Personal Finance & Money Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who want to be financially literate. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The price for CSP1 (London Stock Exchange) has a short term price history that indicates the prices are roughly 7000% of what they are in reality.

For example, on Jan 29th 2016 the price was reported as £178.21 when viewing over a 3M range, and £12,425.10 when viewing over a 5D range.

This behaviour seems consistent across Yahoo, Bloomberg, Morningstar, ... and even my online broker!

What is the cause for this multiplier, which only seems to apply for recent price history?

(Apologies for not attaching screenshots - it appears you cannot do this from the mobile website. Will upload shortly.)

EDIT: As per the accepted answer, the recent prices are actually the correct prices but are in pence. The historical prices are in fact the NAV in USD, which is what the Yahoo app inexplicably switches to when viewing over a 3M+ timeframe.

share|improve this question
up vote 19 down vote accepted

For example, on Jan 29th 2016 the price was reported as £178.21 when viewing over a 3M range, and £12,425.10 when viewing over a 5D range.

The confusion is primarily arising because UK equities and stocks are quoted in pence and not pounds.

12,425.10 is in pence so it is £124.2510

And NAV is quoted in USD, so if you convert it back to GBP, you will arrive at your figure.

share|improve this answer
    
So it would seem that on Yahoo's app, at least, that when you switch to a 3M view, the price it reports is actually the NAV rather than the market price that's reported in the 5D view. That sounds right by your description, which makes sense. Seems odd from an application design point of view, however. – Lawrence Wagerfield Feb 4 at 12:15
2  
this is almost certainly a bug caused by using different data sources for historical and current prices. probably because the historical source is cheaper, but doesn't have current prices. odds are the historical source says the current source is wrong to quote in pence, the current source says the historical source is wrong to quote in pounds, and the aggregator doesn't want to get in the business of converting scales, so no one fixes the problem. – james turner Feb 4 at 18:42

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.