Objective information about retirement, financial planning and investments

 

Are Best Mutual Fund Lists a Good Investing Tool?

June 11, 2017 by 7 Comments
Share

We all like to read article with lists that rank things. Top colleges, top new cars, best and worst dressed and the like are just a few lists we see periodically. Mutual rankings have been around for a while.  Many top personal finance publications such as Money Magazine, Kiplinger’s, and U.S. News publish such lists that rank mutual funds based upon performance. Are these Best Mutual Fund lists useful to you as an investor?

Money (magazine)

Best compared to what?

In order for any mutual fund ranking tool to be useful the comparison needs to be apples-to-apples. Comparing a large cap domestic stock fund to a fund that invests in gold mining companies is a pretty useless exercise. Make sure that you understand what is being compared and the basis for the rankings.

Past performance is not an indication of future performance 

This is a pretty common disclaimer in the investment industry and it is one that should be heeded. Last year’s top mutual fund might finish on top again this year or it might end up at the bottom of the pack. This is especially true for actively managed mutual funds where results can often depend upon the manager’s investment style and whether or not their style is still in favor. Mutual funds that have a big year often find themselves inundated with new money from investors who chase performance, this influx of new money can make it harder for the manager to replicate their past success.

Who’s in charge? 

It is not uncommon for a top mutual fund manager to be wooed by a rival fund company or for them to go off and start their own mutual fund. This is not such a big deal with index funds, but when looking at any actively managed fund be sure to understand whether or not the manager(s) who compiled the enviable track record are still in place.

What period of time is being used? 

Make sure that you understand the time period used in the rankings. Returns over a single year can vary much more than returns compiled over a three, five, or ten year time period. Understand that one or two outstanding years can skew longer-term rankings. Longer periods of time tend to smooth out these blips in performance.

Why didn’t you tell me about this fund a year ago? 

I recall looking at many of these lists over the years and wondering why the publication didn’t write about how wonderful the fund was a year ago before it chalked up this large gain. Well the answer is that this isn’t the job of the publication and they and most of us can’t really predict this.

Is looking at performance worthless? 

No it isn’t but you need to look at performance in context. Look at performance over varying time periods and always in relation to the fund’s peers. Among the things to look at:

  • Risk adjusted performance
  • Performance in up and down markets
  • Performance over rolling periods of time
  • Adherence to the fund’s stated style
  • Costs and expenses
  • Consistency of relative performance
  • Changes in the level of assets in the fund

In short selecting and monitoring mutual funds is about more than looking for the top performers of the past. Like any other investment vehicle, mutual funds need to be viewed in terms of potential future performance and in terms of how they fit into your overall investment strategy and your financial plan.

Approaching retirement and want another opinion on where you stand? Do you want an independent review of your mutual fund holdings and your overall investment strategy? Check out my Financial Review/Second Opinion for Individuals service.

Please contact me with any thoughts or suggestions about anything you’ve read here at The Chicago Financial Planner. Don’t miss any future posts, please subscribe via email. Please check out the Hire Me tab to learn more about my freelance financial writing and financial consulting services.

Photo credit:  Wikipedia

Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , ,

Understanding Your Bond Fund’s Duration

March 19, 2017 by Leave a Comment
Share

Interest Rates

For most of the past 30 years bonds and bond mutual funds have had the proverbial wind in their sails. Interest rates have steadily headed downwards. Bond prices and interest rates have an inverse relationship.

Last week, however, the Fed increased interest rates by 25 basis points (0.25%). They also indicated that they would continue to raise rates this year as, in their view, our economy has reached a new phase. This is part of an overall tightening of the money supply to keep the economy from overheating, including an effort to keep inflation in check.

Many investors may be wondering what this means for their bond mutual funds ETFs. A key number that all holders of bond funds and ETFs must know and understand is the fund’s duration.

What is duration? 

Bond mutual funds and ETFs are a portfolio of individual bonds.

According to Morningstar, “Duration is a time measure of a bond’s interest-rate sensitivity, based on the weighted average of the time periods over which a bond’s cash flows accrue to the bondholder.” A bond’s cash flows include the value received at maturity, generally $1,000 per bond, and the periodic interest payments received by the holder of the bond. A bond’s duration is expressed in years and is generally shorter than its maturity.

All things being equal, a bond with a longer time to maturity will have a higher duration meaning its price is more sensitive to changes in interest rates. Likewise, the higher the bond’s coupon rate (the stated interest rate paid by the bond) the lower the bond’s duration. Bonds with a shorter time to maturity and a higher coupon rate will have a lower duration and their price will be less sensitive to changes in interest rates.

The duration of a bond fund or ETF can be found on the fund’s fact sheet usually posted on the fund company’s site, or the portfolio tab on the fund’s listing on Morningstar.com.

What does bond fund duration tell us? 

The largest bond fund, Vanguard Total Bond Market Index (ticker VBMFX), has an effective duration of 6.05 years according to Morningstar. This tells us that if interest rates rise by 1% the value of the underlying bonds held by the fund would likely decline by around 6.05%.  Note this number is an approximation and bond prices are impacted by factors other than changes in interest rates. This fund roughly tracks the aggregate U.S. bond market.

By comparison Vanguard Long-Term Investment Grade (ticker VWESX) has longer duration of 13.31 years and would see a greater impact from rising interest rates.

The Vanguard Short-Term Bond Index ETF (ticker BSV) has a duration of 2.76 years.

The actively managed Double Line Total Return Bond Fund I (ticker DBLTX), managed by Jeffrey Gundlach who many call the “bond king,” has a duration of 3.98 years.

What impact will rising interest rates have on my bond mutual fund or ETF?

Click To Tweet

What should I do now?

As mentioned above, duration is a good indicator of the potential impact of a change in interest rates upon the value of your bond fund, but other factors also come into play. In 2008, many bond funds saw outsized losses and investors moved their money into Treasuries as a safe haven during the financial meltdown.

Many high-quality bond funds suffered major losses that year based only upon this flight to quality by investors.

Longer term the total return of a bond fund or ETF is driven by income payments as well as the direction of interest rates. Lower coupon bonds will be replaced by bonds with higher coupon rates over time.

Bonds are traded on the secondary market and prices are a function of supply and demand much like with stocks.

Bond mutual funds and ETFs offer the advantage of a managed portfolio.  On the flip side unlike an individual bond, bond mutual funds and ETFs never mature.

Is it time to get out of bond funds?  The point of this article is not to advocate that you do anything differently, but rather that you understand the potential duration risk in any bond mutual funds or ETFs that you currently hold or may be considering for purchase.

Bond funds and ETFs still have a place in diversified portfolios, but for many investors the characteristics of the fixed income portion of their portfolios may need an adjustment. This might mean shortening up on bond fund duration and looking at other, non-core types of bond funds.

The landscape of the financial markets is continually evolving and interest rates are a part of this evolution. As investors we need to understand the potential implications on our portfolios and adjust as needed.

Approaching retirement and want another opinion on where you stand? Not sure if you are invested properly for your situation? Check out my Financial Review/Second Opinion for Individuals service.

Please contact me with any thoughts or suggestions about anything you’ve read here at The Chicago Financial Planner. Don’t miss any future posts, please subscribe via email. Please check out the Hire Me tab to learn more about my freelance financial writing and financial consulting services.  

Photo credit:  Flickr

Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , , ,

5 Tips to Manage Taxable Mutual Fund Distributions

November 7, 2016 by 2 Comments
Share

With the end of the year in sight it’s time for year-end mutual fund distributions. If you hold mutual funds in taxable accounts, these distributions will be taxable to you.

taxable mutual fund distributions

Even with the weakness in the stock market to start the year, the Bexit vote in United Kingdom and recent pre-election weakness many mutual funds have gains embedded from a seven-year plus bull market.

Short of selling the funds, which may or may not a good idea, here are 5 tips to manage taxable mutual fund distributions.

Don’t buy the distribution 

During November and December mutual fund companies will publish information about fund distributions on their websites. If you are looking to add to a position or start a new mutual fund position in a taxable account it is important that you know the dates of these distributions and take the anticipated distribution into account. You don’t want to buy a fund shortly before a significant distribution and then owe taxes on the distribution only having owned the fund for a short time.

Even if you reinvest distributions on mutual funds held in a taxable account the distributions are still taxable in the year received. These distributions can be added to your cost basis in fund which can take a bit of the sting out of this.

Consider tax-loss harvesting to offset capital gains distributions 

As you go through your taxable accounts near the end of the year consider selling holdings with a loss to offset some of the capital gains distributions from your funds.

Just as with gains and losses generated from the sale of investments, long-term capital gains are matched against long-term capital losses and likewise with short-term capital gains and losses.

Tax-loss harvesting or any tax strategy should only be used if it makes sense from an investment point of view.

Use tax-loss harvesting only if it makes sense from an investment point of view.

Click To Tweet

Index funds are not a cure-all for taxable mutual fund distributions

Index funds tracking standard broad-market indexes are generally pretty tax-efficient. That doesn’t mean that this will be the case each and every year. Further index funds and ETFs tracking small and mid-cap indexes may need to make more transactions in order to track their respective indexes.

As smart beta products become more popular they will likely be less tax-efficient than more common market-cap weighted index products. Smart beta funds will likely need to buy and sell more frequently in order to rebalance to the their underlying benchmark than more standard index products, potentially resulting in larger capital gains distributions.

Don’t let the tax tail wag the investment dog 

While it is aggravating to receive large taxable mutual fund distributions, it is rarely a good idea to sell an investment holding solely for tax reasons.

Mutual fund distributions are one of three types:

  • Dividends
  • Short-term capital gains
  • Long-term capital gains

All three have different tax implications.

Ordinary dividends and short-term capital gains are taxed at your highest marginal ordinary income tax rate. Long-term capital gains are taxed at preferential rates ranging from 15% to 20% with higher income tax payers subject to the 3.8% Medicare tax. Qualified dividends are taxed at these same rates as well.

That said it is important to pay attention to the tax efficiency of the mutual funds that you are using in your taxable accounts. 

Pay attention to the tax-efficiency of mutual funds held in taxable accounts.

Click To Tweet

Consider distributions when looking to rebalance 

Year-end is a good time to look at rebalancing your entire portfolio, both taxable and tax-deferred accounts.  As you look to rebalance your portfolio consider reducing positions in taxable mutual fund holdings that continually throw off large distributions. If the fund is a good holding look for ways to own it in a tax-deferred account if possible.

The decision with regard to the taxable portion of your portfolio always involves taxes to one extent or another. If you were looking to reduce your position in the fund anyway it can make sense to sell it prior to the record date for this year’s capital gains distribution. If selling the fund would result in a capital gain, offsetting the gain against a realized loss on another holding could be a good strategy.

The Bottom Line

With the gains in the stock market over the past few years many investors may find themselves the recipient of large distributions this year in spite of weakness in the markets over the course of the past year. When possible consider tax-efficiency when buying mutual funds in a taxable account.

Please contact me with any thoughts or suggestions about anything you’ve read here at The Chicago Financial Planner. Don’t miss any future posts, please subscribe via email. Please check out our resources page as well.  

Photo credit: Pixobay

Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , ,

Do I Own Too Many Mutual Funds?

February 25, 2015 by 10 Comments
Share

In one form or another I’ve been asked by several readers “… do I own too many mutual funds?”  In several cases the question was prompted by the number of mutual fund holdings in brokerage accounts with major brokerage firms including brokerage wrap accounts.  One reader cited an account with $1.5 million and 35 mutual funds.

So how many mutual funds are too many?  There is not a single right answer but let’s try to help you determine the best answer for your situation.

The 3 mutual fund portfolio 

I would contend that a portfolio consisting of three mutual funds or ETFs could be well-diversified.  For example a portfolio consisting of the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index (VTSMX), the Vanguard Total International Stock Index (VGTSX) and the Vanguard Total Bond Index (VBMFX) would provide an investor with exposure to the U.S. stock and bond markets as well as non-U.S. developed and emerging markets equities.

As index funds the expenses are low and each fund will stay true to its investment style.  This portfolio could be replicated with lower cost share classes at Vanguard or Fidelity if you meet the minimum investment levels.  A very similar portfolio could also be constructed with ETFs as well.

This isn’t to say that three index funds or ETFs is the right number.  There may be some additional asset classes that are appropriate for your situation and certainly well-chosen actively managed mutual funds can be a fit as well.

19 mutual funds and little diversification 

A number of years ago a client engaged my services to review their portfolio.  The client was certain that their portfolio was well-diversified as he held several individual stocks and 19 mutual funds.

After the review, I pointed out that there were several stocks that were among the top five holdings in all 19 funds and the level of stock overlap was quite heavy.  These 19 mutual funds all held similar stocks and had the same investment objective.  While this client held a number of different mutual funds he certainly was not diversified.  This one-time engagement ended just prior to the Dot Com market decline that began in 2000, assuming that his portfolio stayed as it was I suspect he suffered substantial losses during that market decline.

Adding more mutual funds doesn’t necessarily mean added diversification.

Click To Tweet

How many mutual funds can you monitor? 

Can you effectively monitor 20, 30 or more mutual fund holdings?  Frankly this is a chore for financial professionals with all of the right tools.  As an individual investor is this something that you want to tackle?  Is this a good use of your time?  Will all of these extra funds add any value to your portfolio?

Can you realistically monitor 30 mutual funds?

Click To Tweet

What is the motivation for your broker? 

If you are investing via a brokerage firm or any financial advisor who suggests what seems like an excessive number of mutual funds for your account you should ask them what is behind these recommendations.  Do they earn compensation via the mutual funds they suggest for your portfolio? Their firm might have a revenue-generating agreement with certain fund companies.  Additionally the rep might be required to use many of the proprietary mutual funds offered by his or her employer.

Circumstances will vary 

If you have an IRA, a taxable brokerage account and a 401(k) it’s easy to accumulate a sizable collection of mutual funds.  Add in additional accounts for your spouse and the number of mutual funds can get even larger.

The point here is to keep the number of funds reasonable and manageable.  Your choices in your employer’s retirement plan are beyond your control and you may not be able to sync them up with your core portfolio held outside of the plan.

Additionally this is a good reason to stay on top of old 401(k) plans and consolidate them into an IRA or a new employer’s plan when possible.

The Bottom Line 

Mutual funds remain the investment of choice for many investors.  It is possible to construct a diversified portfolio using just a few mutual funds or ETFs.

Holding too many mutual funds can make it difficult to monitor and evaluate your funds as well as your overall portfolio.

Approaching retirement and want another opinion on where you stand? Not sure if your investments are right for your situation? Concerned about stock market volatility? Check out my Financial Review/Second Opinion for Individuals service for detailed guidance and advice about your situation.

NEW SERVICE – Financial Coaching. Check out this new service to see if it’s right for you. Financial coaching focuses on providing education and mentoring in two areas: the financial transition to retirement or small business financial coaching.

FINANCIAL WRITING. Check out my freelance financial writing services including my ghostwriting services for financial advisors.

Please contact me with any thoughts or suggestions about anything you’ve read here at The Chicago Financial Planner. Don’t miss any future posts, please subscribe via email. Check out our resources page for links to some other great sites and some outstanding products that you might find useful.

Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , , , , ,

5 Mutual Fund Investing Lessons from the Bill Gross Saga

October 8, 2014 by 4 Comments
Share

The soap opera at PIMco that began with the departure of Co-CEO Mohamed El-Erian in January came to a head with the recent departure of PIMco flounder Bill Gross.   More than just being the founder of PIMco Gross managed the firm’s flagship mutual fund PIMco Total Return (PTTRX).  His high profile exit once again brings one of the pitfalls of investing in actively managed mutual funds to the forefront.  Here are 5 mutual fund investing lessons from the Bill Gross saga.

Know who is in charge of your fund 

Bill Gross was the very public face of PIMco and was known as the “Bond King.”  To his credit he built PIMco Total Return into the world’s largest bond fund and the fund did very well for investors over the years.  The question investors, financial advisors, and institutions are now asking themselves is what is the future of the fund without Gross?

While PIMco promoted two very able managers to take over at Total Return, the redemptions that have plagued the fund over the past several years as a result of its downturn in performance have continued and seem to be accelerating in the short-term.  Much of this I’m sure stems from the uncertainty over the direction of the fund under these new managers.

Succession planning is vital

While most fund manager changes don’t take place in this fashion if you invest in a mutual fund run by a superstar manager what happens if he or she leaves?  For example does Fidelity have a plan to replace Will Danoff when he decides to leave Fidelity Contra (FCNTX)?

One of the long-time co-managers of Oakmark Equity-Income (OAKBX) retired a couple of years ago.  This was planned and announced ahead of time.  Shortly after that the fund brought on four younger co-managers to help the remaining long-tenured manager manage the fund and more importantly to provide succession and continuity for the fund’s shareholders.

The investment process matters 

What makes an actively managed mutual fund unique is its investment process.  If the fund were to merely mimic its underlying index why not just invest in a low cost, passively managed index fund?  There have been a number of articles in the financial press in recent years discussing “closet index” funds.  These are actively managed funds that for all intents and purposes look much like their underlying benchmark.  This is fairly prevalent in the large cap arena with many funds mimicking the S&P 500.  Why invest in an actively managed fund that is really nothing more than an overpriced index fund?

An institutionalized investment process is key when a manager leaves a fund.  I can think of three small cap funds I’ve used over the years that transitioned to new managers seamlessly via the use of a solid investment process.  While it is expected that the new managers may make some changes over time, I’ve also seen well-known funds replace a superstar manager and essentially have the new manager start over.  The results are too often not what shareholders have come to expect.  To a point this is what has happened to Fidelity’s one-time flagship fund Magellan since the legendary Peter Lynch left a number of years ago.  Subsequent managers have never been able to come close to replicating the fund’s former lofty position.

Even the best managers have down periods 

Bill Gross has made a lot of money for shareholders in PIMco Total Return and other funds he managed over time.  However Total Return has lagged its peers over the past several years which has led to a lot of money flowing out of the fund and the firm in recent years.  It is not uncommon for a top manager to go through a few down years over the course of a solid long-term run.  The trick is to be able to determine if this is a temporary thing, or if this manager’s best days are in the past.  For example if the fund has grown to be too large the manager may have more money to manage than he or she can effectively invest.

Is an index fund a better alternative? 

To be clear I am not in the camp that indexing is the only way to go when investing.  There are a number of very good active managers out there, the trick is to be able to identify them and to understand what makes their strategy and investment process successful.

However before ever investing in an actively managed mutual fund, ask yourself what will I be gaining over investing in an index mutual fund or ETF?

It was sad for me to see Gross’ tenure at PIMco end as it did.  It is not always easy to go out on top.  Michael Jordan should have quit after sinking the winning shot to secure the Chicago Bulls’ last championship.  Perhaps the role model here is the late Al McGuire whose last game as the men’s basketball coach at Marquette ended with the Warriors winning the 1977 NCAA championship.

For more on Bill Gross and PIMco please check out my two recent articles for Investopedia:   What To Expect From Pimco After Bill Gross and Pimco Investor? Consider This Before Bailing.  

Please contact me with any thoughts or suggestions about anything you’ve read here at The Chicago Financial Planner. Don’t miss any future posts, please subscribe via email. Please check out our resources page as well.

Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , , ,

Is Your Mutual Fund Bloated and Should You Care?

April 29, 2014 by 6 Comments
Share

Asset bloat in a mutual fund is akin to the situation we’ve all found ourselves in while dining out.  Our meal is fantastic and we can’t stop eating it even though we know we’ll feel lousy and bloated if we don’t stop.  Mutual fund asset bloat can also be a big problem for investors.

What is asset bloat? 

Asset bloat is simply a large increase in the assets managed by a given mutual fund.  Asset bloat is typically not an issue for index funds or money market funds, but it certainly can be for actively managed stock and bond mutual funds.

Asset bloat can be caused by an influx of new money into a mutual fund, often the result of a period of superior performance by the fund.  It has been my experience over the years that investor money chases good performance.  Asset bloat can also be organic in nature via the fund’s investment gains.

Morningstar’s Russ Kinnel wrote an excellent piece on mutual fund bloat that you should check out.

Why is asset bloat a problem? 

At some point an actively managed mutual fund can become too large for the manager(s) to effectively manage.  As an example, Peter Lynch was the legendary manager of the Fidelity Magellan Fund (FMAGX).  Lynch managed the fund from 1977 until 1990 during which time the fund’s assets grew from about $18 million to about $13 billion.  During this time period the fund’s average annual return was 29%.

At the end of the decade of the 1990s the fund’s assets had hit $100 billion, ultimately dropping to today’s level of about $16 billion.  Subsequent to Lunch’s departure the fund’s performance never hit the levels seen during Lynch’s tenure.  I have to believe that this was in part due to the massive growth in the fund’s assets.

This phenomenon is especially problematic in mutual funds that invest in small and mid-cap stocks.  Due to the smaller market capitalization of the underlying holdings in these funds at some point it becomes difficult for the manager to find enough good stock ideas within the fund’s mandate to continue to deliver the top performance that was responsible for the asset growth in the first place.

There have been many instances of small and mid-cap funds that have grown to be so large they have started to invest in larger stocks and ultimately have migrated to another investment style, for example from mid to large cap.

How can funds curb asset bloat? 

Close the fund to new money.  I always respect mutual funds that shut off purchases by new investors in the interest of benefiting existing shareholders.  More assets under management means more money for the fund company.  A shining example of a fund that does this is Sequoia (SEQUX) which has been closed for most of the past 25 years.  The fund’s long-term track record is exemplary.

Start losing money or underperforming.  I say this only partially tongue and cheek.  Nothing will reduce mutual fund assets like a period of underperformance.  Just ask the folks at Fidelity Magellan.  Just as investor money often chases superior mutual fund performance it also has a tendency to flee poor performance.

As Russ Kinnel points out in the Morningstar piece referenced earlier, asset bloat is a symptom of the solid stock market performance we have seen over the past five years.  This is not to say that a large fund cannot be effectively managed.  Case in point is Fidelity Contra (FCNTX).  Manager Will Danoff has done a credible job given the sheer volume of money under his management.  On the other hand American Funds Growth Fund of America (AGTHX) has been called a “closet index fund” meaning that its investments are extremely closely correlated to its benchmark Russell 1000 Growth Index.

For investors in actively managed mutual funds it is important to monitor the fund’s size as one of the indicators that you look at in your periodic review of your mutual fund holdings.  No single indicator is a reason onto itself in determining whether to hold onto a fund or consider selling it, but several key indicators viewed together can help you understand what is happening with your fund holdings.

Please feel free to contact me with your questions. 

Check out an online service like Personal Capital  to manage all of your accounts all in one place.  Also check out our Resources page for more tools and services that you might find useful.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , ,

4 Considerations When Evaluating Active Mutual Funds

April 1, 2014 by 4 Comments
Share

It’s spring here in Chicago (fingers crossed), the baseball season opened yesterday, and the first quarter of the year is in the books.  This means that you will be receiving statements from your 401(k) and your various investment accounts.  For many investors mutual funds comprise a significant percentage of their portfolio.  Here are 4 things to consider when evaluating actively managed mutual fund holdings.

Who’s running the show? 

Even with index mutual funds the manager(s) of the fund are a consideration.  However the management of the fund is a vital consideration when evaluating an actively managed fund.

Davis New York Venture (DNVYX) is an actively managed large cap blend fund with a long track record of success under two long-tenured co-managers.  When one of these co-managers unexpectedly left at the end of 2013 this was a cause of concern in evaluating the fund.  The fact that Davis moved quickly to replace this manager with an experienced member of the team at Davis was reassuring.  The fund continued its solid relative performance in the first quarter of 2014 after a solid 2013, which was preceded by three very sub-par years.  It is too early to tell what impact the management change with have on the long-term performance of the fund and this will bear close scrutiny.

Another example is the veritable soap-opera unfolding at PIMco over the departure of former Co-CEO Mohamed El-Erian.  While El-Erian didn’t manage many of PIMco’s funds, I’m guessing the whole situation was a distraction to CEO and founder Bill Gross who is also the manager of the firm’s flagship fund PIMco Total Return (PTTRX).  While this situation may not have been the cause, the fund finished in the bottom 15% of its peers in the first quarter.  This is on the heels of sub-par performances in calendar 2011 and 2013, though the fund ranks the top 5% of its peers over the trailing ten years all under Bill Gross’ leadership.

It is not uncommon for a fund that has achieved a solid track record over time to see the manager who was responsible for achieving that track record move on.  It is important when looking a mutual fund with a stellar track record to understand if the manager(s) responsible for this track record are still on board.

Size matters 

One of the truisms that I’ve noticed over the years is that good performance attracts new money.  Even if a top fund is responsible enough to its shareholders to close the doors to new investors before asset bloat sets in, the assets inside the fund might still balloon due to investment gains.  Two closed funds that I applaud for putting their shareholders first are Artisan Mid Cap Value (ARTQX) and Sequoia (SEQUX).

I’ve seen several formerly excellent actively managed mutual funds continue to take on new money to detriment of their shareholders.  Asset bloat can be a huge issue especially for equity mutual funds that invest in small and mid cap stocks.  At some point the managers have trouble putting all of this extra money to work and can be faced with investing in stock with larger market capitalizations.  At this point the fund might have the same name, but it is likely a far different fund than it was at its inception.

Closet index funds

According to a 2011 article in Reuters: 

“Since the height of the U.S. financial crisis, more funds are playing it safe, hugging their benchmarks and sometimes earning the unwanted reputation as “closet indexers.” 

About one-third of U.S. mutual fund assets, amounting to several trillion dollars, are with closet indexers, according to research published last year by Antti Petajisto, a former Yale University professor who now works for BlackRock Inc. 

In general, Petajisto defines a closet indexer as a fund with less than 60 percent of its investments differing from its benchmark.” 

I was quoted in this 2012 piece in Investment News discussing closet indexers.  As the article mentions a fund is considered a closet indexer when its R2 ratio (a measure of correlation) reaches 95 in comparison to its benchmark.  In the example of American Funds Growth Fund of America this benchmark index would be the Russell 1000 Growth Index.

The point here is that if you are going to pay up in terms of an actively managed fund’s higher expense ratio, you should receive something in the way of better performance and/or perhaps better downside risk management over and above that which would be delivered by an index mutual fund or ETF.

An example of a an actively managed fund that you might consider being worth its expense ratio is the above-mentioned Sequoia Fund.  A hypothetical $10,000 investment in the fund at its inception on 7/15/1970 held through 12/31/13 would be worth $3,891,872.  The $10,000 invested in the S&P 500 Index (if this was possible) would have grown to $901,620 over the same period.  This fund suffered a much milder loss than did the S&P 500 in 2008 (-27.03% vs. 37.00%) and outgained the index considerably in challenging 2011 (13.19% vs. 2.11%).  Sequoia’s R2 ratio is 80.

R2 can be found on a fund’s Morningstar page under the Ratings and Risk section of the page.

Performance is relative 

Superior performance is an obvious motivation, but you should always make sure to compare the performance of a given mutual fund to other funds in the same peer group.  A good comparison would be to compare a Small Cap Value mutual fund to other funds in this peer group.  A comparison to Foreign Large Value fund would be far less useful and in my opinion irrelevant.

Unfortunately superior active mutual funds are often the exception rather than the rule, one reason I make extensive use of index mutual funds and ETFs.  However solid, well-run actively managed funds can add to a portfolio.  Finding them and monitoring their performance does take work.

Please contact me with any thoughts or suggestions about anything you’ve read here at The Chicago Financial Planner.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , , ,

Shake-Up at PIMco – Should Investors Care?

January 26, 2014 by 4 Comments
Share

The big news in the mutual fund world this past week was the announcement that PIMco Co-Chairman Mohamed El-Erian will be resigning from the firm effective in March.  El-Erian is a frequent guest on CNBC and a really smart guy.  This has been a huge story in the financial press.  As an investor should you care?

Mohamed el Erian - World Economic Forum Summit...

Some background 

PIMco was founded by the soon to be sole Chairman and Chief Investment Officer Bill Gross.  PIMco is perhaps the preeminent bond mutual fund shop.  Many financial advisors, including yours truly, have client assets invested with them.  Their flagship bond fund PIMco Total Return (PTTRX) has had middling results the past couple of years and experienced significant fund outflows in 2013.

El-Erian is the second key executive to leave the firm recently preceded by the retirement of Paul McCulley in 2010.  Some say El-Erian’s departure is an outgrowth of PIMco’s rough year in 2013.

What others are saying 

Jeff Benjamin of Investment News wrote:

“Even as speculation ranges from whether the highly regarded and high-profile economic strategist was forced out or simply burned out, the general consensus is that Mr. El-Erian’s departure will not hurt Pimco‘s reputation or asset management prowess. 

“The news was an incredible surprise, and we have a number of clients with investments in Pimco funds,” said Richard Konrad, managing partner at Value Architects Asset Management. 

 “But at the same time, the issue of talent within the Pimco organization is unquestionable,” he added. “Even without [Mr. El-Erian], the essence of the firm remains, along with a track record that has been established over many years.”” 

The New York Times Dealbook said:

“The move was surprising because Mr. El-Erian, 55, has been the public face of Pimco since he rejoined the company in 2007, taking some of the spotlight from the company’s famous founder and co-chief investment officer, William H. Gross. 

In 2012, Mr. Gross said, “Mohamed is my heir apparent.” On Tuesday, by contrast, Mr. Gross took to Twitter to announce: “I’m ready to go for another 40 years.” That would take Mr. Gross to his 109th birthday. 

Mr. El-Erian’s resignation underscores the upheaval in the investment world as rising interest rates put an end to a bond bull market that lasted for decades and helped build industry giants like Pimco and BlackRock.” 

My take on the PIMco announcement 

PIMco is a very solid fund company with a deep bench of talented managers and researchers that offers a number of very solid mutual funds, closed-end funds, and ETFs.  They are best known as fixed income managers, which going forward will be a tough place to be for any firm.

On the other hand company literature has often mentioned the use of a consensus model called their Secular Outlook developed as the result of an annual meeting of PIMco personnel.  One has to wonder with El-Erian and McCully gone will Bill Gross dominate the discussion here or will others within the organization be able to step up and balance Mr. Goss’ views?  More importantly does PIMco have or are they in the process of developing a succession plan? As youthful as Mr. Gross looks at 69 I’m not counting on him being around PIMco for another 40 years as he indicated he is “… ready to go…”

This situation brings to mind Janus Funds, one of the preeminent go-go growth mutual fund houses of the 1980s and 1990s.  Beginning with the departure of star manager Jim Craig in 1999 and followed by the market drop of 2000-2002, several corporate restructurings, involvement in the mutual fund scandal of the early 2000s, and an awful lot of fund manager and executive turnover this company has never been the same.  I’m not saying PIMco will follow suit, but the potential parallels are there.

My strategy is simple.  I plan to watch the overall situation with the firm and to continue to evaluate my client’s PIMco holdings in the same fashion as before this announcement.  In my opinion this management shake-up is not a cause for any immediate or drastic action, but time will tell.

Personnel issues with a mutual fund and or its parent company are a valid reason to place a fund or a family of funds on your watch list.  This is generally a component of an Investment Policy Statement.  Do you have an orderly due diligence process in place to react to changes in your mutual funds and those in charge of managing them?

Please contact me at 847-506-9827 for a complimentary 30-minute consultation to discuss all of your financial planning and investing questions. Check out our Financial Planning and Investment Advice for Individuals page to learn more about our services. 

Photo credit:  Flick

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , ,

7 Reasons to Consider Selling a Mutual Fund

November 20, 2013 by 4 Comments
Share

Investing in mutual funds takes work, even index funds. Whether you own actively managed funds or index funds you still need to monitor your holdings. Here are 7 reasons you might consider selling a mutual fund holding.

Sale

A significant outflow of dollars

In my view, mutual fund managers should try to stay fully invested within their investment mandate. If I am investing in mutual fund in the large growth style, I want those dollars invested in large cap growth stocks.  I don’t want an equity fund manager deciding to be in cash, if I want to be in cash I’ll put that portion of the portfolio in a money market fund.   When a mutual fund experiences a high level of redemptions the managers may need to keep more cash on hand to meet these redemptions. This cash is not being invested in the stocks, bonds or other vehicles that the fund should be focused on.  In an up market like this one excess cash can be a drag on returns.

A significant inflow of dollars

Money follows success. Last year’s hot fund will attract more investors hoping to latch on to the fund’s success. Too much new cash in a short time frame can pose a real problem for a fund manager in terms of finding good investment ideas within the fund’s investment style.

This is not as significant for an index fund or a fund that invests in larger cap stocks.  However, for a fund investing in small- or mid-cap stocks this can be a death knell in terms of future success. I really admire mutual fund companies who close popular funds when they become too large.  Two that come to mind are Sequoia Fund (SEQUX) which was closed for over 20 years at one point and recently closed again after reopening for a couple of years (purchases can only be made directly from the fund company last time I checked).  Another is Artisan Funds and their Artisan Mid Cap Value Fund (ARTQX).  The mention of these funds should not be construed as investment advice in any way, shape or form. 

The flip-side is funds that simply allow new money to come in droves.  All too often these once stellar performers become tomorrow’s laggards.  I don’t know if this behavior is born out of stupidity, greed, hubris, or all three.  At the very least a fund taking in a vast amounts of new money should be raise a red flag as you monitor your portfolio. 

 A change in personnel

For an actively managed fund, a manager change is a significant event. Who will be in charge going forward? Will the fund’s investment style stay the same? This can also be an issue for an index product in terms of a change in its indexing methodology.

Personnel issues in the management of the fund company can also be an issue. As an example once high-flying Janus Funds has experienced heavy turnover in the executive suite over the past decade.  There has also been a fair amount of management turnover in many of the company’s mutual funds.  I find it hard to believe that this doesn’t have an impact on day to day operations and the management of the funds.

A change in the fund’s investment style  

I alluded to shifting investment styles above, but it’s worth repeating.  For example I recently suggested to the Committee of 401(k) plan for whom I serve as investment advisor that we remove a mutual fund whose investment style had shifted along with their investment methodology and some of the fund’s personnel.  While there’s nothing wrong with a go-anywhere fund that is style agnostic, if your intent is to invest in a mutual fund that invests in small cap growth stocks you should consider replacing that fund if its investment style changes to say small cap blend or value.

Fund mergers

Mutual fund companies sometimes merge laggard funds into other mutual funds within their families.  There are rules about restating past results for the surviving fund, but nonetheless if this happens to a fund you own, or recently took place in one you are thinking of buying, be sure to dig into the details, holdings and performance of the surviving fund to be sure it still makes sense for you as a part of your portfolio.

The reasons listed above often warrant selling out of mutual fund entirely.  Here are two additional reasons to consider a total or partial sale that have nothing to do with negative developments with the fund. 

Donating appreciated fund shares 

As year-end approaches many of us look to make contributions to our favorite charities.  If you own shares of a mutual fund that has appreciated in value donating some or all of the shares to the charity is an excellent and tax-efficient way to make this contribution.  By donating appreciated shares owned in a taxable account (as opposed to a tax-deferred account like an IRA) you avoid paying capital gains taxes that would be due if the shares were simply sold.  You also receive a charitable deduction for the full market value of the shares donated.  Many charities have the capacity to receive donations in this fashion. 

Rebalancing your portfolio 

I generally suggest that most people look to rebalance their portfolio back to its intended asset allocation at least once or twice annually.  For example with the solid gains in most equity asset classes this year and the relatively flat to down performance of many fixed income asset classes, it is likely that your portfolio is over allocated to equities.  This potentially exposes you to more risk than your financial plan and your asset allocation calls for.  It is very appropriate in this case to sell off some of your mutual fund (or other investments) holdings where you are over allocated and adding to fund positions in areas of the portfolio that have become under allocated. 

I am not an advocate of the frequent buying and selling of mutual funds or any other investment vehicle for that matter.   However, mutual fund investing is not about sending in your money and forgetting about it. Successful mutual fund investors monitor their holdings and make changes when and if needed based upon a number of factors.  

Please contact me at 847-506-9827 for a complimentary 30-minute consultation to discuss all of your financial planning and investing questions. Check out our Financial Planning and Investment Advice for Individuals page to learn more about our services.

Photo credit:  Flickr

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , , ,

Mutual Funds and The Rolling Stones: Time is on Their Side

October 11, 2013 by 2 Comments
Share

The Rolling Stones' "Tongue and Lip Desig...

One of the Rolling Stones’ greatest hits is called Time is on My Side.  Given the potential impact that the passage of time will have on the trailing five year returns of many mutual funds  by the end of 2013, the fund companies should be singing this song as well.

In a recent article on Market Watch Chuck Jaffe highlighted this quirk as cited by Morningstar.  According to Jaffe and Morningstar:

“For example, the average large-cap growth fund entered September with a five-year annualized return of 6.38%, according to Morningstar Inc. If the market simply stays flat and the average fund stands still to the end of the year, that five-year average will be 9.2% once September is wiped off the books, and will reach 15.16% by the end of the year.” 

As a case in point, the Vanguard Growth Index (VIGSX) fund’s five year annualized return as of June 30, 2013 was 7.15%.  At the end of the most recent quarter ending September 30, 2013, the fund’s five year annualized return stood at 11.73%.  This is a combination of fund’s 11.99% loss for the third quarter of 2008 dropping off of the five year record and the addition of the fund’s very solid gains of 8.48% for the most recent quarter.

If we carry this forward, at the end of the 2013 the loss of 23.81% for the fourth quarter of 2008 will fall off of the fund’s five year track record.  As Jaffe and Morningstar indicated even a flat return in the fourth quarter of 2013 will result in a significant jump in the fund’s trailing five year track record at the end of 2013, erasing a large portion of the financial crisis from the track record of this and many funds.

A marketing boon for mutual fund companies 

Just like the folks who market breakfast sausage, cars, or life insurance, mutual fund marketers are paid to accentuate the positive aspects of investing in their funds.  The mere passage of time will result in a marketing boon for these folks.

Be leery of the facts

If a mutual fund company touts the fund’s sheer numerical return, this is pretty meaningless.  Mutual fund returns should be viewed in the context of the fund’s peer group.  For example an average annual five year return of 10% might sound great, but not if 90% of the other funds in this same investment category (peer group) did better than that.

Further look at the fund’s risk-adjusted returns.  Did the fund take inordinate risks to achieve their returns, or did they do this with less risk than the average fund?

The past may not be a good indicator of the future

Past returns are not an indication of future results is a standard disclaimer in our industry.  The past is the past.  Many things can change.  Perhaps the fund manager who racked up this stellar track record has moved on.  In the case of small and mid cap funds, gathering too much money to effectively manage can be an issue and is often the result of outstanding performance.  Money has a habit of chasing returns.

Don’t be fooled by the hype that will surely surround these returns on steroids.  Always analyze any mutual fund’s results in terms of the potential implications of this performance and structure on future relative performance.

Please contact me with any thoughts or suggestions about anything you’ve read here at The Chicago Financial Planner. Don’t miss any future posts, please subscribe via email. Please check out the Hire Me tab to learn more about my freelance financial writing and financial consulting services.  

Photo credit:  Wikipedia

Enhanced by Zemanta
Filed Under: Mutual Funds Tagged With: , , ,
Next Page »