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
Professor Snowball wrote an article for September 1, 2014 BottomLine Personal
He wrote an article "Daring Investor Faltering Fund," for the above publication.
The article basically discusses briefly how the Homestead Small Company Stock Fund and Mairs & Power Growth Fund have surpassed the S&P 500 over the past 10 and 15 years, but stumbled as of late.
I take the "Botton Line Personal" and saw the article. However, I can not find a link, either, to post it at MFO for others to read. However, one can subscribe for one year, 24 issues, $ 59.90 by calling 1-800-274-5611.
1. so far as I can tell, BottomLine articles are only available in print.
2. this is probably my third byline for them. The key is that these are "as told to" articles. Mark Gill, frequently, runs a question by me, I offer some suggestions, and then he writes the actual article. That reflects BL's crazy space constraints and their desire to be very responsive to their readers.
The question here was "how quickly should you dump a faltering fund a/k/a how much slack should you give a once-great manager?" I suggested that most good funds suffer back to back trailing years without noticeable problem, but that funds with three consecutive weak finishes rarely rebound. From there they asked for some really solid funds that have suffered lately but on which we'd still counsel patience.
I've offered some names. They've occasionally said "yeah, but we've had some negative reader feedback on that fund so we probably won't go with it." You get a sense of the constraints when you look at the size of the funds highlighted, which is rather higher than we'd normally target.
I did find a link for Bottomline; however, it only has certain articles which are at least a month old and then some after the published version. Also, while it has certain articles, maybe from the staff writers, but I could not find any of David's earlier articles with them. The link is not an endorsement for them, but just a tool I found on the internet.
@David_Snowball Ah, the Bottomline spider caught in its own web. Probably a waste of breath to suggest another path, like a baseball manager offering positioning advice to a field umpire. As an umpire, I never appreciated that very much.
"How quickly should you dump a faltering fund" would probably depend on the degree to which it has become "unloved" by you, would it not? This ties back to your recent hot post on the meaning of "unloved." Will you be continuing with that musing, perhaps forming a Snowball Series: Reflections on Love, for weekend reading? May I suggest:
Part 2: Is it possible to love a mutual fund too much? How much is too much? Part 3: Have you ever been "properly in love" with one of your MFs? (dedicated to ex-CNN talking head and Brit ex-patriot, Pierce Morgan) Part 4: MF love and longevity---eros, platos, or agape? An epistemological rendering.
[I believe it was a Sunday a.m. post, so maybe it was the coffee talkin' ?]
>> suggested that most good funds suffer back to back trailing years without noticeable problem, but that funds with three consecutive weak finishes rarely rebound.
Extremely interesting, and it sounds quite as though you have data --- can you elaborate a little?
Comments
1. so far as I can tell, BottomLine articles are only available in print.
2. this is probably my third byline for them. The key is that these are "as told to" articles. Mark Gill, frequently, runs a question by me, I offer some suggestions, and then he writes the actual article. That reflects BL's crazy space constraints and their desire to be very responsive to their readers.
The question here was "how quickly should you dump a faltering fund a/k/a how much slack should you give a once-great manager?" I suggested that most good funds suffer back to back trailing years without noticeable problem, but that funds with three consecutive weak finishes rarely rebound. From there they asked for some really solid funds that have suffered lately but on which we'd still counsel patience.
I've offered some names. They've occasionally said "yeah, but we've had some negative reader feedback on that fund so we probably won't go with it." You get a sense of the constraints when you look at the size of the funds highlighted, which is rather higher than we'd normally target.
For what it's worth,
David
http://www.bottomlinepublications.com/info-about-everything
Ah, the Bottomline spider caught in its own web. Probably a waste of breath to suggest another path, like a baseball manager offering positioning advice to a field umpire. As an umpire, I never appreciated that very much.
"How quickly should you dump a faltering fund" would probably depend on the degree to which it has become "unloved" by you, would it not? This ties back to your recent hot post on the meaning of "unloved." Will you be continuing with that musing, perhaps forming a Snowball Series: Reflections on Love, for weekend reading? May I suggest:
Part 2: Is it possible to love a mutual fund too much? How much is too much?
Part 3: Have you ever been "properly in love" with one of your MFs? (dedicated to ex-CNN talking head and Brit ex-patriot, Pierce Morgan)
Part 4: MF love and longevity---eros, platos, or agape? An epistemological rendering.
[I believe it was a Sunday a.m. post, so maybe it was the coffee talkin' ?]
http://www.bottomlinepublications.com/content/article/wealth-a-retirement/faltering-funds
Extremely interesting, and it sounds quite as though you have data --- can you elaborate a little?