Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Follow-up question from March commentary (NOLCX)

Near the end of the March 14 commentary, David parenthetically referred to NOLCX as a "Nice little fund, by the way." I was hoping someone might elaborate on that a little - try to help me identify possible holes in how I research funds. When I look at NOLCX, I see a fund with only $25M that still manages to have over 100 large cap stocks and an 86% turnover. Only holdings greater than 2% are Exxon, Apple, Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, and Chevron. Thoughts?

Comments

  • Hi, Joe.

    I guess I was noticing the above average returns (more or less top 10% in the low term), slightly above average upside capture, slightly below average downside capture, exceptional Sharpe ratio (that is, risk-adjusted returns), low expenses, and pretty solid tax-efficiency.

    It's not a large fund and Northern is very unlikely to run a compact portfolio, it's not their style. That said, solid singles hitter for cheap.

    David
  • Thanks for expanding, David. I find value even in your seemingly casual remarks, so I thought it worth checking under the hood.
    The beta over 1 and nearly 100% turnover every year also raised my eyebrow, but I hadn't noted the after-tax returns.
    Morningstar seems to consider them pretty conservative - in line with your singles hitter observation. As I recall, NOLCX isn't the only Northern fund you've positively highlighted.
Sign In or Register to comment.