LTL
LTI’s performance is still largely determined by that of its largest exposure, LTL, which at the end of March 2026 accounted for 19.8% of the portfolio, down from 24.5% six months earlier. LTL has experienced substantial investor outflows in recent years. Funds under management (FUM) at LTL have fallen to £9.8bn in September 2025, from a peak of £24.3bn in July 2021. Annual management fees make up almost 99% of LTL’s total revenues and 80% of net profits are paid to shareholders in dividends, meaning that the contribution made by LTL to LTI’s revenues remains considerable.
One positive development amid declining FUM is the recent launch of a new international strategy (EAFE) focused on the developed world excluding the US, which complements LTL’s four existing strategies spanning global, UK, Japan and North American equities. LTL says that this strategy has been under consideration for some time, but current market valuations and growing demand for international equities made the timing particularly compelling.
Alongside the establishment of an International LLC (funded with balance sheet capital) a longstanding client also seeded the strategy through two segregated mandates. As a result, the strategy has launched with over $200m in AUM. The strategy will be co-managed by James Bullock and Ben van Leeuwen (profiles of whom can be found on page 16).
Performance
Direct comparisons with benchmarks and the global investment companies peer group are difficult to make due to LTI’s unique investment policy and the concentrated nature of its portfolio. Figure 10 shows that LTI’s NAV has fallen sharply over the past year relative to both its peer group and the MSCI World Index, as FUM at LTL has fallen further and sentiment towards its software holdings was hit by AI disruption fears.
Figure 10: LTI NAV total return performance relative to benchmark and peer group1
Despite the poor performance over five years, LTI’s 10-year NAV total return is still greater than both the peer group and the benchmark, as shown in Figure 11, reflecting the exceptional contribution of LTL in prior years.
Figure 11: Cumulative total return performance over periods ending 30 April 2026
| 6 months (%) | 1 year (%) | 3 years (%) | 5 years (%) | 10 years (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LTI share price | (14.6) | (23.6) | (31.9) | (46.3) | 43.2 |
| LTI NAV | (19.3) | (17.7) | (6.0) | (0.9) | 262.2 |
| MSCI World Index | 3.3 | 27.0 | 58.6 | 73.9 | 254.9 |
| Peer group average NAV | 1.4 | 20.9 | 44.8 | 67.6 | 241.1 |
Source: Bloomberg, Marten & Co. Note 1) peer group is defined below.
Peer group analysis
Figure 12: Peer group comparative data as at 5 May 2026
| Premium / (discount) (%) | Dividend yield (%) | Ongoing charge (%) | Market cap (£m) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsell Train | (15.6) | 7.0 | 0.80 | 120 |
| Alliance Witan | (5.5) | 2.2 | 0.47 | 4,823 |
| AVI Global Trust | (8.4) | 1.8 | 0.85 | 1,024 |
| Bankers | (7.7) | 2.0 | 0.51 | 1,313 |
| Brunner | (8.3) | 1.7 | 0.61 | 644 |
| F&C | (8.1) | 1.3 | 0.45 | 6,115 |
| Mid Wynd | (1.7) | 1.1 | 0.64 | 211 |
| Monks | (5.4) | 0.0 | 0.43 | 2,447 |
| Scottish Mortgage | 3.5 | 0.3 | 0.31 | 15,568 |
| Sector median | (6.5) | 1.9 | 0.56 | 3,585 |
| LTI rank | 9/9 | 1/9 | 8/9 | 9/9 |
Source: QuotedData website
Up-to-date information on LTI and its peers is available on our website
LTI is a constituent of the AIC’s Global sector, which is currently comprises nine companies. LTI’s discount is the widest among the peer group, while its dividend yield is far higher than the peer group median due to its unique structure and revenue contribution from LTL. The ongoing charges ratio is at the top end of this peer group, reflecting its small market cap (the smallest in the peer group), although we would argue that none of these charges are particularly high.
Figure 13: Peer group cumulative NAV total return data as at 30 April 2026
| 6 months | 1 year | 3 years | 5 years | 10 years | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lindsell Train | (19.3) | (17.7) | (6.0) | (0.9) | 262.2 |
| Alliance Witan | 0.2 | 14.2 | 36.5 | 71.9 | 190.7 |
| AVI Global Trust | 1.4 | 13.1 | 40.7 | 88.6 | 205.1 |
| Bankers | 3.7 | 27.5 | 44.3 | 68.4 | 204.3 |
| Brunner | 5.1 | 22.0 | 42.5 | 98.0 | 214.5 |
| F&C | 3.6 | 24.9 | 55.8 | 94.4 | 242.2 |
| Mid Wynd | (8.3) | 1.4 | 8.3 | 24.3 | 143.4 |
| Monks | 0.2 | 29.3 | 52.2 | 49.1 | 254.3 |
| Scottish Mortgage | 5.2 | 35.2 | 78.3 | 46.3 | 474.0 |
| Sector median | 1.4 | 20.9 | 44.8 | 67.6 | 241.1 |
| AGT rank | 9/9 | 9/9 | 9/9 | 9/9 | 2/9 |
Source: Bloomberg, Marten & Co
Dividend
Figure 14: LTI dividend history
LTI’s dividend is largely funded by the revenue income it receives from LTL, which accounts for around 72% of LTI’s total revenue. With FUM at LTL continuing to decline, further pressure in LTI’s dividend has become inevitable. For 2025, the dividend was £42 per share, down 18.4% on 2024. Further declines in LTL’s FUM will impact LTI’s future dividend, unless the board decides to draw upon revenue reserves, which seems unlikely.
Premium/(discount)
Figure 15: LTI discount over five years
LTI’s discount has moved within a range of 10.4% to 24.7% and averaged 17.5% over the 12 months ended 30 April 2026. As of publishing, the company’s discount had narrowed to 15.6%.
As we have discussed, LTL’s quality-focused investing style has been out of favour for some time and has contributed to LTI’s wider discount, while the continued shrinking of FUM at LTL has also been a significant factor.
The board has indicated that it believes using share buybacks as a tool to reduce the discount would prove ineffective. To fund a buyback programme, the company would need to sell existing quoted investments, which would result in an increase in LTL’s percentage weighting within LTI’s portfolio and an increased expense ratio for remaining shareholders.
Fees and costs
Investment management fee of 0.6% of the lower of market cap or NAV
Under the terms of the investment management agreement, Lindsell Train Limited is entitled to receive an annual fee of 0.6%, calculated on the lower of adjusted market capitalisation or adjusted NAV. In the year to 31 March 2025, the manager was paid £819,000 (2024: £976,000).
The manager is also entitled to receive a performance fee, which is calculated annually at a rate of 10% of the value of any positive relative performance versus the benchmark in a financial year. Relative performance is measured by taking the lower of the NAV or average market price, taking into account dividends, at the end of each financial year and comparing the percentage annual change with the total return of the benchmark. A performance fee will only be paid out if the annual change is both above the benchmark and is a positive figure. No performance fee has been paid since 2021.
For the year ended 31 March 2025, LTI’s ongoing charges ratio was 0.80% (2024: 0.83%).
Capital structure
LTI has a simple capital structure with one class of ordinary share in issue. Its ordinary shares have a premium main market listing on the London Stock Exchange and, as at 5 May 2026, there were 20,000,000 in issues and none held in treasury.
Gearing
LTI is permitted to borrow up to a maximum of 50% of NAV, but it does not currently use gearing to enhance returns, in part reflecting the size and risk associated with the company’s unlisted investment in LTL.
Financial calendar
The trust’s year-end is 31 March. The annual results are usually released in June (interims in December) and its AGMs are usually held in September of each year. An annual dividend is usually paid in August.
Major shareholders
Figure 16: Major shareholders as at 5 May 2026
Management team
LTL is headed up by Michael Lindsell and Nick Train, who co-founded the business in 2000. The wider investment team comprises four members, all of whom are portfolio managers following recent promotions in March 2026.
Michael Lindsell
Michael co-founded LTL in 2000 and is the firm’s chief executive. He is the portfolio manager for Japanese equity portfolios and jointly manages global equity portfolios. Michael has over 40 years’ experience in investment management, including heading GT Management’s global and international funds. Following the acquisition of GT by Invesco in 1998, he was appointed head of the combined global product team. Michael has a degree in Zoology from the University of Bristol.
Nick Train
Nick co-founded LTL and is the firm’s chairman. He is the portfolio manager for UK equity portfolios and jointly manages global equity portfolios. Nick has over 40 years’ experience in investment management, including as head of global equities at M&G Investment Management. He previously he spent 17 years at GT Management. Nick has a degree in Modern History from the University of Oxford.
Board
LTI’s board comprises six non-executive directors. All are independent of the manager with the exception of Michael Lindsell. The company’s articles of association limit the aggregate fees payable to the directors to a total of £200,000 per annum, leaving comfortable headroom at the current fee levels.
Board policy is for all directors to retire and offer themselves for re-election annually. Neither the chairman nor any other non-executive director should normally serve for more than nine years, although this may be extended for a limited period where it is considered in the interests of the company or shareholders.
As is illustrated in Figure 17, all of LTI’s directors have personal investments in the trust, which we believe aligns directors’ interests with those of shareholders.
Figure 17: Directors
| Director | Role | Date of appointment | Length of service (years) | Annual fee (£) | Shareholding1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roger Lambert | Chair | 23/09/2022 | 3.5 | 43,000 | 5,000 |
| David MacLellan | Chair of the audit committee | 30/08/2023 | 2.6 | 36,000 | 7,500 |
| Nicholas Allan | Non-executive director | 18/09/2018 | 7.5 | 29,000 | 15,000 |
| Helena Vinnicombe | Senior independent director | 23/09/2022 | 3.5 | 29,000 | 2,300 |
| Sian Hansen | Non-executive director | 04/06/2025 | 0.8 | 29,000 | 1,400 |
| Michael Lindsell | Non-independent director | 13/07/2006 | 19.7 | – | 1,333,884 |
| Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|
| Focused investment strategy targeting durable, cash-generative businesses | Extremely concentrated portfolio offers limited diversification |
| LTI’s differentiated investment approach offers a way of diversifying investors’ portfolios | LTI’s returns can deviate markedly from those of peers and global indices |
| Opportunities | Threats |
| Investment approach could return to favour, especially if volatility persists | Focused portfolio brings stock-specific risk |
| AI commoditises data provision, negatively impacting LTI stocks |
Source: Marten & Co
Bull vs. bear case
Figure 19: Bull vs. bear case for LTI
| Aspect | Bull case | Bear case |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | Performance trend reverses and investment approach is widely recognised | Momentum-driven stocks continue to drive indices, to the detriment of LTI returns |
| Dividends | LTI’s dividend yield is by far the highest of the peer group | Dividend falls as revenue income it receives from LTL continues to dwindle |
| Outlook | Quality, growth investing comes back into favour | Elevated macroeconomic risks and uncertainty over impact of AI make the outlook hard to predict |
| Discount | LTI’s discount narrows as enduring quality of portfolio companies acknowledged | Underperformance of peers and indices over past five years creates further selling pressure |
Source: Marten & Co
Source: Marten & Co
IMPORTANT INFORMATION
This marketing communication has been prepared for Lindsell Train Investment Trust Plc by Marten & Co (which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority) and is non-independent research as defined under Article 36 of the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/565 of 25 April 2016 supplementing the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MIFID). It is intended for use by investment professionals as defined in article 19 (5) of the Financial Services Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) Order 2005. Marten & Co is not authorised to give advice to retail clients and, if you are not a professional investor, or in any other way are prohibited or restricted from receiving this information, you should disregard it. The note does not have regard to the specific investment objectives, financial situation and needs of any specific person who may receive it.
Leave a Reply