Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

The AIC website, user feedback

Closed-end funds and OEICs
mc2fool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7812
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 3017 times

The AIC website, user feedback

#474414

Postby mc2fool » January 19th, 2022, 12:37 pm

I see that there's new style company profile pages on the AIC site. There's a feedback button on them asking "Let us know what you think about the new company profile pages", but I thought I'd start a thread here for folks to do so, so that our friendly local AIC Lemon could see any discussion on them. Then I figured, well why restrict the thread to just the company profile pages, let's just have a thread for user (our) feedback on developments on the AIC website in general. So, here we are ... :D

On the new style company profile pages, well my immediate reaction was Whoa! In particular to the long list of tabs across the top. Am I right in thinking that there's not actually any new information from before, just a re-laying out of the existing info? Somehow the new layout feels more overwhelming than the previous one, although that may well just be familiarity with the old one and surprise at the new, so I'll reserve judgement for a while, until I get used to the new one.

For anyone that's wondering, what are the company profile pages? It's, e.g., these: https://www.theaic.co.uk/companydata/0P00008ZME

One thing I will say is that I feel the "How to invest" tab is misplaced. It's generic, is not specific to the company, and is the same for all companies, so really shouldn't be under the company profile pages but rather under the "Ready to invest" menu item (although seems redundant with the other info there anyway).

One apparent bug: if you click the AIC sector "UK Equity Income" link on the Overview page it, indeed, goes to the Compare investment companies page with the right sector selected. However, under Firefox 96 (latest version), the Back button then appears broken, 'cos if you click Back it doesn't return to the company profile page.

On closer examination, the page stack actually contains four entries, two with ?sec=UGI followed by two with ?sec=UGI&sortid=Name&desc=false. So, when you hit Back it goes from the topmost (current) ?sec=UGI&sortid=Name&desc=false back to another the same, Then Back again takes you to ?sec=UGI, which is of course the same page, and another Back to the other ?sec=UGI, and another finally back to the company overview page.

Chome and Opera (both latest versions of) also have the same entries on their page stack but, curiously, don't exhibit the same problem. Hitting Back on those skips them all and goes straight back to the company overview page. So, possibly it's a Firefox bug (which you'll want to report ;)) but in any case, the effect is on the AIC site...

DavidM13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 423
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 405 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#474453

Postby DavidM13 » January 19th, 2022, 2:32 pm

Yes, we had the new pages as a side by side in testing for a month so those who were logged in could feedback before we went properly live. We made some changes on the back of that user testing.

There is more data as well as a general clean up. The general clean up is e.g. Moving things like documents, website address, Morningstar factsheet and announcements from randomly on the screen or side bar to dedicated tabs. The tabs, while more in number are far more targeted and clear on what they contain.

The main data addition is the research tab. This is all tagged up to the individual company so you can read the 3rd party research that comes out to the exchanges. You can also look at relevant press releases, videos and citywire articles. Another addition is for companies with AGMS which have been announced. You will see details of the AGM and if an on line option is available so a user can access the AGM itself or presentation materials. Also more information on gearing and dividend policy for example.

How to invest is indeed the same for all companies however we do make it clear on the page that not all platforms will necessarily offer all companies.

mc2fool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7812
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 3017 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#474483

Postby mc2fool » January 19th, 2022, 4:15 pm

Ok, I'll check out the research tab. :D

Have you managed to reproduce the Back issue under Firefox I described?

On another matter, I see that in some places on the "new" site (like in the Research tab and in Compare investment companies) clicking a link results in the page being opened in a new tab.

Don't do that! Firstly, it violates the basic design principle of the user being in control. Users can open links in new tabs (or windows) if they wish, as all browsers have Open in New Tab (/Window) functions, and shortcuts too (ctrl-click, shift-click). However, as it is the default, none have an Open in This Tab function, so by forcing a new tab on the user you are denying them choice, and hence control.

It's also disorienting, disturbs normal flow and breaks the back button. There's been plenty written about it, including from empirical usability testing. It even made numbers 1 & 2 of Nielsen-Normans Top 10 Web Design Mistakes twenty years ago! https://www.nngroup.com/articles/the-top-ten-web-design-mistakes-of-1999/.

However, they do have more recent (2020) research at https://www.nngroup.com/articles/new-browser-windows-and-tabs/

  • More windows or tabs increase the clutter of the user’s information space and require more effort to manage.
  • New windows or tabs can cause disorientation, with users often not realizing that a new window or tab has opened. This problem is exacerbated on mobile, where the old window is never visible.
  • Less-technical users struggle to manage multiple windows and tabs, especially on mobile. (On tablets, where users can have both multiple windows and tabs for the browser, it’s even more confusing.)
  • New windows or tabs prevent the use of the Back button for returning to the previous page and force the user to spend effort to find their way back to the previous content.
  • New windows or tabs are not inclusive for blind or low-vision users — especially when they open outside of the area that's magnified.
(If you're not familiar with Nielsen-Norman you should be! ;) They're the founding fathers of empirical usability testing, testing website usability by sticking users in front of them with eye trackers, heart monitors, keystroke timers, etc, etc, etc!)

Here's a few others:

"...opening a link in a new tab can have serious user experience implications.
:
The user can’t use the back button if a new tab has been opened since the new page is the first in that tab’s history (although more on that later); the content the user might want to go back to is in a different tab.
" https://www.tempertemper.net/blog/opening-links-in-a-new-tab-or-window-is-better-avoided

"Avoid opening links in a new tab or window. It can be disorienting - and can cause accessibility problems for people who cannot visually perceive that the new tab has opened." https://design-system.service.gov.uk/styles/typography/#opening-links-in-a-new-tab
Also see https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G200.html

"No, your website’s links should not open in a new window or tab (with rare exception). Here’s why. New Windows Break Up the User Flow" https://www.dgtlnk.com/blog/website-links-new-tab/

Yeah, some other sites do it too, but all the research and design principles say that in general it's not a good idea,

DavidM13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 423
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 405 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#474486

Postby DavidM13 » January 19th, 2022, 4:22 pm

Thanks for that it will certainly be taken under consideration.

I don't have Firefox but I will look at downloading it and recreating in due course.

thanks again

mc2fool
Lemon Half
Posts: 7812
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:24 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 3017 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#474510

Postby mc2fool » January 19th, 2022, 5:04 pm

DavidM13 wrote:I don't have Firefox but I will look at downloading it and recreating in due course.

Shock horror! :D I strongly recommend installing every browser with more than a smidgen of usage share and testing the AIC website on each. And each browser on each operating system too (the AIC do give you a PC, a Mac, an Anrdoid phone/tablet and a Linux system, right?!?).

All browsers are, thankfully, pretty much standards complaint nowadays, and the days of struggling to get a website working on more than two are more or less gone. But still, testing with at least Edge, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and Opera is a must .... :D

senanque
Posts: 11
Joined: November 12th, 2016, 8:05 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#474817

Postby senanque » January 20th, 2022, 6:00 pm

I'm a little disappointed that the 5 year dividend growth figure has been removed from the list of companies and is now only to be found under each company's 'Dividends' tab. I find it useful, even though the headline number does require scrutiny. And if five years why not ten as well?

I've always found it a little odd that a list of companies shows share price return from 1, 5 and 10 years but 'Performance' also shows the 3-year figure.

It would be tremendous if the user could select more than one sector - as you can on Trustnet - so that you could compare, say, Global with Global Equity Income.

I like the new look though, and the extra data. The website is an invaluable tool.

UncleEbenezer
The full Lemon
Posts: 10690
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 1459 times
Been thanked: 2965 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#474950

Postby UncleEbenezer » January 21st, 2022, 9:33 am

senanque wrote:It would be tremendous if the user could select more than one sector - as you can on Trustnet - so that you could compare, say, Global with Global Equity Income.

Not to mention, if you could list both OEICs and ITs in the same view. Particularly in specialist sectors, where sparsity may be more of an issue than overwhelming choice.

DavidM13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 423
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 405 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#474957

Postby DavidM13 » January 21st, 2022, 9:55 am

senanque wrote:I'm a little disappointed that the 5 year dividend growth figure has been removed from the list of companies and is now only to be found under each company's 'Dividends' tab. I find it useful, even though the headline number does require scrutiny. And if five years why not ten as well?

I've always found it a little odd that a list of companies shows share price return from 1, 5 and 10 years but 'Performance' also shows the 3-year figure.

It would be tremendous if the user could select more than one sector - as you can on Trustnet - so that you could compare, say, Global with Global Equity Income.

I like the new look though, and the extra data. The website is an invaluable tool.


Hi,

Almost everything you speak of above can be found on the "Advanced Compare" rather than the more basic "Compare" tool. This is designed to be intuitive but there is also a little tutorial if you require it. https://www.theaic.co.uk/aic/find-compa ... ed-compare Our data provider does not calculate 10y dividend growth rate.

We don't put everything in the more basic view e.g. 3y performance as dont want to overload the users and the page but the more sophisticated users are welcome to use the more advanced tool to tailor the report to themselves. If they are logged in they can save all their settings too.

There are no current plans to add OE funds to our website.

Cornytiv34
Lemon Pip
Posts: 98
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 12:36 pm
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 60 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#475020

Postby Cornytiv34 » January 21st, 2022, 12:14 pm

Going to the quoted site

"https://www.theaic.co.uk/aic/find-compa ... ed-compare"

I find the dividend rate for "AGT" AVI GLOBAL TRUST is 1.76% but going to my own AIC watchlist the rate is shown as an incredible 7.96%. As this is merely a watching not purchasing site I would expect adjustments for the 5 for 1 share reissue to be adjusted by AIC not me (my AIC watchlist is dated several days after the action). It seems that while it has happened in the quoted link something is amiss.

It must be a nightmare changing layouts when such transactions are in progress. Thanks to the brave people making these improvements.
Mike

DavidM13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 423
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 405 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#475084

Postby DavidM13 » January 21st, 2022, 2:28 pm

Cornytiv34 wrote:Going to the quoted site

"https://www.theaic.co.uk/aic/find-compa ... ed-compare"

I find the dividend rate for "AGT" AVI GLOBAL TRUST is 1.76% but going to my own AIC watchlist the rate is shown as an incredible 7.96%. As this is merely a watching not purchasing site I would expect adjustments for the 5 for 1 share reissue to be adjusted by AIC not me (my AIC watchlist is dated several days after the action). It seems that while it has happened in the quoted link something is amiss.

It must be a nightmare changing layouts when such transactions are in progress. Thanks to the brave people making these improvements.
Mike


Hi Mike,
This is nothing to do with the tools or change in profile pages. Watchlists should update automatically. This is a data calculation bug by our supplier Morningstar. I have raised a ticket so they fix urgently. It should be showing a sensible figure now. https://www.theaic.co.uk/companydata/0P ... /dividends

DavidM13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 423
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 405 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#478481

Postby DavidM13 » February 4th, 2022, 8:07 am

mc2fool wrote:I see that there's new style company profile pages on the AIC site. There's a feedback button on them asking "Let us know what you think about the new company profile pages", but I thought I'd start a thread here for folks to do so, so that our friendly local AIC Lemon could see any discussion on them. Then I figured, well why restrict the thread to just the company profile pages, let's just have a thread for user (our) feedback on developments on the AIC website in general. So, here we are ... :D

On the new style company profile pages, well my immediate reaction was Whoa! In particular to the long list of tabs across the top. Am I right in thinking that there's not actually any new information from before, just a re-laying out of the existing info? Somehow the new layout feels more overwhelming than the previous one, although that may well just be familiarity with the old one and surprise at the new, so I'll reserve judgement for a while, until I get used to the new one.

For anyone that's wondering, what are the company profile pages? It's, e.g., these: https://www.theaic.co.uk/companydata/0P00008ZME

One thing I will say is that I feel the "How to invest" tab is misplaced. It's generic, is not specific to the company, and is the same for all companies, so really shouldn't be under the company profile pages but rather under the "Ready to invest" menu item (although seems redundant with the other info there anyway).

One apparent bug: if you click the AIC sector "UK Equity Income" link on the Overview page it, indeed, goes to the Compare investment companies page with the right sector selected. However, under Firefox 96 (latest version), the Back button then appears broken, 'cos if you click Back it doesn't return to the company profile page.

On closer examination, the page stack actually contains four entries, two with ?sec=UGI followed by two with ?sec=UGI&sortid=Name&desc=false. So, when you hit Back it goes from the topmost (current) ?sec=UGI&sortid=Name&desc=false back to another the same, Then Back again takes you to ?sec=UGI, which is of course the same page, and another Back to the other ?sec=UGI, and another finally back to the company overview page.

Chome and Opera (both latest versions of) also have the same entries on their page stack but, curiously, don't exhibit the same problem. Hitting Back on those skips them all and goes straight back to the company overview page. So, possibly it's a Firefox bug (which you'll want to report ;)) but in any case, the effect is on the AIC site...


Yes. It is indeed a Firefox bug rather than a website issue. We will report it in any case to get in their queue. Interestingly, if you press the back button 4 times you get to the previous page.

Myfyr
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 130
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:34 pm
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#481124

Postby Myfyr » February 17th, 2022, 9:58 am

The new JEGI that replaced JETI and JETG is missing, do you know when this may be added?

Also does Primary Health Properties (PHP) qualify for inclusion?

Thanks.

seagles
Lemon Slice
Posts: 490
Joined: August 19th, 2017, 8:37 am
Has thanked: 153 times
Been thanked: 235 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#481159

Postby seagles » February 17th, 2022, 12:05 pm

I thought I had added JEGI to my income builder portfolio but just noticed it was JGGI, thanks for making me aware of my mistake.

DavidM13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 423
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 405 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#481160

Postby DavidM13 » February 17th, 2022, 12:27 pm

Myfyr wrote:The new JEGI that replaced JETI and JETG is missing, do you know when this may be added?

Also does Primary Health Properties (PHP) qualify for inclusion?

Thanks.


Hi There,
Our data provider is still finalizing the JETI/JETG merger. It has proven quite complex to ensure a smooth history but they are edging closer.

Primary Health Properties is an Chapter 6 "commercial property company" https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/LR/6.pdf rather than a chapter 15 closed-end fund https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/LR/15.pdf

So we dont cover it.

Myfyr
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 130
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:34 pm
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#481225

Postby Myfyr » February 17th, 2022, 9:56 pm

DavidM13 wrote:
Myfyr wrote:The new JEGI that replaced JETI and JETG is missing, do you know when this may be added?

Also does Primary Health Properties (PHP) qualify for inclusion?

Thanks.


Hi There,
Our data provider is still finalizing the JETI/JETG merger. It has proven quite complex to ensure a smooth history but they are edging closer.

Primary Health Properties is an Chapter 6 "commercial property company" https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/LR/6.pdf rather than a chapter 15 closed-end fund https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/LR/15.pdf

So we dont cover it.


Thank you! :D

For JEGI I guess the historic dividends may differ depending if you are ex-JETI or ex-JETG. May need to be some sort of average I guess.

DavidM13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 423
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 405 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#482393

Postby DavidM13 » February 23rd, 2022, 5:29 pm

This is all now alive and well and there are no horrible spikes on the chart :) https://www.theaic.co.uk/companydata/0P ... erformance

Myfyr
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 130
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:34 pm
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#482405

Postby Myfyr » February 23rd, 2022, 6:56 pm

DavidM13 wrote:This is all now alive and well and there are no horrible spikes on the chart :) https://www.theaic.co.uk/companydata/0P ... erformance


Thanks.

The yield of 1.93% seems a bit low. Certainly in JETI the yield was north of 3%.

The dividend frequency is stated as semi annually but JETI was quarterly. Could this explain the dividend being a lot less than expected?

Thanks.

dmukgr
Posts: 40
Joined: September 14th, 2018, 3:35 pm
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#482420

Postby dmukgr » February 23rd, 2022, 9:24 pm

It’s certainly messed up my historical dividend received

Pendrainllwyn
Lemon Slice
Posts: 304
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:53 pm
Has thanked: 162 times
Been thanked: 200 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#482447

Postby Pendrainllwyn » February 24th, 2022, 6:48 am

Firstly, thank you to all those at AIC. The website is a very useful resource and free. I have used it many times and made a number of investments as a result. A few suggestions.

1. Videos
Some of the videos on AIC are very good and have helped me decide to invest or not. Many provide short soundbites and don't really get to the heart of what the portfolio manager is trying to do and are, for me, less useful. In some cases there are excellent videos on Youtube that are not available on AIC's site. Finsbury Growth & Income is a recent example, Fundsmith Emerging Equity Trust another. The latter has a 45 minute video of their AGM on youtube. It's also on FEET's website. Could AIC add more such videos to their Research tab?

2. ESG.
City of London's ESG policy looks impressive (I choose only because mc2fool used that company for his link). It starts with
"The Board believes that integrating environmental, social and governance factors or "ESG" into investment decision-making and ownership practices is an important factor for delivering the investment outcomes our shareholders seek. ESG considerations are therefore a fully embedded component of the investment process employed by the Fund Manager, and the wider Janus Henderson investment teams.

Defining ESG
Environmental factors include climate change, use of natural resources, pollution, waste management, water usage and deforestation

Social factors include corporate culture, diversity, health and safety, community relations and supply chain management"

Then I note the top 3 holdings are in the Tobacco, Alcohol and Oil&Gas businesses. Also in the top 10 is another Oil & Gas company and a mining company which has had well publicised ESG challenges. ESG doesn't seem to be an important factor and I am unconvinced by City of London's ESG credentials. Other companies are more upfront that ESG is not a priority. AIC allows me to compare companies by many criteria - Dividend Yield, Premium, Performance etc. could you allow me to do the same by their ESG credentials and add as a screening option? There are a number of ESG rating agencies. An independent assessment would be more valuable than a Board policy statement.

3. Future Performance. If you could show that I would willingly pay a subscription fee :D

Keep up the good work,
Pendrainllwyn

DavidM13
Lemon Slice
Posts: 423
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 46 times
Been thanked: 405 times

Re: The AIC website, user feedback

#482451

Postby DavidM13 » February 24th, 2022, 7:14 am

Pendrainllwyn wrote:Firstly, thank you to all those at AIC. The website is a very useful resource and free. I have used it many times and made a number of investments as a result. A few suggestions.

1. Videos
Some of the videos on AIC are very good and have helped me decide to invest or not. Many provide short soundbites and don't really get to the heart of what the portfolio manager is trying to do and are, for me, less useful. In some cases there are excellent videos on Youtube that are not available on AIC's site. Finsbury Growth & Income is a recent example, Fundsmith Emerging Equity Trust another. The latter has a 45 minute video of their AGM on youtube. It's also on FEET's website. Could AIC add more such videos to their Research tab?

2. ESG.
City of London's ESG policy looks impressive (I choose only because mc2fool used that company for his link). It starts with
"The Board believes that integrating environmental, social and governance factors or "ESG" into investment decision-making and ownership practices is an important factor for delivering the investment outcomes our shareholders seek. ESG considerations are therefore a fully embedded component of the investment process employed by the Fund Manager, and the wider Janus Henderson investment teams.

Defining ESG
Environmental factors include climate change, use of natural resources, pollution, waste management, water usage and deforestation

Social factors include corporate culture, diversity, health and safety, community relations and supply chain management"

Then I note the top 3 holdings are in the Tobacco, Alcohol and Oil&Gas businesses. Also in the top 10 is another Oil & Gas company and a mining company which has had well publicised ESG challenges. ESG doesn't seem to be an important factor and I am unconvinced by City of London's ESG credentials. Other companies are more upfront that ESG is not a priority. AIC allows me to compare companies by many criteria - Dividend Yield, Premium, Performance etc. could you allow me to do the same by their ESG credentials and add as a screening option? There are a number of ESG rating agencies. An independent assessment would be more valuable than a Board policy statement.

3. Future Performance. If you could show that I would willingly pay a subscription fee :D

Keep up the good work,
Pendrainllwyn


Thanks for the note Pendrainllwyn.

1) We have the ability to link all videos already. It is just about being made aware of them. I will check in with colleagues about the process for receiving.

2) I totally understand that heavy text based narratives made comparisons hard. The ESG policy is just a start within the world of ESG data provision. There are a lot of taxonomy and disclosure rules coming down the pipeline which we will be monitoring to help understand how best to enhance the offering. Ratings is not on the agenda yet. It is a well known fact that ratings between providers are not very well correlated. MSCI and Morningstar (sustainalytics) are two of the better known providers. Their methodology at an individual stock level and when aggregating to a fund level are quite different and correlation is far lower than one would expect. Put simply MSCI may make a fund AAA while Morningstar assign just 3/5 "Globes" to the same fund. Additionally, coverage is an issue. Both providers require the reference data for underlying companies of 67% or more. They dont always have this for emerging or smaller companies which would unfairly penalise them if they then fall off searches and filters You may note that Morningstar recently culled 1,500 OPEN END funds from its "Sustainable universe"so this is an evolving area where caution is advised . If you are desperate to see a rating you can access freely on the Morningstar website now via their screener tool (which isn't as pretty as our screener tool!). Choose "next columns" to see what I mean.

3) This is currently in beta testing with a view to a summer launch.


Return to “Investment Trusts and Unit Trusts”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: doug2500 and 14 guests