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.
FYI: (Follow-Up Article): The $34 billion DoubleLine Total Return Bond Fund (DBLTX) has been raking in assets and outperforming its mortgage-backed-security strategy peers, even though Morningstar Inc. has sent up its rarest of red flags by deeming the fund “not ratable. Regards, Ted http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20140808/BLOG12/140809936?template=printart
I do not anymore. M* cannot put the funds into the correct fund bracket in many cases and that has a direct effect on their fund ratings. A key example would be the relatively new strategic income funds that are un-constrained on what they can hold.
Yes, I think the return:risk ratings (Hi to Lo on both) are useful and fairly indicative of the personality of the fund in most cases. I don't mean the medal ratings, which are the issue in the linked story; I couldn't even tell you what any of the funds I own rate in the M* medal department.
M* medal ratings attempt to do what M* said could not be done, which is make a prediction on how the fund would perform in the future. Yeah, I know there is more to it than that, but it is essentially what the medal ratings do. They are another marketing tool for funds that get good ratings. That is about it. Some of the commentary behind each part of the analyst rating is pretty good. But the final rating often has seemingly very little relation to the individual commentary scores. And there is absolutely no explanation from M* why the final medal rating is not reflective of the commentary. I have asked repeatedly and been ignored.
As for Mr. Gundlach's fund, since we do not use any of his funds, the lack of a rating is of no consequence to us. And probably to him, either.
Comments
As for Mr. Gundlach's fund, since we do not use any of his funds, the lack of a rating is of no consequence to us. And probably to him, either.