
How to profit from the rush to protect firms from M&S-style cyber attacks
At the time of writing, M&S still isn't offering online shopping after a huge cyber hack, while the Co-op is struggling with stock issues and a customer-data breach. The hackers have cost these companies dear – Deutsche Bank puts the cost to M&S at £15 million a week – and experts warn many more companies are vulnerable to similar attacks.
'Cyber threats are growing in size and severity,' warns Mike Seidenberg, portfolio manager at Allianz Technology Trust, who says there were more than six billion malware attacks globally in 2023. 'Bad actors have increased their ambition, with critical infrastructure, government departments and crucial industries permanently at risk.'
For investors, cyber warfare represents both an opportunity and a threat. On the one hand, poorly prepared companies undergoing a cyber attack will hit their shareholders squarely in the pocket, with M&S stocks down more than 6 per cent in the past week.
However, investing in companies in the cyber security sector could allow you to benefit from a trend, with Cabinet minister Pat McFadden stating this week that the Government would 'turbo charge' the cyber security sector.
'Cyber security is not a luxury but an absolute necessity,' he says. If investment in the sector continues, investors may feel the same.
Protect your wealth from hackers
As the fall in M&S shares last week has shown, hackers can seriously damage your wealth.
A report from security experts Cisco suggests that only 4 per cent of businesses have reached what they call a 'mature' stage of readiness where they can withstand a cyber attack, with 70 per cent of companies either in the 'formative' or the 'beginner' stages of readiness. This suggests that many household names are as vulnerable as M&S and the Co-op.
However, Laith Khalaf, head of investment analyst at investment group AJ Bell, says it is difficult to predict where hackers may strike next, which makes it extremely difficult to protect your portfolio.
'Even companies which provide cyber security have found themselves the victims of attacks, such as CrowdStrike and FireEye,' he says. 'Probably the best and simplest tonic is to hold a diversified portfolio so that if a company sees its share price fall because of a cyber attack, it doesn't damage your wealth too badly.'
Khalaf adds that the share-price reaction to cyber attacks tends to be short-lived. Many companies have strong cyber security insurance policies, so if you buy firms where you believe the management makes good decisions about risk, chances are they will be protecting themselves.
However, it is always an area you could ask about at an annual general meeting if you are concerned or check the firm's risk factors' section of its annual report.
Searching for cyber security opportunities
With governments and businesses spending more on cyber security, many experts believe now is the time to invest in those securing us all against the hackers.
'Investment capital is pouring into cyber security businesses alongside aerospace and defence firms,' says Jason Hollands, managing director at investment platform BestInvest.
The Cisco study also showed that more than nine in ten companies increased their budget for cyber security in the past two years.
Many of the biggest players in cyber security are either unlisted or listed in the US, but there are various ways you can invest.
Good options for individual stocks
For those who prefer to pick individual shares and are untroubled by the volatility that entails, there are some good options.
Tiny SysGroup, based in Manchester, is backed by Ken Wotton, manager of Baronsmead Venture Capital Trusts, who says that the business is 'well positioned for sustained growth'.
SysGroup supports small and medium-sized businesses with their cyber security. 'It assists in building robust cyber security systems spanning not only the core business but also its supply chains – a critical yet often overlooked area of vulnerability for many groups,' Wotton says.
SysGroup shares have been volatile – down 26 per cent in the past six months, up 10 per cent in the past month. At the other end of the scale in the UK, defence giant BAE has a cyber security division – although, as Khalaf at AJ Bell points out, it comprises less than 10 per cent of the business.
Lee Wild, head of equity strategy at Interactive Investor, says cybersecurity firm NCC stands out as one of the remaining UK players not to have gone private. It is down 25 per cent this year, but there's always the possibility that it will attract a suitor with a hefty premium at this level.
Funds and trusts that back cyber specialists
There are also trusts and funds that allow you to take a mixed slice of the cyber security market.
Darius McDermott, managing director at FundCalibre, likes the HANetf Future of Defence ETF. This is 43 per cent invested in technology firms, most of which are cyber security specialists.
It launched in 2023, at just the right time for cyber security, and has seen its shares rise 46 per cent.
Other specialist ETFs in this area include the Legal & General Cyber Security ETF and iShares Digital Security ETF.
James Carthew, head of investment companies at QuotedData, recommends Polar Capital Technology, which invests in leading players such as CyberArk Software, Crowdstrike Holdings and Cloudflare. Polar Capital has had a torrid three months – down nearly 17 per cent following President Trump's tariff announcements, but has recovered somewhat in the last month.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Salford's Wakefield clash called off after Red Devils failed to raise team
Salford's Betfred Super League match against Wakefield on Sunday has been called off after the crisis-hit Red Devils were unable to raise a team. Salford have lost a number of top players in recent weeks due to their ongoing financial turmoil, and cited 'significant concerns regarding player welfare' for the cancellation. Although the club insist the decision is a one-off, the move will inevitably raise concerns over their ability to complete the season, with five more rounds remaining. Salford said in a statement: 'The Round 22 Betfred Super League fixture between Salford Red Devils and Wakefield Trinity which was scheduled for Sunday has been cancelled. 'The Club have reluctantly taken this decision as there were significant concerns regarding player welfare and have been in consultation with the Rugby Football League, RL Commercial and Rugby League Cares. 'As a result, the RFL Board will determine the outcome of the fixture in line with the RFL Operational Rules requirements early next week.' According to a precedent set last month when Warrington women forfeited their match against St Helens, Wakefield will duly be awarded a 48-0 victory. The move is the latest development in a shocking season for Salford, who have seen an exodus of key players in recent weeks due to the ongoing uncertainty surrounding the financial position of the new owners. Salford have won just two matches this season, and have increasingly been forced to blood youth and academy players despite being given special dispensation to sign loan players in recent weeks, including in last week's 80-6 defeat at Hull FC. Salford added: 'Of the 17 available for Sunday's fixture, there are only two senior players who have featured at Super League level over the last 12 months, with Academy products making up the rest of the current playing squad. 'Eleven members of the first-grade team are currently injured – although a number of those are expected to be available for Salford's next scheduled fixture against Leigh Leopards. 'The club has been fortunate to take on a number of loan players from opposing Super League teams over the course of the season and their efforts in helping us during these testing times has been greatly appreciated.'


The Guardian
6 minutes ago
- The Guardian
UK's largest bioethanol plant to shut after blow from Starmer's trade deal with Trump
The UK's largest bioethanol plant is to close after being dealt a body blow by Keir Starmer's trade deal with Donald Trump. The owner of the Vivergo plant in Hull, owned by Associated British Foods (ABF), said it is to close with the loss of 160 jobs, just hours after the government said it would not fund an industry rescue package. The first redundancies will be made on Tuesday. The government's decision creates uncertainty over a further 4,000 jobs in the industry's supply chain including farmers and hauliers. Bioethanol is a petrol substitute produced from agricultural products. Vivergo opened a redundancy programme in June. At that point the government appointed talks with the company, more than a month after ABF warned that the US trade deal was an 'existential threat' allowing US producers, for the first time, to compete litre-by-litre under a new duty free agreement for American ethanol. ABF and Ensus, the owner of the other major bioethanol plant in the UK, said the US deal would have a huge knock on effect in farming for wheat farmers who supplied their plants, as well as the UK's lead in clean fuels. A spokesperson for ABF said on Friday: 'It is deeply regrettable that the government has chosen not to support a key national asset. We have been left with no choice but to announce the closure of Vivergo and we have informed our people. 'We have been fighting for months to keep this plant open. We initiated and led talks with government in good faith. We presented a clear plan to restore Vivergo to profitability within two years under policy levers already aligned with the government's own green industrial strategy.' ABF had warned the US trade deal, hailed as a triumph for Starmer, was a killer blow because it scrapped tariffs on a quota of 1.4bn litres of imports from the US, the exact size of the UK production, as part of the agreement with Trump in May. The US trade deal was a victory for the car industry which had tariffs slashed from 27.5% to 10%. The steel industry is still facing 25% tariffs but the UK government is hoping these will be scrapped through ongoing negotiation. Government sources said they had to prioritise the 320,000 jobs in auto, steel and aerospace and added that the ethanol plants had faced financial problems before the US deal. Sources in the National Farmers' Union believe that Trump's negotiators had said that in exchange for slashing tariffs on cars and steel it wanted US farmers to have access to either the British pork or ethanol industries. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion A spokesperson for the department for business and trade said it had taken 'the difficult decision not to offer direct funding as it would not provide value for the taxpayer or solve the long-term problems the industry faces'. ABF said the decision was 'deeply regrettable' accusing the government of having 'thrown away billions in potential growth in the Humber' and the opportunity to 'lead the world' on clean fuels. Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: 'This is a shortsighted decision that totally disregards the benefits the domestic bioethanol sector will bring to jobs and energy security.'


The Sun
6 minutes ago
- The Sun
Thousands could be due car insurance compensation over ‘unfair' claims as Admiral sets aside £50m
THOUSANDS of drivers could be owed compensation after being underpaid by their car insurer, as Admiral has set aside £50m to cover claims. A review of the 12 biggest car insurers by the City watchdog last March found some customers were being offered settlements worth less than their car's value when making a claim on stolen or written-off vehicles. 1 Admiral has now become the first insurer to set aside cash to compensate customers who may have been impacted. In its half-year results on Thursday, the company admitted to failing to respond quickly enough to rising used car prices when settling claims. Admiral customers who made a claim on a stolen or written-off vehicle between 2019 and 2025 will be contacted by the company if they're owed compensation, the FCA said. It's expected that other insurance firms will follow suit in announcing their redress plans. When drivers claim on their car insurance where their vehicle is written off or stolen, they should be offered a payout equivalent to the fair market value of their car. This is the amount their car should have been worth at the time it was stolen or damaged. The FCA looked at the 12 biggest car insurers, which it said make up around 70% of the total market. The watchdog said it had since set clearer expectations for how these sorts of claims should be handled in the future. An FCA spokesperson said: 'We're pleased that Admiral is acting on our findings to put things right for its customers. 'Customers should wait to be contacted by Admiral and we're working with the firm to make sure that those affected get compensation if they're due it.' Admiral boss Milena Mondini de Focatiis said just 3% of motor loss claimants had been affected, adding that it was of "paramount importance" for the claims to be handled fairly. The company said it would begin contacting impacted customers during H2 2025. Admiral, which has 9.3million customers in the UK, reported strong first-half results this week. This was led by growth in its motor insurance business, where profits leapt 56 per cent year-on-year. The FTSE 100-listing said pre-tax profit rose 67% to £516.1 million in the six months to June 30 from £309.8 million the year prior. It comes after the Supreme Court ruled last month that millions fewer drivers will be entitled to compensation over "hidden commission" payments in a landmark case. The decision avoided a major headache for chancellor Rachel Reeves, as a major financial redress scheme for victims is no longer needed. However, millions of drivers are still in line to get up to £950 in compensation for car finance loans. The City watchdog is set to launch a refund scheme for motorists stung by 'hidden' commission payments, with up to £18billion expected to be paid out as early as next year. In 2023, Direct Line was forced to pay out £30million in compensation to customers after they were overcharged. The redress involved home and car policyholders who were charged more than new customers after renewing their policies, which broke rules introduced by the FCA in 2022.