Game theory

It's been a slightly more agitated start to the new year than usual for the UK's investment trust sector. 

The last time I can remember such excitement about the industry was back in the bad old days of split-cap investment trusts. But perhaps let's not go there. 

Those with long enough memories - like me - will recall they caused a proper stink.

In fact, the investigation into them - 21 years ago - was the largest at the time ever carried out by the then Financial Services Authority, the fore-runner to today's Financial Conduct Authority, the UK's financial watchdog. 

Back in the here and now, I'm sure you've all got your own views on Saba Capital, the state of the investment trust industry in 2025, and so on. 

For the record, I've long been a big fan of - and investor in - investment trusts. Who wouldn't want a bit of exposure to an investment called Temple Bar?

But you do have to ask yourself why the discount narrative is so widespread and is now in danger of occupying 'long-running saga' territory, rather than a mere blip on the industry's timeline. 

Saba's approach to the seven trusts where it's built up sizeable amounts of exposure to varying degrees has commanded plenty of press attention.

But to understand more about Boaz Weinstein's wider intentions, and how his actions may eventually play out, I thought his recent keynote speech to the World Chess Championships was just as telling as the screeds of reaction from various investment commentators that I've read in the past few days.

You can view yhe address via his X account. As part of the speech, Mr Weinstein weighed up the likes of chess, poker, and blackjack (he is particularly adept at playing all three), with the practice of investing, comparing factors such as long-range planning, depth of analysis, and pattern recognition, across each.

His conclusion was particularly interesting: "Investing is not about winning. It's about how you handle losing." 

Do other investment professionals agree?