Adam and Paul have notably been adding, given tailwinds such as attractive valuations, strong earnings growth potential, and a weakening US dollar. This includes, for example, the introduction of Invesco Asia Dragon (IAD) into both the CMPI and CMPG portfolios. They have also initiated a new position in Invesco Global Equity Income (IGET) in both portfolios, further contributing to global diversification.
Conversely, they have reduced exposure to UK equities. While these trade at a discount to peers in other developed markets, they believe this reflects their lower growth potential. The allocation to private equity has also been reduced, notably in CMPG’s portfolio. This was, however, driven by idiosyncratic reasons, as Adam and Paul have trimmed their position in HgCapital Trust (HGT), a private equity strategy focussing on software and tech-enabled services companies, amid concerns that these types of businesses may be disrupted by artificial intelligence.
Analyst’s View
In our previous note, we highlighted Adam and Paul’s plans to increase global diversification and build higher-conviction portfolios as exciting developments, and we note that significant progress has been made towards this commitment. While we believe it is too early to assess the effectiveness of these changes on Performance, we continue to think they could lead to stronger returns over time, as both share classes should be able to benefit from a broader opportunity set through selectively curated investment companies.
In addition, we believe that both CMPG and CMPI offer exposure to attractive growth themes, including technology and emerging-market equities. In particular, we view the managers’ decision to continue adding to emerging markets as promising, given their attractive valuations and earnings growth potential. We also believe that both portfolios are well positioned to benefit from a potential recovery in alternative assets, with several investment companies specialising in these areas trading at wide Discounts.
Finally, we believe that CMPI could be particularly attractive to income-focussed investors, offering a Dividend yield of c. 6.1%. This compares favourably with many equity indices and equity income-focussed investment companies. It is also higher than the yields available on long-dated gilts, such as 10- and 20-year gilts, while offering greater potential for capital appreciation than fixed-income instruments. That said, we note that CMPI is currently trading at a premium of c. 3%, which could amplify losses should this narrow.
Bull
Higher-conviction approach and broader global diversification could lead to stronger returns
Both share classes offer exposure to promising growth themes
CMPI offers an attractive dividend yield from diversified sources
Bear
Ongoing geopolitical tensions in the Middle East could prove a headwind for risk assets
CMPI is currently trading at a premium to NAV, which may exaggerate losses if the premiums narrow
Trust of investment companies approach results in high overall cost of investment
The UK government has unveiled a broad package of energy reforms aimed at reducing the influence of volatile gas prices on electricity bills, alongside fresh support for clean power, grid investment and electrification. The measures come as renewed geopolitical tensions and disruption in the Middle East have once again exposed the UK’s reliance on international fossil fuel markets.
At the centre of the package are the government’s plans to “break the link” between gas and electricity prices by expanding the use of long-term fixed-price contracts for renewable generators and increasing the windfall tax on electricity producers benefiting from higher wholesale prices.
Fixed-price contracts for existing renewables
The most significant structural change is a proposal to offer voluntary long-term fixed-price contracts to existing low-carbon generators that are not already covered by subsidy schemes such as Contracts for Difference (CfDs). According to the government, these assets account for roughly a third of Britain’s power supply.
The aim is to shield households and businesses from spikes in wholesale electricity prices, which are often set by gas-fired peaking plant, even when cheaper renewables and nuclear supply much of the system.
The government says that Britain has already reduced the frequency with which gas sets the power price from around 90% of the time in the early 2020s to around 60% today, and this should fall further as more renewable capacity is built and comes online.
Windfall tax increased
The government has also announced changes to the Electricity Generator Levy (EGL), which was introduced to capture exceptional revenues earned by generators during periods of elevated gas prices. The tax rate under the levy is increasing from 45% to 55% and with immediate effect and its duration is being extended. The government says that the additional revenues generated by the levy will help fund support for households and businesses facing higher energy costs.
Wider clean energy package
The announcement also included a wider range of measures intended to accelerate the energy transition and reduce bills over time, including:
bigger grants for households using heating oil and LPG to install low-carbon heating;
extra funding for solar panels on social housing, schools and colleges;
plans to unlock public land for renewable development;
reforms to planning, grid access and network connections;
easier installation of EV chargers, heat pumps and rooftop solar;
funding to expand UK heat pump manufacturing; and
a new delivery plan for “Reformed National Pricing”, which the government says could unlock up to £20bn of system benefits between 2030 and 2050.
What it means for TRIG
The Renewables Infrastructure Group (TRIG) has released a statement following the government’s announcement saying that several elements of the package could be supportive for its portfolio.
Most notably, the possible extension of CfD-style contracts to operational renewable assets could improve revenue visibility and reduce earnings volatility for existing projects. TRIG said this policy aligns closely with its strategy of increasing fixed-price income, noting that around 75% of its projected revenues over the next five years are already contracted or fixed-price in nature. The company expects its eligible operational assets to participate in the proposed allocation process in 2027, if the scheme proceeds.
TRIG also said the higher Electricity Generator Levy is not expected to affect its Q1 2026 NAV. Its current power price assumptions remain below the threshold at which the levy applies, meaning no impact is expected on asset values or dividend cover.
Meanwhile, policies to accelerate electrification through EV adoption, heat pumps and network upgrades may support longer-term demand for electricity, strengthening the case for renewable generation and battery storage assets such as those held in TRIG’s portfolio.
What it means for ORIT
Octopus Renewables Infrastructure (ORIT) has also published an update in response to the UK government’s energy policy changes. ORIT estimates that the removal of Carbon Price Support from April 2028 would reduce forecast power prices for its unhedged UK assets by around £2–3/MWh initially, fading over time as renewables play a larger role in setting electricity prices, with a hit to net asset value is less than 0.5p per share. The increase in the Electricity Generator Levy from 45% to 55% is not expected to have a material impact on the trust.
More positively, the government’s proposal for voluntary long-term fixed-price contracts for existing low-carbon generators could create an opportunity for ORIT to lock in additional stable revenues in future. That would fit well with the trust’s income-focused strategy and may help further reduce exposure to wholesale power price volatility.
The benefits of using investment trusts to build wealth through market cycles is demonstrated by a real-world example.
By Rupert Hargreaves
(Image credit: Cheng Xin/Getty Images)
Investment trusts are the ideal vehicle to build long-term wealth. A real-world example recently posted on LinkedIn by investment manager John Moore makes this point well.
The portfolio was set up in 1999 and initially held Gartmore Shared Junior Zero Div (7.3% by value), English & Scottish Investors (18.4%), Finsbury Trust (18.2%), Law Debenture (19.8%), Majedie Investments (17.7%) and Scottish Mortgage (18.5%). You will notice that some of these no longer exist, while others have changed significantly.
English & Scottish Investors has undergone several reinventions. It became Gartmore Global Trust in 2002 and Henderson Global Trust in 2011. It was merged into Henderson International Income Trust in 2016 and this was then merged with JPMorgan Global Growth & Income (LSE: JGGI) in 2025.
Get 6 free issues + a free water bottle
Stay ahead of the curve with MoneyWeek magazine and enjoy the latest financial news and expert analysis, plus 58% off after your trial.
Tracing investment trust returns back over multiple decades and mergers is challenging. However, I estimate (using Google’s Gemini AI tool) that an investment of £1 in 1999 would now be worth £7.42 in JGGI shares today – an annual return of 7.8%. The fate of the Gartmore Shared Junior Zero Dividend trust, created in 1993, was less happy. This was a split-capital trust that emerged from Gartmore Value in 1993.
During the late 1990s, split-capital investment trusts with complicated structures became fashionable. Many ended up holding the shares of other splits. This financial engineering was a disaster – when the tech bubble burst, the sector imploded under a mass of debt and cross-shareholdings. By 2003, most split structures had either collapsed or been wound up. The Financial Services Authority, the then-regulator, stepped in and set up a £194 million compensation fund in 2004.
The rest of the portfolio still exists, with some manager and strategy changes. Finsbury Trust is now Finsbury Growth & Income (LSE: FGT) and has been run by Nick Train since Lindsell Train, the company he co-founded, was appointed portfolio manager in 2000. The shares have returned 677% since then, despite recent lacklustre performance.
Why you should consider investment trusts
Majedie Investments (LSE: MAJE)traces its roots back to 1910 as Majedie (Johore) Rubber Estates, a plantation company in Malaysia and is still controlled by the founding Barlow family. In 2002, the trust backed the launch of Majedie Asset Management, which ran its investments until it was acquired by Liontrust in 2022. Today, it is a multi-manager investment trust overseen by Marylebone Partners (now part of Brown Advisory). Gemini estimates that an investment would have returned 4.1% per year between 1999 and 2026.
Scottish Mortgage (LSE: SMT)and Law Debenture (LSE: LWDB)will be very familiar to many MoneyWeek readers. Like Majedie, Scottish Mortgage began by funding rubber plantations in Southeast Asia in 1909, but quickly began investing more widely. Today, it holds a high-conviction global portfolio of public and private growth stocks. I calculate it has returned 16.7% since 1999. Law Debenture is a unique combination of a UK equity portfolio and a professional services business. I estimate its annual return has been 11.8%.
So this portfolio has probably returned 11%-12% per year since 1999, compared to 8.2% for the MSCI AC World index, assuming no rebalancing and dividend reinvestment. The performance of the biggest winners more than offsets the losers. Investment trusts can use their fixed capital to invest and survive market cycles that can be terminal for open-ended funds.
This is why the MoneyWeek portfolio, set up in 2012, is based on investment trusts. There have been a few changes over the years, but the goal has remained the same: a global, set-and-forget portfolio. It now holds JGGI, LWDB and SMT (and has held FGT): other positions are AVI Global (LSE: AVI), Caledonia (LSE: CLDN) and Personal Assets (LSE: PNL).
Law Debenture is a unique combination of a UK equity portfolio and a professional services business. I estimate its annual return has been 11.8%.
The obvious question is why LWDB isn’t in your Snowball or why wasn’t is added when Mr. Market gave you the chance ?
It took several years to become an overnight success and it isn’t in the SNOWBALL, although it should be, because of the low yield and when prices fall, yields rise so there are always higher yielding shares to add to the SNOWBALL.
Next Rate Cut in 2027!? We Say No. This 7.6% Dividend Is Our Play
Brett Owens, Chief Investment Strategist Updated: April 21, 2026
I just took a glance at the Fed futures market and, frankly, couldn’t believe what I saw.
These traders don’t see a rate cut from the Fed until July of 2027. And even then, only a bare majority do:
Source: CME Group
C’mon man! That’s 15 months from now.
I know predictions are tough, but from where I sit, this one seems awfully hard to justify.
For one, Trump administration pick Kevin Warsh is likely to be installed as Fed chair long before then, with Jay Powell’s term officially up next month. Sure, Warsh has been hawkish in the past, but over the last few months, he’s been in line with the administration’s wish for lower borrowing costs.
Let’s be honest. If (when?) push comes to shove, Warsh will choose self-preservation.
But the Fed drama is the least of my reasons for expecting lower rates. A far bigger one is AI, which is cutting headcount, slowing wage growth and, as it does, grinding on inflation.
Goldman Sachs (GS), for example, recently said that AI is wiping out roughly 16,000 jobs a month on a net-net basis, with the bulk of those on the entry-level side of things. That’s after the US added just 181,000 net jobs last year, or an average of just over 15,000 a month.
In other words, the economy added fewer jobs per month than Goldman says AI is wiping out! Wage growth, too, has trended steadily lower since the big raises doled out in the go-go days of 2020 and 2021.
These are all deflationary. And with AI just starting to flow out to the broader economy, I expect wage growth and hiring to stay on the mat, dragging down price growth more. That means it’s time for us to pounce, while the crowd wrings its hands over inflation.
Our play? Bonds! Specifically, good old-fashioned municipal bonds. We’re into these plays now because:
They pay high (and tax-free) dividends. The fund we’ll discuss next yields 7.6%, and that payout could be worth 11.2% on a taxable-equivalent basis for those in the highest tax bracket.
They’re relatively safe, with bonds backed mainly by revenue-generating assets. Think vital infrastructure, like toll roads and airports.
Municipal bonds tend to be long duration. That’s key now, as these bonds’ value has fallen as rates have risen (since newer debt is being issued at higher rates). But their value stands to gain as rates fall (and newer, competing bonds are issued at lower rates).
When we’re looking to add “munis” to the portfolio of my Contrarian Income Report service, we look to closed-end funds (CEFs), specifically CEF manager Nuveen.
The company has been around since 1898 and manages around $1.4 trillion in assets today. It specializes in bonds, infrastructure and real estate, and its performance is proven. The Nuveen Municipal Income Fund (NZF) has been a staple of our portfolio since April 2023, and it’s returned about 30% in gains and reinvested dividends for us since. That’s a big move for a “boring” fund like this.
Funny thing is, this return came as the fund’s net asset value (NAV, or the value of its underlying portfolio—in purple below) declined, weighed down by the rising 10-year Treasury rate (in orange)—pacesetter for the real interest rates we all pay on our loans:
NZF’s NAV/Interest-Rate “Teeter-Totter”
Another thing to note here is the inverse relationship between NZF’s NAV and interest rates: When rates jump, NZF’s NAV falls (and vice versa). That overall trend toward higher rates cut the fund’s discount to NAV from roughly 14% when we bought to around par today.
That might make it seem like we’re too late here, but we’re not. A look deeper shows that the fund’s narrowing discount is not the result of investors suddenly catching on to our argument that AI will erode inflation and piling in. The fund’s price (shown in orange below) is only up around 6% in that three-year period.
Instead, it’s that falling NAV (again in purple below) that’s wiped out the discount:
NAV Drops, Price Holds Steady
Now that NAV drop looks set to reverse, setting up a nice entry point.
As AI slows wage growth and pulls down inflation, the Fed will cut, putting downward pressure on Treasury rates. As that happens, NZF’s NAV will rise (rates down, NAV up, remember), priming the fund for a premium—and the price growth that goes with it.
Another reason to be bullish? That long duration I mentioned a second ago. As I write, NZF’s portfolio of 671 bonds carries an average leverage-adjusted duration of 14 years. That’s the key to further upside as rates move down.
By the way, that leverage I just touched on amounts to about 35% of the portfolio. That sounds high, but it’s actually a normal ratio for a fund holding government-backed bonds like these. And it’s another benefit as rates decline, since lower rates will cut NZF’s borrowing costs.
But I’ve really left the best for last here: the dividend, and how much it could really mean for you, depending on your tax bracket.
An 11.2% Payout “Disguised” as 7.6%
As you might’ve guessed, NZF’s dividend has provided most of our 30% gain on the fund, since its price has only risen around 6% since we bought. That’s in part because management has hiked the dividend a healthy 85% in the last three years.
Given that the fund’s price tends to move slowly, these hikes went a long way toward boosting NZF’s 4.3% current yield at the time of our buy to 7.6% today.
And that’s before we talk tax benefits, which boost our payout even more—potentially a lot more. In the top tax bracket? NZF’s 7.6% yield flips to a gaudy 11.2% for you, with your federal tax savings, according to Bankrate’s taxable-equivalent yield calculator:
Source: Bankrate.com
In addition, we’ve got a shot at further dividend growth here as rates fall, driven by NZF’s NAV gains and its lower borrowing costs.
At the end of the day, our approach here is pretty simple: Come for the upside as AI swings NZF’s NAV/rate “teeter-totter” back our way. Stay for the 7.6% dividend (shielded from Uncle Sam), which we’ll happily pick up while we wait.
as Department for Energy says move to de-link electricity and gas prices won’t affect RO incentives
21 April 2026
QuotedData
Gavin Lumsden
Shares in renewable energy providers and infrastructure funds rose today after the government clarified that its plan to break the link between electricity and volatile gas prices would not affect generators accredited under the long-standing renewables obligation (RO) incentive scheme.
Energy secretary Ed Miliband and the chancellor Rachel Reeves announced an immediate hike in the electricity generator levy from 45% to 55%. They said this would ensure more of the “extraordinary revenues” power companies received from gas prices soaring in response to the Middle East war were available to support households and businesses.
Officials hope the tax rise will also encourage older renewable energy generators, which provide around a third of the UK’s power supply, to voluntarily move to long-term fixed-price contracts where they hadn’t already done so.
The move to new wholesale contract for difference (WCfD) would offer generators a stable, fixed price for their electricity and would mean that they and consumers would no longer be exposed to variable gas-linked electricity prices, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said.
Crucially, for London-listed renewables funds, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said the new WCfD regime, on which it will consult, would not replace their existing RO revenues.
“Under this proposal it is envisaged that generators accredited under the renewables obligation (RO) would continue to receive support via the RO in the way they do currently – with only their wholesale revenues being exchanged for a fixed price CfD,” the Department said.
“Government will only offer contracts to electricity generators where it represents clear value for money for consumers,” it added.
Having fallen last week when the government announced it would scrap the carbon price support tax on fossil fuel burners used to subsidise renewable energy providers, and reports emerged of the plan to uncouple gas and electricity prices, shares in renewable funds rallied. The Renewables Infrastructure Group (TRIG) rose 5% to 67.5p, Greencoat UK Wind (UKW) added 3% to 99p. Power companies Centrica, SSE and Drax gained 2%-4%.
Miliband said the government was “doubling down on clean power” as the UK faced its second fossil fuel shock in less than five years since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine also sent gas prices soaring.
Speaking at the Good Growth Foundation conference in London, Miliband announced further measures such as increased grants to upgrade oil and gas boilers, instal solar panels in social housing and schools and streamline planning rules to unlock more public land for renewable projects and speed up their connections to the electricity grid.
Energy groups and trade associations welcomed the moves but regretted the confusion caused last week.
RenewableUK CEO Tara Singh said: “We will work constructively through the details of all the measures being announced by the government, but we have to ensure that we take investors with us. At a time when ministers are hoping to attract record levels of investment into renewables, uncertainty over changes to taxation needs to be clarified immediately so it does not drive up the cost of investment.”
Dhara Vyas, chief executive of Energy UK, said it was frustrating that a positive announcement had been overshadowed by poor communications.
“The UK wins when there is the stability and certainty for companies to invest and we’ve seen the results in the roll-out of clean power, through CfDs for example, which continues to increase our energy security and reduce our reliance on gas. Sudden and ambiguous briefing of potential tax and policy changes outside a fiscal event, like the Budget, damage the UK’s investability and result in uncertainty for businesses and customers.”
As an older Fool, I love generating passive income. One of my main goals is delivering unearned income for my family. But like work itself, producing passive income is no pushover. In my working and investing life, I’ve encountered these five problems with building passive income:
1. Time and effort
Like everything worthwhile, making and managing money is not easy. It takes time and effort, often with significant upfront work. Also, making better financial decisions means understanding the pitfalls and rewards of money management, which can be boring.
2. Continuous upkeep
Once a plan is in place, it requires constant (even lifelong) commitment. Making extra income is not ‘fire and forget’. This endless maintenance is why my wife and I never became property landlords. We just couldn’t face dealing with tenants, repairs, etc.
3. Initial investment
Making extra financial income often requires some initial investment, because there’s rarely such thing as a free lunch. But making money from, say, stocks and shares doesn’t require a fortune. When I started investing in the 1980s, my yearly purchases probably totalled a couple of hundred pounds. However, this strategy snowballed over decades to improve our lives immeasurably.
4. No guarantees
The future is inherently uncertain. It’s impossible to predict what might be just around the corner, never mind in 10 or 20 years. Investing for income is a long game with no guarantees of success. Then again, a disciplined and long-term approach usually reaps rewards — but not for owners of Russian shares when the revolution came in 1917!
5. Risk of loss
As one old saying goes, the greater the risk, the greater the reward. But taking huge risks can cause a ‘permanent capital loss’ (losing more than is affordable). For example, I once lost £675,000 in 13 months on a single share that went to zero. This caused me great pain, but taught me lucrative lessons about taking excessive risks.
Delightful dividends
My family portfolio generates plenty of passive income from shares, plus some interest from highly rated bonds. Right now, we own maybe 30 different US stocks and UK shares, mostly for their dividend income.
Alas, share dividends are not guaranteed, so they can be cut or cancelled at short notice. That’s why I buy into solid businesses with good dividend histories, such as FTSE 100 firm Legal & General Group (LSE: LGEN).
Legal & General is one great British business I truly admire. Founded in 1836, today it is a leading provider of UK life assurance, long-term savings, and investment products. It currently manages over £1.1trn of assets for individuals and institutions.
This company has an enviable dividend record. In 2014, the dividend was 13.4p a share. This reward has risen every year since, except for Covid-wracked 2020, when it was unchanged from 2019. In 2024, the payout was 21.36p — up 59.4% in nine years.
As I write, this stock trades at 241p, valuing the group at £13.7bn. Its dividend yield is a whopping 8.9% a year, one of the very highest in the London stock market.
I suspect that in the next financial meltdown, L&G shares will take a beating as its earnings and cash flow fall. But the company has billions of pounds in reserves to keep paying dividends, so I hope to own this stock in perpetuity!
Foresight Solar Fund Limited Update on UK Carbon Price Support removal
Foresight Solar Fund Limited
(“Foresight Solar”, “FSFL” or the “Company”)
Update on UK Carbon Price Support removal
Foresight Solar, the fund investing in solar and battery storage assets to build income and growth, notes the UK government’s announcement on 16 April 2026 that it will remove the Carbon Price Support (CPS) mechanism from April 2028. The government’s move is intended to reduce wholesale electricity prices for consumers and industry in the medium term.
Based on the investment manager’s analysis, the removal of the CPS is expected to have a limited impact on Foresight Solar’s net asset value (NAV) of between 0.5 pence per share and 1.0 pence per share based on the 31 December 2025 NAV. As at this date, Foresight Solar’s NAV per share was 99.2p.
This estimate remains subject to review as independent power price forecasters update their forecasts. The Foresight Solar board and the investment manager will provide a further update in due course.
The change will have no impact on FSFL’s dividend target and expected 1.1x dividend cover for 2026.
Mitigating factors
It is important to note that the announced removal of the CPS mechanism is not taking place in isolation, with the outlook for UK power markets impacted by a range of factors. The expected effect on Foresight Solar’s NAV is limited by several mitigating factors:
· Active power price hedging: With merchant prices remaining elevated, the Company continues to benefit from its hedging strategy. As a reminder, Foresight Solar took advantage of recent market volatility to contract 87% of global forecast total revenues for 2026, 75% for 2027 and 63% for 2028.
· Market assumptions: Foresight Solar’s power price forecast is based on a blended average from three independent consultants, which captures a range of underlying forecasts. Two of them had already assumed a reduction or removal of the CPS over time, while the third estimated a tapered, longer-term impact. As a result, the effect was already partially reflected in current valuations.
· Geographic diversification: Approximately 25% of FSFL’s portfolio capacity is located outside the UK, reducing exposure to UK-specific policy changes.
· Timing of impact: The effect of CPS removal is expected to be concentrated in the period between 2028 and 2030, with minimal impact on the Company’s near-term cashflows.
· Expected policy harmonisation: The UK and the European Union are currently in the process of negotiating a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism that is likely to align Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) prices.
What is the Carbon Price Support?
The Carbon Price Support is a UK-specific tax applied to fossil fuel-based electricity generation. It increases the cost of generating power from gas and coal, which in turn has historically supported higher wholesale electricity prices.
With coal now fully phased out of the British generation mix and a focus on reducing electricity costs, the government has decided to end this mechanism from 2028. Its removal is expected to result in a modest reduction in UK power prices over time – and was already anticipated to varying degrees by market consultants.
Outlook
The board believes that the impact of this policy change is limited and manageable within the context of the Company’s diversified portfolio and active hedging strategy. Foresight Solar will continue to monitor market developments and hedge production as appropriate to maintain revenue visibility and support its dividend.
