Charities unconcerned by Brexit referendum, Mayfair survey shows

Charities are largely unconcerned by the UK’s EU referendum, according to a report by Mayfair Capital Investment Management.

Mayfair Capital’s ‘Charity Investors’ Attitudes to Property Investment’ found that 80% of investors intend to keep their allocations to property unchanged over the next two years.

The company surveyed 41 investment managers with charity mandates and direct charities, with a combined total of more than £35bn (€44.5bn) in investments under management.

Of the survey’s 32 respondents that had no intention of changing their allocation to property, only two said a vote to leave would alter their plans.

Frances Ketteringham, head of research, strategy and risk, said there were signs charity investors might be better able to look through short-term volatility in the market.

“Charity investors signalled that they will take a longer-term view of their investments, and they have a strong emphasis on income,” she said.

“Few selected ‘fund performance’ or ‘capital growth’ as primary reasons for investing in this asset class.”

If a fund is delivering a “reasonable level of income and the investor has a longer-term investment horizon, then that investor may be less anxious about current conditions,” Ketteringham added.

Mayfair said the outlook for inflows into the property sector would remain subdued.

The target property investment allocation by investment managers is 7.5%, compared with 15% by direct charities.

It said the primary reasons for investing in property were diversification and income, although it pointed toward a shift away from a pure income towards a total return mindset.

Ketteringham said: “The focus on income is unsurprising and means property is competing with inflows into equities, corporate bonds and infrastructure, which were identified as the other assets classes also chosen for income purposes”.

The survey found a preference for absolute returns over benchmark-relative returns.

Most respondents also noted that environmental, social and governance had less impact on fund selection than traditional measures.