Schroders has appointed Phil Middleton as head of UK business.

Middleton, who is currently the firm’s CEO, Americas, will take on the role from 1 January 2025.

He replaces James Rainbow, who will be leaving Schroders to pursue opportunities outside of the business. Rainbow has been with the wealth manager for 17 years.

Middleton, who joined Schroders in 1992, has a track record of working in the UK market.

He said: “It’s fantastic to be returning to the UK market, where I have spent so much of my career.

“Schroders has an award-winning UK business, with a compelling investment proposition, dedicated to solving the complex investment needs of our clients.

“I look forward to leading our UK business to drive further success and growth.”

During his 32-year tenure at Schroder, Middleton has held senior roles across the business in distribution and marketing.

In 2020, he moved to New York after he was appointed head of institutional distribution, North America, overseeing direct sales, relationship management and consultant relations.

He became CEO of North America in January 2022 and was subsequently appointed in June 2023 as CEO Americas.

Meanwhile, Tom Darnowski has been promoted to CEO Americas.

Darnowski has been with Schroders since 2013 leading product development across the Americas and most recently held the role of global head of product strategy, where he oversaw Schroders’ global product range.

Both roles will continue to report to Karine Szenberg, global head of client group at Schroders.

Szenberg said: “We are excited to welcome Phil back to the UK, a market that he knows extensively and where he already has a well-established track record.

“The UK is an important and valued market for Schroders and we believe now is the right time for Phil to return to lead this part of our business.”

Schroders provides active asset management, wealth management and investment solutions, with £773.7bn of assets under management at 30 June 2024.

LONDONERS were surprised with a delightful twist as the festive season kickstarts – a charming miniature Christmas market featuring gnome-themed stores.

These whimsical stalls, which popped up overnight, were designed to be gnome-height, creating a magical atmosphere.

4

4

Advertisement

Despite their petite size, the stalls are run by regular-sized staff and visitors can explore the tiny market and enjoy complimentary festive treats.

To add to the excitement, lucky passers-by also have the chance to win a special Christmas gnome, as well as a bag full to brim of seasonal goodies.

The market stalls, standing at an adorable 3.5 feet high, will be open to the public on November 7 and 8 along the scenic Southbank.

David Hills, chief customer officer at Asda, said: “It’s been fantastic to see the response to our Christmas campaign.

“We’re thrilled that the nation seems to be falling in love with our gnomes, so what better way to celebrate than to bring some playful Christmas cheer to London with our gnome-sized market.

“Visitors will not only get the chance to be up, close and personal with our pint-sized heroes, they’ll also get to sample some of the incredible products which make up our Christmas range in a really fun and unique way.”

The market featured five mini market stalls, all tailored to match the individual passions and personalities of each gnome – Max, Gnibbles, Gnorma, Gnicky and Gnarla.

Head gnome Max was managing the ‘Magical Mince Pie’ stall and perfectionist party planner Gnorma hosted the ‘Glorious Grazing’ stall.

While surfer dude Gnarla took charge of the ‘Festive Afternoon Sea’ stall, decked out with an assortment of luxurious fish canapes.

4

4

Good morning and welcome to White House Watch. Let’s talk about the split screen in America and Wall Street’s giddiness over coming deregulation.

America’s deep fissures were palpable yesterday as the nation processed the election results.

Reporting from Arizona and Nevada, the two states yet to call the presidential race, the FT’s Myles McCormick and Chris Grimes found both ecstasy and desolation. As Republicans teemed with excitement over Donald Trump’s win, Democrats appeared completely gutted.

Trump’s supporters were fired up about the president-elect’s agenda, and eager for him to enact his policies ASAP. With Republicans set to take control of the Senate — and a solid chance they’ll keep the House of Representatives — the party will have significant legislative power.

Bruce Parks, chair of the Washoe county Republicans in Nevada, told Myles that he looked forward to Trump making good on his promises to increase oil production, shut the border, deport undocumented workers.

Meanwhile, Democrats were conducting a postmortem [free to read].

Matt Bennett, co-founder of centrist Democratic think-tank Third Way, told the FT’s Lauren Fedor:

The Democratic brand is pretty bad. The country has shifted pretty far to the right, and we were not aware of how deep the problem ran.

The voters that we lost . . . looked at Democrats and said: they don’t understand my life. I don’t want them representing me.

Now they need to figure out how to get it together in the years to come. Democrats must craft an agenda that proves the party understands voters’ biggest concerns, said Obama White House alumnus Ken Baer: “We need a generational change. We have had a gerontocracy of 80-year-olds running the Democratic party since Obama left. We need new blood and new leaders.”

When it came down to it, Democrats lost on the economy.

Charles Franklin, a non-partisan pollster and director of the Marquette Law School Poll, told me that the “most pervasive” issue in Wisconsin and nationwide was the cost of living:

People saw their financial situation now is considerably worse than it was four years ago.

You can argue about the macro economic indicators, but you can’t argue with people’s subjective feelings of how they’re doing, and that’s clearly worse.

Transitional times: the latest headlines

What we’re hearing

With Trump’s White House return in sight, US bankers, private equity titans and other financial services executives are drooling over the prospect of deregulation and the chance to boot Biden’s aggressive watchdogs.

While Trump hasn’t said yet who will take the top financial roles in his administration, financial services companies are anticipating industry-friendly picks.

Republicans are expected to usher a more permissive approach to everything from bank capital requirements to takeovers and consumer protection rules in the financial services sector. They’re also likely to allow a new wave of financial products.

After leading the regulatory charge, Securities and Exchange Commission chair Gary Gensler has become the bane of the industry’s existence. With a new leader atop the SEC, money managers think Republicans will change rules that Gensler and other regulators have pushed through, and drop other contentious proposals.

Jack Inglis, chief executive of the Alternative Investment Management Association, told my colleagues: “We anticipate that the administration’s approach to financial regulation will be much more restrained and targeted . . . particularly when it comes to the SEC agenda.”

Many are also hoping Trump’s picks will adopt a more relaxed attitude to M&A than current antitrust officials Lina Khan and Jonathan Kanter. This could spur a dealmaking spree, and in turn boost investment bank earnings and invigorate private equity firms.

But it’s not an entirely rosy picture. Vice president-elect JD Vance has praised some parts of Khan’s agenda. Trump was also all over the place on antitrust, blocking AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner because of his hatred for CNN, and he’s recently pledged to prevent Nippon Steel’s acquisition of US Steel.

Viewpoints

• Under Trump, investors will thrive on unstifled market forces, volatility and low taxes. But they risk ending up weaker later, warns John Foley in his latest Lex column. [Available for Premium subscribers]

• America’s Democrats are part of a global trend as they join a graveyard of incumbents this year, John Burn-Murdoch points out.

• Anger has become the defining feature of western politics, writes Robert Shrimsley. Quelling it must be a democratic imperative.

• Trump’s victory poses huge risks — and, possibly, a calamity — for the global economy and the post-1945 world order, writes the FT editorial board.

• Democrats threw away a winnable election, writes Janan Ganesh. The reason why stems back to a decision made on August 12 2020.

• FT readers reflect on the election result, sharing how they feel about Trump’s victory and how they view the outlook for the US.

EQUITY release allows homeowners aged 55 and over to unlock the equity that has built up in their homes as tax-free cash. But is equity release a good idea for you?

1

It may allow you to unlock from a minimum of £10,000 up to 53% of the value of your property – providing it is worth at least £70,000.

The exact amount of money that you can access is based on the age of the youngest homeowner, the value of your home, and your individual needs.

Calculate how much you could unlock

What are the advantages of equity release?

It can be a flexible option with many different plan features to suit individual needs and requirements. For example, you can choose how you take the money you release, either as a lump sum or in smaller amounts over time.

One of the main benefits of equity release for many people is you’re not required to make any repayments if you don’t wish to, as the money you unlock, plus accrued interest, is repaid when you die or move into long-term care. 

Plus, with a lifetime mortgage, the most popular type of equity release plan, you continue to own 100% of the home you love.

Another advantage is that the money you unlock can be used for a variety of reasons; a new car, holiday, or even providing a financial gift to loved ones. As long as any existing mortgage is repaid first, the money is yours to enjoy spending.

Plans which meet the Equity Release Council’s standards feature a no negative equity guarantee.  This means that your estate will never owe more than the property is worth when it is sold.

Calculate how much you could unlock

What are the drawbacks?

With equity release, interest can build up over time on the amount you borrow which can be a significant amount.

With a lump sum plan where you take all the money in one go, you know exactly how much this will be when you take the loan.

With a drawdown plan, where you take the money in smaller amounts over time, you only pay interest on the money when you withdraw it, and the interest rate is typically the current rate at the time the funds are drawn.

Releasing equity could increase your income enough to make you ineligible for means tested benefits, now or in the future.

Equity release may involve a home reversion plan or a lifetime mortgage, which is secured against your property and the value of your estate will be reduced. This means that there will be less wealth to pass on to loved ones, and funding long-term care will be impacted by releasing the money tied up in your home.  

Equity release can be complex, and it is a long-term financial commitment so it’s important to get the right advice.

Calculate how much you could unlock

Is equity release a good idea for you?

It’s important to carefully consider the impact of equity release on your individual circumstances when evaluating if it is a good idea for you.

Advice is required before proceeding with equity release and a specialist advisor, such as those at Age Partnership, can talk you through the different options to help you find out if it could be right for your individual needs, or if another option could be better.  

Initial advice is provided for free and without obligation. Only if your case completes would an advice fee of £1,895 be payable. Other lender and solicitor fees may apply.

Calculate how much you could unlock

Age Partnership is a trading name of Age Partnership Limited, which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. FCA registered number 425432. Company registered in England and Wales No. 5265969. VAT registration number 162 9355 92. Registered address, 2200 Century Way, Thorpe Park, Leeds, LS15 8ZB.           

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Your guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the world

The Wall Street Journal today has an interview with “Théo”, the mystery prediction-market trader who says he’ll make nearly $50mn on Polymarket by betting on Donald Trump winning the US presidency.

It offers some interesting new information about his apparent edge:

Théo argued that pollsters should use what are known as neighbor polls that ask respondents which candidates they expect their neighbors to support. The idea is that people might not want to reveal their own preferences, but will indirectly reveal them when asked to guess who their neighbors plan to vote for.

Théo cited a handful of publicly released polls conducted in September using the neighbor method alongside the traditional method. These polls showed Harris’s support was several percentage points lower when respondents were asked who their neighbors would vote for, compared with the result that came from directly asking which candidate they supported. 

To Théo, this was evidence that pollsters were—once again—underestimating Trump’s support. The data helped convince him to put on his long-shot bet that Trump would win the popular vote. At the time that Théo made those wagers, bettors on Polymarket were assessing the chances of a Trump popular-vote victory at less than 40%.

As Théo celebrated the returns on Election Night, he disclosed another piece of the analysis behind his successful wager. In an email, he told the Journal that he had commissioned his own surveys to measure the neighbor effect, using a major pollster whom he declined to name. The results, he wrote, “were mind blowing to the favor of Trump!” 

Théo declined to share those surveys, saying his agreement with the pollster required him to keep the results private. But he argued that U.S. pollsters should use the neighbor method in future surveys to avoid another embarrassing miss.

Advertisement

“Public opinion would have been better prepared if the latest polls had measured that neighbor effect,” Théo said.

Théo’s hunch has been proved right, but does the methodology stack up? According to the experts, it’s impossible to know.

“Unless the evidence is put into the public domain with tables (often missing for many US polls) it is frankly impossible to comment,” Sir John Curtice, professor of politics at Strathclyde University, told FTAV.

Though only a few papers have been published that test the accuracy of so-called nominative opinion polls, the wisdom of crowds remains an active area of research. James Surowiecki’s 2004 pop-sociology bestseller of the same name sets out the argument that decentralised groups of independent, diverse thinkers can provide unbiased estimates of reality. More recent work — such as this paper from Roni Lehrer, Sebastian Juhl and Thomas Gschwend of Mannheim University — has applied to elections the principle that crowds are fairly good at guessing what “share of the population has [a] socially undesirable characteristic”.

Building on the theme is Predicting Elections: a ‘Wisdom of Crowds’ Approach by Martin Boon, co-founder of Deltapoll. His study concludes that while know-thy-neighbour polling can be more accurate than conventional surveys, the method is “more than capable of producing seriously misleading predictions”.

Crowd-wisdom polling outperformed the best conventional poll for the UK 2010 general election, Boon finds, but was a notably poor predictor when applied to the outcomes of the 2011 Welsh referendums on devolution powers and voting reform.

Wisdom polls struggle when a high proportion of the electorate doesn’t understand the question, he suggests:

When our general election prediction proved accurate, most people had the advantage of both a basic understanding of British politics at general election time, and a prompted understanding of how each party had fared at the previous election. In short, they had enough information to be smart. However, this may not have been the case in the referenda; both were characterised by the electorate’s limited understanding.

Making people take a view about whether the public would prefer proportional representation to first-past-the-post delivered superficial answers that grouped like a coin flip around the median point of 50 per cent, Boon finds. Their predictive powers improved in all cases when given information around which to frame an answer, such as the result of a previous vote, the trade-off being that prompted questions introduce potential biases. And even then, given a difficult question, voting-intention polling methods still won out.

How informed and engaged the US electorate was in this year’s presidential election is being explored at length elsewhere, as is the possibility that systematic biases skewed conventional polls. Whether one trader’s private polling tapped sentiment more accurately than the publicly available surveys, or whether statistical noise just happened to reinforce his confidence to buy a dollar for 40c, can’t be known without seeing the data.

Whichever way, the bet on Trump winning the popular vote was not quite as contrarian as the risk-and-reward of a binary market makes it appear. “A 40 per cent chance is quite high!” said Curtice:

In any event the polls were not far off. [They] probably underestimated Trump relative to Harris by 4 points and by less than that in most of the swing states. Nobody would have noticed such errors if the election had not been as close as it was.

That’s not to deny that the polls still have a bit of a problem estimating Trump — but finding the source of an error as small as the one this time around will not be easy.

Further reading:
— Take political betting markets literally, not seriously (FTAV)