Agenda Document Pack - Investment Review Board - 10/06/2026
Renfrewshire Council · 10 June 2026
Back to Investment Review Board — 10 June 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
02/06/2026 Notice of Meeting and Agenda Investment Review Board Date Time Venue Wednesday, 10 June 2026 11:00 Remotely via MS Teams, Members Councillor John Shaw (Convener): Councillor Iain Nicolson (Depute Convener): Councillor Alison Ann-Dowling: Councillor Jacqueline Cameron: Councillor Neill Graham. Further Information - online meetings only This meeting is on-line only but is a meeting which is open to members of the public by prior arrangement. A copy of the agenda and reports for this meeting will be available for inspection prior to the meeting at the Customer Service Centre, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley and online at http://renfrewshire.cmis.uk.com/renfrewshire/CouncilandBoards.aspx For further information, please email democratic-services@renfrewshire.gov.uk Recording of Meeting This meeting will be recorded for subsequent broadcast via the Council's internet site. If you have any queries regarding this please contact committee services on democratic- services@renfrewshire.gov.uk To find the recording please follow the link which will be attached to this agenda once the meeting has concluded. https://youtu.be/lozkjJZtr8E MARK CONAGHAN Head of Corporate Governance Page 1 of 46
Page 2
02/06/2026 Items of business Apologies Apologies from members. Declarations of Interest and Transparency Statements Members are asked to declare an interest or make a transparency statement in any item(s) on the agenda and to provide a brief explanation of the nature of the interest or the transparency statement. 1 Minute of Meeting Minute of meeting held on 19 November 2025. 3 - 6 2 Paisley and Renfrew Common Good Funds six-month report to 31 March 2026 Report by Director of Finance & Resources. 7 - 46 3 Date of Next Meeting Members are asked to note that the next meeting of the Investment Review Board is scheduled for 18 November 2026. Page 2 of 46
Page 3
Minute of Meeting Investment Review Board Date Time Venue Wednesday, 19 November 2025 11:00 Remotely via MS Teams, Present Councillor Jacqueline Cameron, Councillor Alison Ann-Dowling, Councillor Iain Nicolson, Councillor John Shaw. Chair Councillor Shaw, Convener, presided. In Attendance C McCourt, Head of Finance & Procurement, G Borland, Finance Manager, A Burns, Corporate Finance Manager, J Barron Committee Services Officer and D Cunningham, Licensing & Committee Services Officer (all Finance & Resources). Item 1 Page 3 of 46
Page 4
Also in Attendance D Watson, Investment Consultant Hymans Robertson LLP, G Brisbane and J Ryan, LGT Wealth Management Limited, formerly abrdn Capital Limited. Recording of Meeting Prior to the commencement of the meeting, the Convener intimated that this meeting of this Board would be recorded and that the recording would be available to watch on the Council’s website. Declarations of Interest and Transparency Statements There were no declarations of interest or transparency statements intimated prior to the commencement of the meeting. 1 Minute of Meeting There was submitted the Minute of the meeting of the Investment Review Board held on 11 June 2025. DECIDED: That the Minute be approved. 2 Paisley and Renfrew Common Good Funds six-month report to 30 September 2025 There was submitted a report by the Director of Finance & Resources together with a presentation by D Watson from Hymans Robertson LLP, relative to the Paisley and Renfrew Common Good Funds, a review of investment income and the key issues relating to the Paisley and Renfrew Common Good Funds. G Brisbane, Senior Investment Manager and Charity Lead (Scotland) LGT Wealth Management Limited (formerly abrdn Capital Limited) also spoke to the presentation relative to the Paisley and Renfrew Common Good funds investments performance. The presentation referred to a review of the Investment Managers’ performance for the six months to 30 September 2025; an update of markets; and the current economic climate. DECIDED: That the report and presentation be noted. Page 4 of 46
Page 5
3 Review of Investment Policy Statement There was submitted a report by the Director of Finance & Resources relative to the scope and content of the proposed Investment Policy Statement. The Council had arranged for the investments of the Paisley and Renfrew Common Good Funds to be managed by LGT Wealth Management Limited and had agreed a number of principles governing decisions regarding those investments. These requirements were formalised in an Investment Policy Statement, which was reviewed annually to ensure that the principles remained appropriate to the Council's requirements. The Investment Policy Statement was last reviewed in November 2024. A copy of the Policy was appended to the report. DECIDED: That the Investment Policy Statement, a copy of which was attached to the report, be approved. 4 Date of Next Meeting DECIDED: That the next meeting of the Investment Review Board be held on 10 June 2025. Page 5 of 46
Page 6
Page 6 of 46
Page 7
1 PUBLIC ___________________________________________________________________ To: Investment Review Board On: 10 June 2026 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Director of Finance and Resources __________________________________________________________________ Heading: Paisley and Renfrew Common Good Funds six-month report to 31 March 2026 ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 Hymans Robertson LLP have been engaged by the Council to provide investment advice pertaining to the Paisley and Renfrew Common Good Funds, and to assess the performance of the Funds’ investment managers, LGT Wealth Management. 1.2 A report by Hymans Robertson LLP is attached for Members’ consideration. The report provides an assessment of the performance of the Funds’ investments and income levels during the six-month period ending 31 March 2026. Hymans Robertson LLP will be represented at the meeting by David Watson (Investment Consultant), who will present his report to Members. Mr Watson will also give a presentation covering an update on markets and the current economic climate. 1.3 Gair Brisbane, Head of Charities - Scotland, LGT Wealth Management, will give a short presentation during which there will be an opportunity for Members to question him directly in regard to his presentation and Fund performance. Item 2 Page 7 of 46
Page 8
2 PUBLIC ____________________________________________________________ 2. Recommendations 2.1 To consider the attached report and presentation from Hymans Robertson LLP and the presentation by LGT Wealth Management. ___________________________________________________________________ Implications of the Report 1. Financial – fund income generated by the Investment Manager is made available for distribution through grants and other awards agreed by Local Partnerships and the Finance, Resources and Customer Services Policy Board. All funds are managed in line with the requirements of local government regulations, and in line with the Investment Policy Statement. 2. HR & Organisational Development – none arising directly from this report. 3. Community Planning – none arising directly from this report. 4. Legal – none arising directly from this report. 5. Property/Assets – none arising directly from this report. 6. Information Technology – none arising directly from this report. 7. Equality & Human Rights – none arising directly from this report. The Investment Policy Statement that governs the Environmental, Social and Governance impacts of the Common Good Fund investment is set and agreed by the Investment review Board annually.. 8. Health & Safety – none arising directly from this report. 9. Procurement – none arising directly from this report. 10. Risk – there is an inherent risk that investment returns will not meet their target due to a number of external factors. It is the job of the investment manager to mitigate against this risk by their investment approach, and decisions taken throughout the year. 11. Privacy Impact – none arising directly from this report. 12. COSLA Policy Position – none arising directly from this report. 13. Climate Risk – none arising directly from this report. Page 8 of 46
Page 9
3 PUBLIC ___________________________________________________________________ List of Background Papers None ___________________________________________________________________ Author: Geoff Borland, Finance Manager 0141 487 0875 geoffrey.borland@renfrewshire.gov.uk Page 9 of 46
Page 10
63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Hymans Robertson LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC310282. A list of members of Hymans Robertson LLP is available for inspection at One London Wall, London EC2Y 5EA, the firm’s registered office. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and licensed by the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries for a range of investment business activities. Hymans Robertson is a registered trademark of Hymans Robertson LLP. Renfrewshire Council Common Good Funds Review of Investment Managers' Performance for the 6 months to 31 March 2026 Page 10 of 46
Page 11
2 63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Market update Annual CPI Inflation (% year on year) Gilt yields chart (% p.a.) Investment and speculative grade credit spreads (% p.a.) Brent crude oil rose 76.4%, to $118 per barrel, over the period. Oversupply concerns weighed on oil prices in 2025; however, geopolitical tensions and the Strait of Hormuz (a vital route for 20% of global energy trade) closure drove oil prices up 63.1% in March and 94.5% in the first quarter (Q1). Despite above-target inflation, weakening labour markets prompted rate cuts in the US and UK over the fourth quarter (Q4). More cuts were expected in 2026; however, energy-driven inflation concerns led markets to price in possible rate hikes instead. In the UK, two rate-cuts by end-February became two-rate hikes by end-March. Markets priced in a possible rate hike in the eurozone. In Japan, rates rose to 0.75% pa, the highest since 1995. Despite a softer second half, 2025 proved resilient (expanding 2.8%), amid higher US tariffs and policy uncertainty. AI-related investment, fiscal support and monetary easing reinforce a reasonable global growth backdrop in 2026. However, supply-side risks from the US-Iran conflict add uncertainty. After peaking in summer 2025, US and UK headline inflation was slowly easing. Tariff impacts on US inflation were milder; in the UK, wage and services inflation eased. However, higher energy costs derailed disinflation progress, with US (3.3%), UK (3.3%) and eurozone (2.6%) inflation up in March. The trade-weighted US dollar was up 0.6% over the period and has outperformed peers since the conflict began. Yen (-7.2%), euro (-1.2%) and sterling (-0.8%) equivalents fell. Gold prices rose 20.6%, despite March’s 12% decline, due to selling pressure from investors seeking liquidity for rebalancing and collateral purposes, and non-yielding assets’ diminishing appeal. Markets priced in a possible rate hike in the eurozone. In Japan, rates rose to 0.75% pa, the highest since 1995. Sovereign bond yields rose across major advanced markets in Q1. Short-term yields rose the most, as markets priced in rate hikes. UK and US 10-year yields increased to 4.9% pa and 4.3% pa, over the six-month period, respectively. Data source: LSEG DataStream, Barings, Bloomberg Market Background – 6 Months to 31 March 2026 Page 11 of 46
Page 12
3 63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Historical returns for world markets Market Background – 6 Months to 31 March 2026 Data source: LSEG DataStream. Returns shown in Sterling terms. Indices shown (from left to right) are: FTSE All World, FTSE All Share, FTSE AW Developed Europe ex-UK, FTSE North America, FTSE Japan, FTSE AW Developed Asia Pacific ex-Japan, FTSE Emerging, FTSE Fixed Gilts All Stocks, FTSE Index- Linked Gilts All Maturities, iBoxx Corporates All Investment Grade All Maturities, Bloomberg Global Aggregate Treasuries Index, MSCI UK Monthly Property; UK SONIA. Page 12 of 46
Page 13
4 63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Global equity sector returns [2]Regional equity returns [1] Market commentary Equivalent Japanese and German yields rose more, to 2.4% pa and 3.0% pa, respectively, on increased issuance expectations. Concerns over greater bond issuance amid waning institutional demand have pressured long-end yields. Real yields rose on global competition for capital from the AI-investment boom. Despite the sell-off in March, global equities are up a modest 1.2% over the six months. Performance broadened beyond the US. Energy stocks outperformed, and investor preference for ‘old economy’ sectors led value (6.2%) to outpace growth (-4.1%). US markets fell 1.9% as mega-cap tech stocks declined due to earnings, AI capex and sector concerns. Developed Asia Pacific outperformed on increased AI capex and expectations of fiscal support in Japan. The UK benefited from its above-average exposure to energy stocks. A value tilt and exposure to healthcare (the best-performing sector in Q4) lent support to Europe ex UK. Emerging markets also modestly outperformed. The MSCI UK Monthly Property Total Return Index rose 2.9% over the period; aggregate capital value growth eased to a modest 0.1% gain. The sectoral trend continued: industrial (0.8%) and retail (0.7%) capital values grew, more slowly, while offices fell (-1.8%). Data source: LSEG DataStream. [1] FTSE All World Indices. Commentary compares regional equity returns in local currency. [2] Returns shown in Sterling terms and relative to FTSE All World Market Background – 6 Months to 31 March 2026 Page 13 of 46
Page 14
5 63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Valuation and Performance - Paisley Common Good Fund Valuation Income Performance Cumulative Performance 30/09/2025 £154,810 31/12/2025 £158,306 31/03/2026 £165,892 Target £129,000 (LGT) Estimated Annual Income 30/09/2025 31/03/2026 Actual % Benchmark % Difference UK Equity 1.16 1.26 22.4% 40.0% Overseas Equity 3.22 3.34 59.4% 40.0% Total Equity 4.38 4.61 81.8% 80.0% UK Government Bonds 0.39 0.39 6.9% 18.0% International Bonds 0.48 0.46 8.3% Total Bonds 0.87 0.85 15.1% 18.0% Cash/Cash Products 0.18 0.17 3.1% 2.0% Total 5.43 5.63 Value (£m) Proportions - 17.6% 19.4% 1.8% - 11.1% 8.3% -2.9% 1.1% Page 14 of 46
Page 15
6 63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Valuation and Performance - Renfrew Common Good Fund Valuation Income Performance Cumulative Performance 30/09/2025 £592,244 31/12/2025 £603,555 31/03/2026 £632,066 Target £492,000 (LGT) Estimated Annual Income 30/09/2025 31/03/2026 Actual % Benchmark % Difference UK Equity 4.42 4.80 22.2% 40.0% Overseas Equity 12.31 12.89 59.7% 40.0% Total Equity 16.73 17.69 81.9% 80.0% UK Government Bonds 1.49 1.48 6.8% 18.0% International Bonds 1.82 1.78 8.2% Total Bonds 3.31 3.25 15.1% 18.0% Cash/Cash Products 0.72 0.65 3.0% 2.0% Total 20.76 21.59 Value (£m) Proportions - 17.8% 19.7% 1.9% - 11.2% 8.2% -2.9% 1.0% Page 15 of 46
Page 16
7 63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Over the six months to March 2026, the Paisley and Renfrew funds delivered returns of 4.9% and 5.2% respectively, underperforming their benchmarks by 1.5% and 1.2%. This reflects a strong end to 2025, followed by a materially weaker market environment in the first quarter of 2026. As 2025 drew to a close, financial markets remained supportive despite emerging signs of slowing global growth. Expectations of monetary easing and continued strength in global equities, particularly in AI-related sectors, supported asset prices, while bond markets also benefited as investors priced in lower interest rates. Against this backdrop, both the Paisley and Renfrew funds delivered returns of 5.8% in Q4 2025, outperforming their benchmarks by 0.6%. Market conditions deteriorated in Q1 2026. An initial period of stability was overtaken by rising geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, which drove energy prices higher and clouded the macroeconomic outlook. This weighed on global equities, with weakness later in the quarter offsetting earlier gains, although UK equities were more resilient given their higher exposure to energy and commodity producers. Bond markets also came under pressure as higher inflation expectations reduced the likelihood of near-term policy easing, with UK gilts among the weaker performers. As a result, the Paisley and Renfrew funds returned -0.8% and -0.6% over Q1 2026, underperforming their benchmarks by 2.0% and 1.7%. Overall underperformance over the six-month period was therefore driven by weaker returns across most asset classes in Q1 2026 (with the exception of UK equities), particularly toward the end of the period, and was further compounded at total fund level by asset allocation differences versus the benchmark, which detracted from relative performance. In particular, the funds’ underweight exposure to UK equities detracted from relative performance over this period, as UK equities proved more resilient than overseas equities. As at March 2026, equity allocations stood at 81.8% for Paisley and 81.9% for Renfrew, slightly above the 80% benchmark, with portfolios underweight UK equities and overweight overseas equities. While this positioning reflects a long-term preference for overseas markets, which have outperformed the UK over time, it was less supportive over the recent six-month period. Bond allocations were 15.1% for both funds, below the 18% benchmark, with the remaining c.3% held in cash to provide liquidity. Over the 12 months to March 2026, the Paisley and Renfrew funds delivered returns of 15.4% and 15.7% respectively, underperforming their benchmarks by 1.8% and 1.5%. In the same order, three-year annualised returns were 9.0% pa and 9.1% pa, trailing the benchmark by 2.1% pa and 2.0% pa respectively. Five-year annualised performance stood at 5.2% pa and 5.3% pa, lagging by 2.9% pa and 2.8% pa. Since the inception of the mandate, however, both funds have delivered annualised returns of 6.9% pa, broadly in line with the benchmark. Commentary Page 16 of 46
Page 17
63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Hymans Robertson LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC310282. A list of members of Hymans Robertson LLP is available for inspection at One London Wall, London EC2Y 5EA, the firm’s registered office. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and licensed by the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries for a range of investment business activities. Hymans Robertson is a registered trademark of Hymans Robertson LLP. Appendices Page 17 of 46
Page 18
9 63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Asset Allocation Paisley Common Good Fund Renfrew Common Good Fund 30/09/2025 Benchmark Fund Difference UK Equity 40.0% 21.4% Overseas Equity 40.0% 59.4% Total Equity 80.0% 80.7% UK Government Bonds 18.0% 7.2% International Bonds 8.8% Total Bonds 18.0% 15.9% Cash/Cash Products 2.0% 3.3% Total 100.0% 100.0% -18.6% 19.4% 0.7% -10.8% 8.8% -2.1% 1.3% 30/09/2025 Benchmark Fund Difference UK Equity 40.0% 21.3% Overseas Equity 40.0% 59.3% Total Equity 80.0% 80.6% UK Government Bonds 18.0% 7.2% International Bonds 8.8% Total Bonds 18.0% 15.9% Cash/Cash Products 2.0% 3.5% Total 100.0% 100.0% -18.7% 19.3% 0.6% -10.8% 8.8% -2.1% 1.5% 31/03/2026 Benchmark Fund Difference UK Equity 40.0% 22.4% Overseas Equity 40.0% 59.4% Total Equity 80.0% 81.8% UK Government Bonds 18.0% 6.9% International Bonds 8.3% Total Bonds 18.0% 15.1% Cash/Cash Products 2.0% 3.1% Total 100.0% 100.0% -17.6% 19.4% 1.8% -11.1% 8.3% -2.9% 1.1% 31/03/2026 Benchmark Fund Difference UK Equity 40.0% 22.2% Overseas Equity 40.0% 59.7% Total Equity 80.0% 81.9% UK Government Bonds 18.0% 6.8% International Bonds 8.2% Total Bonds 18.0% 15.1% Cash/Cash Products 2.0% 3.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% -17.8% 19.7% 1.9% -11.2% 8.2% -2.9% 1.0% Page 18 of 46
Page 19
10 63 166 204 108 188 216 155 210 229 210 234 242 253 200 47 254 223 134 253 211 93 254 235 180 110 192 64 151 210 118 183 224 160 218 239 207 242 1 108 247 61 150 249 127 185 251 191 220 75 75 75 100 100 100 125 125 125 69 85 96 Appendix 4 – Explanation of Performance Calculations Hymans Robertson are among the investment professionals who calculate relative performance geometrically as follows: ( (1 + Fund Performance) / (1 + Benchmark Performance) ) - 1 Some industry practitioners use the simpler arithmetic method as follows: Fund Performance - Benchmark Performance Arithmetic Method Fund Performance Benchmark Performance Relative Performance Quarter 1 7.0% 2.0% 5.00% Quarter 2 28.0% 33.0% -5.00% Linked 6 months -0.25% 6 month performance 37.0% 35.7% 1.30% • If fund performance is measured quarterly, there is a relative underperformance of 0.25% over the six month period. • If fund performance is measured half yearly, there is a relative outperformance of 1.3% over the six month period. • The arithmetic method makes it difficult to compare long term relative performance with shorter term relative performance. Geometric Method Fund Performance Benchmark Performance Relative Performance Quarter 1 7.0% 2.0% 4.90% Quarter 2 28.0% 33.0% -3.76% Linked 6 months 0.96% 6 month performance 37.0% 35.7% 0.96% • If fund performance is measured quarterly, there is a relative outperformance of 0.96% over the six month period. • If fund performance is measured half yearly, an identical result is produced. • The geometric method therefore makes it possible to directly compare long term relative performance with shorter term relative performance. The following example illustrates the shortcomings of the arithmetic method in comparing short term relative performance with the longer term picture : Page 19 of 46
Page 20
Risk Warning Please note the value of investments, and income from them, may fall as well as rise. This includes equities, government or corporate bonds, and property, whether held directly or in a pooled or collective investment vehicle. Further, investment in developing or emerging markets may be more volatile and less marketable than in mature markets. Exchange rates may also affect the value of an investment. As a result, an investor may not get back the amount originally invested. Past performance is not necessarily a guide to future performance. In some cases, we have commercial business arrangements/agreements with clients within the financial sector where we provide services. These services are entirely separate from any advice that we may provide in recommending products to our advisory clients. Our recommendations are provided as a result of clients’ needs and based upon our independent research. Where there is a perceived or potential conflict, alternative recommendations can be made available. Hymans Robertson LLP has relied upon third party sources, and all copyright and other rights are reserved by such third-party sources as follows: LSEG DataStream data: © LSEG DataStream; Fund Manager data: Fund Manager; Morgan Stanley Capital International data: © and database right Morgan Stanley Capital International and its licensors 2026. All rights reserved. MSCI has no liability to any person for any losses, damages, costs or expenses suffered as a result of any use or reliance on any of the information which may be attributed to it; Hymans Robertson data: © Hymans Robertson. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of such estimates or data - including third party data - we cannot accept responsibility for any loss arising from their use. © Hymans Robertson LLP 2026. Page 20 of 46
Page 21
© LIECHTENSTEIN. The Princely Collections, Vaduz‒Vienna Renfrewshire Council IRB Presented by GairBrisbane| Partner, Head ofCharities (Scotland) Thursday21st May 2026 Page 21 of 46
Page 22
Your team Gair leadsthe Scottishcharity and endowmentsoffering from LGT,managing portfolios forcharities, trusts and public institutions. He joined LGT following the acquisition of abrdn's discretionary investment management business in 2023, bringing over 20 years’ experience in the charity sector as a volunteer, Executive Director and Investment Manager. Gair moved into investment management in 2011 to specialise in charity investments and prior to that, spent six years in MilitaryIntelligence,commissionedintheRoyalAir Force. Gair is a former Trustee and Finance Committee member of the Officers’ Association Scotland and the John Muir Trust. He is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute for Securities and Investment and holdsthe CFA’sCertificatesin ESG InvestingandClimateFinance. Gair Brisbane Partner, Head of Charities (Scotland) Josh works in our Charities Team in the Edinburgh office as an Investment Assistant. He is a University of Bristol and Durham University graduate. Josh holds the following CISI qualifications: Level 4 Investment Advice Diploma (IAD) in both Securities and Financial Planning and Advice, Level 4 Certificate in Paraplanning, Level 3 Extended Certificate in Investment Operations (IOC), and the Level 3 Certificate in Derivatives (CapitalMarketsProgramme). Joshua Ryan Investment Assistant +44 (0) 131 385 1326 gair.brisbane@lgt.com +44 (0) 131 385 1256 joshua.ryan@lgt.com 2 Page 22 of 46
Page 23
© LGT Scenarios De-escalation / Swift Resolution Sticky Resolution Severe Disruption / Prolonged Conflict Oil price levels over time Ceasefire, Strait of Hormuz (SoH) quickly normalises to full capacity. Oil returned to pre-war level by June. 2-3 months of partial SoH disruption. Oil stays elevated around $100 before easing slightly in 2H. Months-long closure of SoH. Oil > $100/b for several months. Macro / Growth & Inflation Short-lived inflation bump with limited effect on US/global growth. “Stagflation-lite”: higher energy costs, possible 2nd round inflation passthrough. Growth slows but above recessionary levels. “Stagflation-heavy”: with more severe supply shock and rising global recession risk. Asia and Europe more exposed. Central Banks / Interest Rates Central Banks look through the shock. Hike pricing in the UK, EU, and Canada unwinds, and the Fed shifts back toward limited cuts. Central Banks adopt a cautious, data- dependent stance, with hawkish bias. Markets keep some “insurance” hikes priced in G10. Central banks pivot dovish as recession risks increase. Markets start to price rate cuts, with policy priority shifting from inflation control to downside growth risk. Oil price scenarios 3 Source: LGT / Bloomberg Potential impact on growth, inflation and central bank actions Page 23 of 46
Page 24
© LGT Investment guidelines Renfrewshire Council IRB The value of investments as well as the income derived from them can go down as well as up and investors may get back less than the original amount invested. Please note that LGT Wealth Management takes responsibility for the ongoing suitability of your portfolio. Please make us aware if your circumstances have changed. Investmentobjective A regularstreamof incomefromthe portfolio,andcapitalgrowththereafter. IncomeRequirement Renfrew Common Good Fund seeks to generate an annual income of £492,000 and Paisley Common Good Fund seeks to generate an annual income of £129,000; income is paid to the Council bank account on a quarterlybasis. InvestmentRestriction The investment restrictions in addition to those stated in the standard Terms & Conditions of your InvestmentManagementAgreementaredetailedin theAppendix. CompositeBenchmark/ ComparatorIndex 40%MSCI AllCountryWorldIndex(ACWI)(£) 40%MSCI UK InvestableMarketIndex(IMI)(£) 20%BloombergGlobalAggregate TotalReturnIndex(GBPHedged)(£) 5%SONIA (£) RiskProfile Based on the information supplied by the Trustees a medium-high risk approach is being followed. This approach is appropriate for Trustees who are prepared to accept a moderate to high level of risk over the Charity’s investment time horizon. The Trustees understand that this may increase the risk of greater fluctuations inthe valueof theCharity’sinvestments. TimeHorizon 10 yearsplus Capacity for Capital Loss Up to 30% Capacity for IncomeLoss Up to 15% 4 Asset Class Renfrew Common Good Fund Portfolio* (%) Benchmark weightings (%) Indices (£) Overseas Equities UK Equities (including Alternatives) 54.7 26.2 40 40 MSCI All Country World Index MSCI UK IMI Corporate Bonds Government Bonds 8.6 7.2 18 Bloomberg Global Aggregate Total Return Index Cash & Liquidity 3.2 2 SONIA Total 100 100 Estimated Annual Income Yield^ 2.9 PortfolioValueas of13th May2026 (£) RenfrewCommonGood Fund 22,801,207 Estimatedannualincome 674,285 PaisleyCommonGood Fund 5,940,082 Estimatedannualincome 176,925 *Source: LGT, Figaro, average weighting for 12-months to 31st March2026 ^Estimated annual income yield as of 31st March2026 Page 24 of 46
Page 25
© LGT Portfolio Values and Performance Quarterly Portfolio Values 31st March 2026 (£) 31st December 2025 (£) 30th September 2025 (£) 30th June 2025 (£) Renfrew Common Good Fund 21,592,127 21,825,242 20,759,562 19,799,155 Estimated Annual Income 631,628 603,558 592,245 595,417 Paisley Common Good Fund 5,629,435 5,706,416 5,429,606 5,176,880 Estimated Annual Income 165,777 158,305 154,809 155,755 5 Portfolio Performance as of 31st March 2026 1 year (%) 3 years Cumulative (%) 5 years Cumulative (%) 7 years Cumulative (%) 10 years Cumulative (%) Renfrew Common Good Fund 15.7 29.7 29.2 57.0 114.4 Paisley Common Good Fund 15.4 29.3 28.6 56.2 112.8 UK CPI* plus 3.0% per annum 6.4 18.7 44.9 54.8 75.2 ARC** Charities Steady Growth index (£) 8.7 22.1 24.6 42.3 77.3 Composite Benchmark*** 17.5 37.9 49.2 63.6 114.6 Source: LGT performance to 31st March 2026, unless otherwise stated. ^Withdrawals in the period from 01/04/2025 to 13/05/2026: £584,297.42 from Renfrew Common Good Fund, £152,881.35 from Paisley Good Common Good Fund. *The UK CPI performance value used for the most recent month may be an estimate, therefore the figures quoted may be subject to adjustment in the future. **For information on ARC see appendix disclaimer page. ***The Composite Benchmark constituents are detailed on the Investment Guidelines page. All performance returns are Total Returns unless otherwise specified. Performance figures for the Fund are calculated net of the management fee. Investors should be aware that past performance is not a reliable indicator to future performance Total Withdrawals since 1st April2025^ = £737,179Total Contributions since 1st April 2025 = £0 Page 25 of 46
Page 26
6 Top 10 Equities (%) As of 31st March 2026 Top Contributors (%) 12 months AA Biggest Detractors 12 Months Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company 4.29 ASML 4.21 AstraZeneca 3.99 Alphabet 3.55 Rio Tinto 3.52 Microsoft 3.12 National Grid 2.97 Schneider Electric 2.97 CRH 2.84 Eli Lilly 2.82 ASML 2.66 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company 2.61 Alphabet 1.83 Rio Tinto 1.54 AstraZeneca 1.15 High Level Overview RELX -1.06 Accenture -0.54 Roche -0.53 Constellation Software -0.51 Adyen -0.36 Key Activity Since1st April 2025 Purchase DNB Bank Purchase Vinci Purchase Japan Exchange Group Purchase AIA Group Purchase Halma Purchase Nvidia Purchase S&P Global Sale Adyen Sale Autodesk Sale Owens Corning Sale Gresham House Energy Storage Sale Nestle Renfrew Common Good Fund – 12-months to 31st March 2026 Portfolio activity Source: LGT, Figaro Stock contribution is measured gross of management fees. Investors should be aware that past performance is not a reliable indicator to future performance. Page 26 of 46
Page 27
© LGT Appendices 7Page 27 of 46
Page 28
Authorised Signatories Renfrew & Paisley Common Good Funds Current Authorised Signatories Geoffrey Borland Christine McCourt Lisa Dickie Signing Requirements and Restrictions In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Investment Management Agreement, LGT WM will act on instructions and requests it reasonably believes to have been given by the following signatory(s) on your behalf. LGT WM will not be liable for loss, claims damages or expenses that might arise as a result of LGT WM acting in accordance with the authorised person’s instructions. Instructions are subject to the restrictions orlimitations imposedby you(the Client) as set out below: Onesignatoryforadministrativechanges,twoforcashwithdrawals 8 Please advise us if any updates or amendments are required. We can send out the Authorised Signatory Form to be completed via Docusign or email. For completion via Docusign, we will require the full names and email address of any new signatories to be added, as well as certified ID andaddressdocuments. Information Only Hymans Robertson Page 28 of 46
Page 29
© LGT Investment Guidelines - Restrictions 9 Renfrew & Paisley Common Good Funds The portfolio is managed according to your ethical policy and is implemented in conjunction with MSCI as required. (MSCI is a leading provider of ESG [environmental, social and corporate governance] services and research). This is also applied along with internal resources: please note that MSCI ethical screens may change. These restrictions relate to direct investment (see belowforthedefinitionofthis)*. All ethicalrestrictions are implementedona bestendeavours basis. Ifan existingholding is foundto be unacceptable underthe restrictions detailed, now orin the future,we will review the holdingandwhere deemedappropriatecontacttheTrustees. We define direct investment as investing in an equity or bond directly rather than via a pooled fund. We define indirect investment as applying to any holdings (equities or bonds) via a pooledfund. Thefollowingrestrictionsare in additiontothosein thestandardTermsand ConditionsofyourInvestmentManagementAgreement: Tobacco No directinvestmentin tobaccoproduction(i.e.excludethe tobaccosector)(TOB) No directinvestmentin companiesthatderivemorethan10% ofturnoverfromtobaccoproduction(MSCI- E05) Gambling No directinvestmentin acompanyif thereismorethan5% turnoverfromgambling-relatedbusinessactivities(MSCI– E80) Military No directinvestmentin armaments/ defence (i.e.excludetheaerospace& defencesector)(ARM) No directinvestmentin companiesthathave any industrytietothemanufactureoflandminesexceptforsafety,whichmaybe a positiveindicator(MSCI- E17) No directinvestmentin companiesthatmanufactureclustermunitionswholeweaponssystems,components,ordeliveryplatforms(MSCI- E38) No directinvestmentin acompanywithmorethan10% turnoverinweapons& components(MSCI- E76)] FossilFuels No oil/gasstocks- excludeOil& Gas Sectorandthermalcoalproducers(Y23) No directinvestmentsina companyif therehasbeenprovenreservesofshalegasand/oroilownedby the company(MSCI– E73) FixedInterestrestriction FixedIntereststocksa targetassetallocationof15%,variablebetween10% and 20% at thediscretionofthe InvestmentManager. Page 29 of 46
Page 30
Renfrew Common Good Fund Source: LGT, average weighting for 12-months to 31st March 2026 75.1%15.8% 5.9% 3.2% Equities Bonds Alternative Cash 10 Asset allocation Equities 75.1% Technology 20.0 Industrials 14.7 Financials 10.5 Healthcare 8.7 Utilities 7.2 Consumer Discretionary 3.9 Consumer Staples 3.2 Basic Materials 2.8 Telecommunications 2.4 Real Estate 1.7 Bonds 15.8% Corporate 8.6 Government 7.2 Alternatives 5.9% Infrastructure 2.7 Renewables 2.5 Private Equity 0.7 Cash & Liquidity 3.2% Cash 1.8 Liquidity Fund 1.4 Page 30 of 46
Page 31
© LGT Top 10 holdings (%) Top 10 holdings and equities Name Value % Yield % 1. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company 4.29 1.04 2. ASML 4.21 0.67 3. AstraZeneca 3.99 1.61 4. Capital Group UK Global Corporate Bond Fund 3.74 4.28 5. Alphabet 3.55 0.29 6. Rio Tinto 3.52 4.38 7. Microsoft 3.12 0.98 8. Schneider Electric 2.97 1.83 9. National Grid 2.97 3.72 10. CRH 2.84 1.48 Top 10 equity holdings (%) 11 Renfrew Common Good Fund Name Value % Yield % 1. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company 4.29 1.04 2. ASML 4.21 0.67 3. AstraZeneca 3.99 1.61 4. Alphabet 3.55 0.29 5. Rio Tinto 3.52 4.38 6. Microsoft 3.12 0.98 7. National Grid 2.97 3.72 8. Schneider Electric 2.97 1.83 9. CRH 2.84 1.48 10. Eli Lilly 2.82 0.75 Source: LGT, Figaro, 31st March 2026 Page 31 of 46
Page 32
© LGT Top 10 performers Stock Contributions Name Average Weight % Total Return % Contribution % 1. ASML 3.46 94.44 2.66 2. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company 3.60 101.40 2.61 3. Alphabet 3.04 82.27 1.83 4. Rio Tinto 2.75 60.92 1.54 5. AstraZeneca 3.44 32.91 1.15 6. Roche 0.07 78.18 0.85 7. National Grid 2.73 31.30 0.82 8. Royal KPN 2.40 32.79 0.77 9. NextEra Energy 2.36 31.19 0.75 10. Enel 2.15 36.26 0.72 Bottom 10 performers 12 Renfrew Common Good Fund – 12-months to 31st March2026 Source: LGT, Figaro, 12-months to 31st March 2026 Stock contribution is measured gross of management fees. Investors should be aware that past performance is not a reliable indicator to future performance. Name Average Weight % Total Return % Contribution % 1. RELX 2.46 -34.85 -1.06 2. Accenture 1.10 -36.89 -0.54 3. Roche 1.51 -32.97 -0.53 4. Constellation Software 0.83 -47.13 -0.51 5. Adyen 0.89 -36.71 -0.36 6. Hermes 0.96 -29.50 -0.33 7. Mastercard 2.46 -10.50 -0.29 8. Procter & Gamble 1.41 -15.29 -0.27 9. S&P Global 0.89 -13.87 -0.22 10. Owens Corning 0.62 -27.89 -0.22 Page 32 of 46
Page 33
© LGT Top 10 holdings (%) Top 10 holdings and equities Name Value % Yield % 1. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company 4.30 1.04 2. ASML 4.20 0.67 3. AstraZeneca 4.02 1.61 4. Capital Group UK Global Corporate Bond Fund 3.75 4.28 5. Alphabet 3.57 0.29 6. Rio Tinto 3.53 4.38 7. CRH 3.44 1.48 8. Microsoft 3.11 0.98 9. National Grid 3.00 3.72 10. Schneider Electric 2.98 1.83 Top 10 equity holdings (%) 13 Paisley Common Good Fund Name Value % Yield % 1. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company 4.30 1.04 2. ASML 4.20 0.67 3. AstraZeneca 4.02 1.61 4. Alphabet 3.57 0.29 5. Rio Tinto 3.53 4.38 6. CRH 3.44 1.48 7. Microsoft 3.11 0.98 8. National Grid 3.00 3.72 9. Schneider Electric 2.98 1.83 10. Eli Lilly 2.82 0.75 Source: LGT, Figaro, 31st March 2026 Page 33 of 46
Page 34
© LGT Top 10 performers Stock Contributions Name Average Weight % Total Return % Contribution % 1. ASML 3.44 94.44 2.65 2. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company 3.59 101.40 2.61 3. Alphabet 3.04 82.27 1.83 4. Rio Tinto 2.75 60.92 1.54 5. AstraZeneca 3.46 32.91 1.15 6. Roche 0.07 90.66 0.93 7. National Grid 2.74 31.30 0.83 8. Royal KPN 2.44 32.79 0.79 9. NextEra Energy 2.36 31.19 0.75 10. Enel 2.16 36.26 0.73 Bottom 10 performers 14 Paisley Common Good Fund – 12-months to 31st March2026 Source: LGT, Figaro, 12-months to 31st March 2026 Stock contribution is measured gross of management fees. Investors should be aware that past performance is not a reliable indicator to future performance. Name Average Weight % Total Return % Contribution % 1. RELX 2.45 -34.85 -1.06 2. Roche 1.53 -37.36 -0.61 3. Accenture 1.10 -36.89 -0.54 4. Constellation Software 0.82 -47.13 -0.50 5. Adyen 0.86 -36.71 -0.35 6. Hermes 0.93 -29.50 -0.32 7. Mastercard 2.39 -10.50 -0.28 8. Procter & Gamble 1.41 -15.29 -0.27 9. Owens Corning 0.62 -27.89 -0.22 10. S&P Global 0.89 -13.87 -0.22 Page 34 of 46
Page 35
© LGT Moving to an LGT Investment Objective Which of the following would you describe as most important to you? Capital Preservation Income Capital Growth Income & Capital Growth I want my portfolio to maintain its current nominal value My primary need is for this portfolio to provide an income I wish to grow the value of my portfolio, but I also need it to provide some income I want to grow the value of my portfolio and have no need for it to provide an income 15Page 35 of 46
Page 36
© LGT Understanding your risk appetite and willingness to take risk In seeking investment returns above those available from high quality bank deposits it is necessary to take some form of risk. These questions are designed to help us to understand your ability to withstand capital loss and your appetite for the various risks involved in investing. I’m comfortable that I can afford large fluctuations in my capital and I’m willing to absorb these if there is the possibility that my capital may grow in the long term I do not want to take any risk of my capital falling in value I don’t mind taking some risk with my capital, but I would be uncomfortable with large fluctuations in its value It is important that we understand your risk appetite or willingness to take risk. In relation to this portfolio, how do you feel about investing in volatile assets (e.g. equities) that might expose your portfolio to fluctuations in value and losses? 16Page 36 of 46
Page 37
© LGT Medium High Risk profiles at LGT and descriptors The primary objective of the portfolio is to achieve above average capital growth. The portfolio will be invested in a diversified range of asset classes, with a medium to high allocation to equities (expected to be up to 90%) and other higher risk assets. We would suggest a minimum investment period of five years for this type of risk profile. The primary objective of the portfolio is to target high levels of capital growth. You have a high tolerance for risk, and you are comfortable with the significant fluctuations in the value of your portfolio and potential loss of capital that may result fromthis investment strategy. The portfolio may be invested in a diversified range of asset classes but is likely to have a substantial bias towards equities (up to 100%) and other higher risk assets. We would suggest a minimum investment period of five years for this type ofrisk profile. High Very High Equity Fixed Income Cash Alternatives 95% 0% 5% 0% The primary objective of the portfolio is to target very high returns and/or allow concentrated exposure to a single asset class or individual assets. You are comfortable that the selection of such assets or asset classes may vary from time to time. You have a very high tolerance for risk and understand the trade-off between risk and return. You acknowledge that this investment strategy may result in large fluctuations in the value of your portfolio and potentially expose your portfolio to significant loss of capital as you pursue high returns. We would suggest a minimum investment period ofseven years forthis type ofrisk profile. Equity Fixed Income Cash Alternatives 100% 0% 0% 0% Equity Fixed Income Cash Alternatives 75% 20% 5% 0% The pie charts are a neutral asset allocation typical for the type of portfolio based on LGT WM’s internal guidelines. The bar charts are intended to illustrate the potential gains and losses associated with the various risk profiles. This is not intended to be a prediction of any future performance of your portfolio. Which of the following statements best summarises your risk and return objectives? Please review the charts when considering your answer. 17Page 37 of 46
Page 38
© LGT Understanding your capacity for loss We understand that your capacity for loss and the impact that losses might have on your lifestyle and standard of living may differ from your willingness to take risk. With this in mind, and in relation to this portfolio, how would you describe your ability to absorb capital losses and fluctuations in the value of your portfolio? At some point in the future, you may need the money in this portfolio either for income in retirement or for other reasons (such as to pay school fees or repay a mortgage). With this in mind, how would you describe your ability to absorb losses or fluctuations in the value of your portfolio based on your anticipated future needs? I am unable to accept any losses to my capital as this will have a significant detrimental effect on my standard of living I can accept a small amount of loss. In extreme circumstances, a drop of 20% or less in the value of my portfolio would not have a material impact on my overall financial position I can accept some loss. Falls of up to 35% in the value of my portfolio would not have a significant impact on my overall financial position I am financially able to accept the possibility of large losses (above 35%) in my portfolio without it having a significant impact on my overall financial position I am entirely reliant on the funds in this portfolio to fund my standard of living/pay off future liabilities I have other sources of wealth or income, but this portfolio will be needed to support my standard of living I have significant assets/income from other sources and the money in this portfolio is not earmarked for any particular needs © LGT 18Page 38 of 46
Page 39
Global investment capabilities A personalised experience with leading capabilities and expertise across the globe As part of LGT Group, we leverage the resources and knowhow of our global research and investment teams. Our experts are continuously analysing economic developments and global financial markets to provide a solid basis for well-considered, conviction- led investment decisions. Our clients benefit from the wider services of the group, including multiple booking centres, all whilst receiving a personalised experience. 5,600+ employees across 30 locations in Europe, Asia, Australia, the Americas and the Middle East* LGT Private Banking key facts £313.4 billion of clients assets under management 6 booking locations Ratings (LGT Bank Ltd.) Moody’s/Standard & Poor’s Aa2/A+ Regional expertise in all key financial markets Strong focus on sustainable and alternative investments *as at 30 June 2024 19 Page 39 of 46
Page 40
Our commitment to sustainability 20 We cannot tackle big challenges like climate change, social inequality or political polarisation alone. Together we can achieve more and change the future Memberships and signatories Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) Principles for Responsible Banking (PRB) Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials (PCAF) Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) Climate Action 100+ (CA100+) Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) Finance For Biodiversity Pledge Nature Action 100 UK 10+ SI experts, research analysts EUROPE 10+ SI experts, analysts, portfolio advisers APAC 5+ SI experts, specialists As well as drawing on expertise at LGT globally, we work with other organisations and within our sector to pursue similar goals and exchange ideas. We have received a number of awards to recognise our commitment to a more sustainable future. Wealth for Good Awards 2023 Winner International Investment Awards 2022 Winner International Investment Awards 2021 Winner Page 40 of 46
Page 41
21 Quality focused Structural growth, not speculation Globally active, robust process Flexible and transparent outcomes Investment approach Quality, sustainable growth A bottom-up, fundamentals driven approach using a global buy list We think about risk in terms of permanent loss of capital Uncovering companies exposed to the most enduring structural growth themes High visibility of growth provides confidence in sustainable returns over the long term Active stewards of our client’s capital, advocating for positive change on our clients’ behalf In-depth research process and focus on Sustainability helps us understand key risks and opportunities to assess overall quality Cost effective offering Direct holdings enable flexibility and transparency Portfolios meet a range of objectives and risk profiles 21Page 41 of 46
Page 42
Additional reports Charity specific insights and training 22 Impact report Sustainability 360 Stewardship at LGT Stewardship policy Sector Insights Topical Articles Webinars Quick Reads Suggestion box – what would you like to hear about? Introducing: the Charity Resources Hub We offer practical added value, insights, training for trustees and guidance on best practice. Visit: https://www.lgtwm.com/uk- en/charities/charity-resource-hub Or scan the QR code below: Page 42 of 46
Page 43
Glossary LGT Wealth Management, total charge This is the combined value of the LGT Wealth Management, management charge minus any annual charge discountas agreed with yourclient’s adviser. Money market instruments (including cash) These include deposits with banks and building societies, as well as governments and large corporations. They also include other investments that can have more risk and return than standard bank deposits. Investments in money market instruments are riskier than standard cash deposit accounts – in some circumstances their values will fall.The returns may alsobe lower than inflation. Ongoing charge The ongoing charges figure represents a fund’s or portfolio’s Annual Management Charge (AMC) and additional costs associated with any funds which we may buy on yourclient’s behalf. Property investing includes direct investment in buildings and land, as well as indirect investments such as shares in property companies. The value of direct property is generally based on a valuer’s opinion. Like equities, property securities can have sharp changes in value at any time. The values of different types of property do not necessarily move in line with each other. For example commercial property could be losing value even if residential house prices are going up. Bonds These are essentially loans to a government, supra-national institution or company. These loans are often for a set period and the bond owner usually receives regular interest payments, sometimes referred to as coupons. Bonds issued by the UK government are called Gilts and those issued by a company are corporate bonds. Some bonds are riskier than others, for example bonds issued for a longer time period or by governments or companies that display a higher risk of not being able to re-pay these loans. Derivatives Funds can sometimes use derivatives to improve portfolio management and to help meet investment objectives. A derivative is a financial instrument – its value is derived from the underlying value or movement in other assets, financial commodities or instruments like equities, bonds, interest rates, etc. Depending on how it is used, a derivative can involve little financial outlay butresult in large gainsor losses. Equities These are part ownership in a company and are also referred to as stocks and shares. The return on equities comes from growth in the value of the shares in a company, plus any income from dividends. Equities are one of the more volatile asset classes – although they can offer good growth potential. LGT Wealth Management, management charge is our charge for managing your client’s investments, custody, dealing and other costs associated with maintainingyourclient’s portfolio. ARC Private client indices ARC private client indices are based on actual client portfolio returns provided by various investment management companies. These portfolio returns are allocated to one of four categories based on the volatility of their returns relative to world equities, and an average return is calculated for each category. Grouping portfolios by their volatility differs from the traditional approach, which compares portfolios which have similar asset allocations. Instead, investment managers may use whatever asset allocation they consider appropriate to achieve the desired levels ofreturn and volatility. Asset allocation refers to the proportion of a portfolio invested in different types of investments (for example equities, bonds or property). Sector asset allocation refers to which sectors of the economy your client’s money is invested in (for example healthcare, energy, industrials, financials, telecommunications. Asset classes. An asset class is a category of investments such as equities or bonds. Normally assets in the same class have similar characteristics. However, they can have very different returns and risks. Benchmark. This is a relevant index used by an investment manager as a gauge to assess the performance of a portfolio. There are many different benchmarks to accommodate different types of investments. Risk All investments carry risk. Some are riskier than others. Higher-risk investments offer the potential for higher returns. There is no guarantee that you will get back all the money you initially invested. Money market instruments (including cash) are generally considered to be the least risky investments. SONIA is the Sterling Overnight Index Average. It is based on actual transactions and reflects the average of the interest rates that banks pay to borrow sterling overnight from other financial institutionsand other institutionalinvestors. Standard deviation A statistical measure of how much the return for an investment is likely to vary. The higher the number, the more variable the return. Given two investments with the same average return, but different standard deviations, we would expect the fund with the larger standard deviation to have a wider range oflikely returns. Volatility measures the risk of loss. It shows how widely the range of returns in a portfolio might deviate from the average return over a particular period. Yield The interest or dividend (income) received from an investment © LGT 23Page 43 of 46
Page 44
© LGT Disclaimers Any data contained herein which is attributed to a third party (“Third Party Data”) is the property of (a) third party supplier(s) (the “Owner”) and is licensed for use by LGT Wealth Management. Third Party Data may not be copied or distributed. Third Party Data is provided “as is” and is not warranted to be accurate, complete or timely. To the extent permitted by applicable law, none of the Owner, by LGT Wealth Management or any other third party (including any third party involved in providing and/or compiling Third Party Data) shall have any liability for Third Party Data or for any use made of Third Party Data. Neither the Owner nor any other third party sponsors, endorses orpromotes the fund orproduct to which Third Party Datarelates. ARC Private Client Indices (“PCI”) are based on historical information and past performance is not indicative of future performance. PCI are computed using a complex calculation and the results are provided for information purposes only and are not necessarily an indicator of suitability for your specific investment or other requirements. ARC does not guarantee the performance of any investment or portfolio or the return of an investor’s capital or any specific rate of return. ARC accepts no liability forany investment decision made on the basis of the information contained in this report. You should always complete your own analysis and/or seek appropriate professional advice before entering into an agreement with any PCI Data Contributor. The content is the property of ARC or its licensors and is protected by copyright and other intellectual property laws. Use of the information herein is governed by strict Conditions of Use as detailed on https://www.assetrisk.com/research/ ©2025 Morningstar. AllRights Reserved. The information,data,analysesand opinions(“Information”)contained herein: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (1) include the proprietary information of Morningstarand its content providers (2) may notbe copied or redistributed except as specifically authorized (3) do not constitute investment advice (4) are provided solely for informationalpurposes (5) are notwarranted to be complete, accurate ortimely (6) may be drawn from fund datapublished on variousdates Morningstar is not responsible for any trading decisions, damages or other losses related to the Information or its use. Please verify all of the Information before using it and don’t make any investment decision except upon the advice of a professional financial adviser. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The value and income derived from investments may go down as well as up. 24Page 44 of 46
Page 45
LGT Wealth Management UK LLP is authorised and regulated by the FinancialConduct Authority. Registered inEngland and Wales: OC329392. Registered office: 14 Cornhill, London,EC3V 3NR. LGT Wealth Management Limited is authorised and regulated by the FinancialConduct Authority. Registered in Scotland number SC317950 at Capital Square, 58 Morrison Street, Edinburgh, EH3 8BP. LGT Wealth Management Jersey Limited is incorporated in Jersey and is regulated by the Jersey Financial Services Commission in the conduct of Investment Business and Funds Service Business: 102243. Registered office: Sir Walter Raleigh House, 48-50 Esplanade,St Helier, Jersey JE2 3QB. LGT Wealth Management (CI) Limited is registered in Jersey and is regulated by the Jersey Financial Services Commission: 5769. Registered Office: atIFC1, The Esplanade,St Helier, Jersey, JE1 4BP. LGT Wealth Management US Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and is a Registered Investment Adviser with the US Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Registered inEngland and Wales: 06455240. Registered Office: 14 Cornhill,London,EC3V 3NR. This publication is marketing material. It is for information purposes only. Certain services described herein are not available to retail clients as defined by the FCA or the JFSC, as applicable; please speak to your investment adviser for further clarification in this regard. All services are subject to status and where local regulations permit. The wording contained in this document is not to be construed as an offer, advice, invitation or solicitation to enter into any financial obligation, activity or promotion of any kind. You are recommended to seek advice concerning suitability from your investment adviser. Any information herein is given in good faith, but is subject to change without notice and may not be accurate and complete for your purposes. This document is not intended for distribution to, or use by, any individual or entities in any jurisdiction where such distribution would be contrary to the laws of that jurisdiction or subject any LGT Wealth Management entity to any registration requirements. When we provide investment advice it is on the basis of a restricted approach where we consider a restricted range of products or providers rather than assessing the whole market. Investors should be aware that past performance is not an indication of future performance, the value of investments and the income derived from them may fluctuate and you may not receive backthe amount youoriginally invested. Legal information © LGT 25Page 45 of 46
Page 46
Page 46 of 46