Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · Finance & Accounting · Financial decision · 2025

Woodford's £3.7B fund froze — six years later the FCA fined him £46M

Neil Woodford's Equity Income fund peaked at £10.1B and suspended at £3.7B in June 2019. On Aug 6, 2025 the FCA fined him and his firm £46 million.

Woodford Investment Management · 2025-08-06

What happened

The Woodford Equity Income Fund opened with a 16% first year, beating all 50 peers it was tracked against, and peaked at £10.1 billion in May 2017. The portfolio kept moving down the liquidity curve: the allocation to micro-, small- and mid-cap stocks rose from 40% in January 2016 to almost 97% by the end of May 2019. When withdrawals came, only 8% of the fund's investments could have been sold within seven days — against a rule requiring investors to have access to their money within four.

The suspension landed in June 2019, trapping about £3.7 billion of investor money, a large share of it pledged by a single client, St. James's Place. On 15 October 2019 the fund's administrator, Link Fund Solutions, shut the fund rather than reopen it and removed Woodford with immediate effect; BlackRock was hired to prepare the portfolio for wind-down, with distributions to begin in January 2020.

Six years on, the regulator's bill arrived. On 6 August 2025 the FCA fined Woodford Investment Management £40 million and Neil Woodford £5.89 million — £46 million in total — for 'unreasonable and inappropriate investment decisions' between July 2018 and June 2019, including selling the fund's liquid assets while buying illiquid ones as withdrawals mounted. Woodford was banned from senior management and from managing retail funds; the ruling was provisional, and his firm disputed it, blaming the losses on Link's fire sale of the assets.

Why it happened

  • The fund offered daily liquidity on assets that had none: 8% sellable in seven days against a four-day access rule — the mismatch was the product.
  • As withdrawals mounted, the firm sold what it could sell and kept buying what it couldn't, making the mismatch worse with every trade.
  • The oversight sat with an administrator that suspended only after the hole was public — the FCA's fine covered the firm, the manager and the structure together.
What it cost£46M in fines; £3.7B fund frozen and wound upcostly

The lesson

A fund that promises daily access is defined by what it can sell in a week, not by what it owns on paper. When those diverge, the suspension is not the accident — it is the accounting.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →