Would it, as the ‘no’s’ suggest drive both countries into economic turmoil? Or could it be beneficial for one or the other? Either way, should investors be adjusting their portfolios in anticipation of a change? These are the experts’ views:

Gary Potter, joint head of multi-manager at F&C Investments

“A ‘yes’ vote would probably weaken the pound, but then again, it was already over-valued against the dollar anyway. However, I don’t believe people should be adjusting their portfolios ahead of the vote. Shifting a portfolio based on these short term considerations is a dangerous game. The UK market is very diversified and people will probably just end up losing money on the trading costs.”

Simon Evan-Cook, multi-asset fund manager at Premier Portfolio Managers

“The Scottish referendum is a known unknown. Trying to position a portfolio without knowing the outcome is quite dangerous. There are one or two stocks that may be affected badly, and one or two that could benefit, but selling out of the UK and trying to buy Europe makes no sense. Investors should leave it up to their active managers to negotiate the change.”

Toby Nangle, Head of Multi-Asset Allocation at Threadneedle Investments

“Markets dislike uncertainty and the timetable for complex negotiations surrounding constitutional divorce is necessarily long. Given the constitutional and economic uncertainties attached to a potential break-up of the UK, a vote for independence would likely deliver a negative shock to UK financial assets and lead to meaningful currency weakness. However, despite the change in polling, financial markets still attach a very low probability to independence. We are unable to discern any meaningful risk premium in UK equities, and the sterling weakness experienced over the past month has been principally against the US dollar: against the Euro and the Yen Sterling is almost unchanged.

Given the likely hit to business confidence that would come from the political and constitutional uncertainty following a ‘Yes’ vote, we would expect the Bank of England to delay or slow its hiking path. As such, short-dated gilts would perform strongly. Long-dated gilts may benefit from a ‘flight to quality’ although international reserve managers perspectives on the political developments introduces uncertainties into this call.”

Tom McPhail, Head of Pensions Research, Hargreaves Lansdown

“The best approach for long term investors is to ignore the ‘noise’ and stick with their plan. Invest with the right managers and they should deliver good returns for you regardless of the short term issues. It is more likely that you lose if you act in haste than you gain.”

Tom Stevenson, Fidelity Personal Investing

“The real and meaningful consequences of a Yes vote would play out over time. Ultimately, for stock markets to view the breakup of the union positively there would have to be good reason to believe that corporate profits could grow faster in the separated entities of an independent Scotland and the UK.

“A weaker pound – likely in the event of a breakup – would help in that regard, given the high proportion of profits earned by many of the UK’s largest companies from overseas. However, it might require also a marginal increase in economic growth large enough to outweigh the increased costs of coping with differing taxes, regulations and employment laws.

“The rational decision for investors perhaps is to persist with their existing strategies, at least until the outlook becomes clearer. The time it might take to establish an independent Scotland or a new Scottish currency would likely allow investors ample time to transfer savings and investments to alternative providers should they need or wish to.”

Tim Cockerill, head of research at Rowan Dartington

“If it is a ‘yes’ in Scotland, it will be bad news all round. There will be lots of disruption and no-one is likely to be a winner. It will stifle investment in Scotland and the UK. We are conscious that some investment groups have Scottish connections, but we haven’t take away any positions yet.”