Markets have been momentum and growth-driven for much of the last decade with value investors broadly left behind. 
But more recently, analysts have been more bullish about the style’s return to favour within the next five years and potentially even sooner.
As such, now could be the time to consider adding a value fund to your portfolio to diversify but also capture a potential market rotation.
For those who agree and are looking for home market value exposure, there are a number of UK equity funds available.
Two that merit comparison, however, are Polar Capital UK Value Opportunities run by George Godber and Georgina Hamilton and their former fund – LF Miton UK Value Opportunities run by Andrew Jackson.
FE Alpha Manager Jackson (pictured) took over the Miton fund from Godber and Hamilton in July 2016 joining the firm from Edentree Investment Management.
“I said when I took over in July 2016 give me until the clocks change in October and it will be my fund and I stuck by that. They are my stocks,” he said.
Since taking over the fund it has made a top quartile return in the IA UK All Companies sector of 45.57 per cent, as the below chart shows.
Performance of fund vs sector since manager start
Source: FE Analytics
This is despite seeing significant outflows during his first 12 month in charge. Having peaked in March 2016 at £868m, the fund’s assets under management (AUM) hit a trough of £283m in January 2017.
The manager said he uses a more idiosyncratic stockpicking method, relying less on screening stocks, resulting in a lower beta to the market.
“The problem with a screen is that the best ideas often don’t screen well. What I am looking for is a company that is not firing on all cylinders which can look a little bit grubby,” he noted.
As such, he believes the Miton fund has a slightly deeper value style than the Polar fund, launched by Godber and Hamilton after arriving at the firm, with a stronger allocation to recovery stocks.
Adrian Lowcock, investment director at Architas, said of the two funds he would back Jackson to outperform over the longer term, given his track record although it was a close call.
“Andrew’s career track record is impressive and he has been better at protecting the portfolio in falling markets,” said Lowcock.
“His bias towards mid and smaller companies is likely to contribute to growth going forward and the greater focus on overseas earners has also helped deliver since he took over management of the fund.”
Godber and Hamilton’s Polar Capital UK Value Opportunities fund was launched in January 2017 and has seen its AUM rise from £111m to £695m.
AUM of Polar Capital since launch
Source: FE Analytics
The fund employs the same investment process the pair have used throughout the entirety of their investment careers, which involves a focus on cheap valuations, sustainable returns and stocks with strong funding positions.
Essentially, the managers’ mantra is finding companies that are in control of their own destiny and aren’t reliant on cyclical upswings to improve their performance. 
Hamilton (pictured) launched the fund with co-manager Godber in April 2017 after completing his gardening leave at Miton.
Polar is the third firm for the pair having previously managed Matterley Undervalued Assets (alongside FE Alpha Manager Henry Dixon) and Miton UK Value Opportunities.
Ben Stoves, investment analyst at Rowan Dartington, said: “Godber and Hamilton run a very disciplined strategy that has evolved over time since they split from Henry Dixon, many years ago now.
“The result is a more balanced approach than a lot of other value funds, which should result in less extreme sector or thematic biases.”
The managers enjoyed a very strong period at Miton, outperforming throughout their time there, returning 42.34 per cent over their tenure, a top quartile return in the IA UK All Companies sector.
And Ben Yearsley, director at Shore Capital, said that had he been invested in the Miton fund, he would have moved his allocation to the Polar fund when possible.
“I don’t know what Andrew is doing with the Miton fund because I haven’t met him. The fund wasn’t available from launch. If I hadn’t have moved it I would have moved it and followed them,” he said.
“They have got a very distinct thing they are doing and they have got a database that they have built which analyses the market and comes out with undervalued stocks.”
Had investors switched they would have enjoyed top quartile performance. However, both funds have made top quartile returns since last April, with the Miton fund slightly edging performance.
If investors trust the process that Godber and Hamilton employed throughout their career, Yearsley said there is little reason to change.
“George has used it for about a decade now from when he was working with Henry Dixon and over that decade it hasn’t really changed,” he said.
“Therefore, if I was happy with it when it was the original Matterley fund and then obviously Henry went to Man GLG and George went off to Miton. He’s done the same again so why wouldn’t you follow if you were happy with him in the previous versions.”
Performance of funds vs sector since Polar fund launch
Source: FE Analytics
The only thing he said that is frustrating with the new fund is the use of a performance fee, which he said was “unnecessary”, although noted that fund size capacity being at the managers discretion is a positive for longer term investors.
Overall, The Share Centre investment manager Sheridan Admans said investors can’t really go wrong with either fund.
When George and Georgina were at Miton the fund was in their preferred range of funds – the Platinum 120 – and in their fund-of-funds. Yet when the pair left, the fund was out of the fund-of-funds but remains maintained in the Platinum 120.
“We had met with Andrew Jackson at the time, could see his track record at Edentree, and we had no real reason to cut the fund loose and we have not been disappointed in Andrew’s performance,” he said.
“If managers leave we tend to cut them unless we can find a credible enough reason to keep them and we found a reason to keep Andrew.”
He added that there are a lot of similarities between the two funds and that a lot of the future performance will come down to their ability to stock pick, with specific stocks giving one the advantage over the other.
“They are both active managers with medium-concentrated portfolio of around 60 stocks and have roughly a quarter of the portfolio in the top 10,” he noted.
“I wouldn’t have any objection to owning both – they are good quality managers – my only concern about it is it good get quite expensive having a broad selection of the all share but I wouldn’t call right now which one I would prefer to own. I am torn.”