‘Influence is built over time’: John Ellerman Foundation’s Sufina Ahmad on long-term investing

In the early 20th century, John Ellerman was believed to be the wealthiest man in Britain. He made his fortune in shipping and at one point owned the equivalent of the French fleet. His wealth was closely linked to the British empire, through shipping routes to South Africa and the Indian subcontinent, and he supplied ships to the British navy during the Boer War. He also held stakes in breweries, coal mines and some of the UK’s most influential papers, including The Times, the Financial Times and the Daily Mail. When he passed away, he left close to £36m; some of this wealth was used by his son to establish the predecessor of today’s John Ellerman Foundation.

Investing in perpetuity 
Fast forward 100 years and the Foundation manages a portfolio of £142m in assets, funding a broad array of social and environmental causes, from Friends of the Earth Northern Ireland to the Turner Contemporary and the Common/Wealth Artistic Programme. Its core aims now are to tackle the planetary crisis and social divisions, promote a more sustainable economic system and advance marginalised communities.

Sufina Ahmad will speak at Net Zero Investor's Annual Conference on 21 October | Find out more here

Sufina Ahmad joined the Foundation as director five years ago, having previously worked at the City of London Corporation, the City Bridge Foundation and the National Lottery Community Fund. She was awarded an MBE for charitable services in 2020.

Earlier this year, the Foundation formalised its decision to become an in-perpetuity investor. Will this change its approach to investing? In practice, not very much, Ahmad explains: “We had been working on a 25- to 30-year time horizon for a good while, and in March 2025, the board decided to move back to an in-perpetuity model. We were already operating as a long-term investor. Becoming in perpetuity doesn’t really change things dramatically.”

On a day-to-day basis, the fund aims to balance a return target of CPIH +4% with regular liquidity considerations. She adds: “We need to ensure we’re getting contributions to our cash flow, mainly through dividends, to meet our annual grant and operational commitments. Sometimes, we do need to draw down cash.”

Asset allocation: equities and impact
At the time of writing, CPI inflation is still at 4%. Beating the 4% real return target is therefore no mean feat, she acknowledges. Given the Foundation’s size, all its investments are externally managed by six different managers: CCLA, Charities Property Fund, Fulcrum Asset Management, GMO UK, Newton Investment Management and Ruffer.

The Foundation’s strategic allocation is tilted heavily towards global equities, which account for 85% of its overall portfolio, with 15% allocated to other assets. “We’ve got defensive investments too, including an allocation to the Charities Property Fund as diversifiers,” she adds.

While all investments are externally managed, a new social investment policy may see up to 10% in social investments (currently £15m) managed internally, though Ahmad stresses that it is still early days. In time, the Foundation plans to appoint a specialist investment consultant to advise on developing a structured portfolio of social impact funds forming approximately 75% of its total social investment portfolio. The remainder will be deployed as direct investments into charities, social enterprises, limited companies and social impact funds.

Engagement over exclusion
The John Ellerman Foundation has stood out in the charity sector due to its clear net-zero policy, including a commitment to exclude investments in tobacco, thermal coal, tar sands and new fossil fuel infrastructure through primary market capital assets. But putting this into action for a portfolio of pooled funds managed externally is not always straightforward and requires a degree of flexibility. It also means that the Foundation prioritises engagement with managers over direct ownership engagement, Ahmad explains. 

“We’ve shifted away from focusing on the underlying holdings. We think the most impact comes from influencing our fund managers so they understand what it means to be an ethical and environmentally responsible investor,” she explains.

“We ask quite specific questions about engagement, escalation tactics, and at what point they’d consider divestment. But our real influence is through sharing our point of view with managers.”

“We’re realistic based on our investment size. Pooled investments make exclusions more difficult, but some of the funds we’re invested in already have these exclusions in place,” she adds.

Ahmad argues that this approach has delivered progress over the years, even though some managers have improved more than others. Overall, she is still confident that it is the right strategy for the Foundation.

Manager alignment
An obvious question that arises now is whether political headwinds in the US have made these engagement efforts harder. She admits that with some of the world’s largest managers very publicly leaving climate alliances, finding the right managers has become more challenging: “Political headwinds influence markets and the work of fund managers. We’re seeing that play out.”

But she also cautions against an overly active approach to changing managers. “You build influence over time. If you keep switching managers, you lose that ability. It’s like any stakeholder relationship – it has to be worked at to be effective.”

That said, the Foundation has adjusted its lineup of managers over the past five years. “We’ve had several changes in that time and ultimately those changes relate to what we feel is the best way of achieving our investment policy aims and objectives.”

“We try not to be so reactive that we end up creating issues for ourselves, so I think it’s like anything – you just want to strike a good balance.”

“Above all, it’s about compliance with our investment policy, which focuses on positive impact and alignment with our charitable aim. But we also need financial returns.”