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.
Just wanted to chime in on WAEMX, Wasatch Emerging Market Small Cap. This fund did very well in the most recent downturn. I own both WAEMX and MSMLX and while WAEMX has had a more volatile long term track record when compared to MSMLX its short term...1 year performance has been note worthy. Not sure what Wasatch had done differently this past year but I was pleasantly surprised with the way it held up. This makes holding WAEMX much more tolerable when the market dynamics go against emerging markets, especially small cap emerging markets.
Lastly, what's up with Wasatch's share price? They seem extremely low. It presently trades at an NAV of $2.45...I never understood a Mutual funds NAV price. I always assume it is a weighted value of all underlying shares in the fund at the close of trading. Could this fund be made up of a lot of very low priced stocks?
It seems they attribute their outperformance to better companies and (I think more likely) investments in smaller markets in SE Asia, South America and Turkey.
I also hold MSMLX (but not WAEMX). WAEMX returned about -14% in 2011 compared to -20% for MSMLX. WAEMX certainly did better, but they both outperformed the index, so I am not too concerned. I think the Yahoo Finance chart you exaggerates the difference because of the big drop in December due to MSMLX's dividend (which was quite large, and maybe that's a different problem).
I have never felt compelled to invest in Wasatch funds because their expenses are so high! But I will continue to check if they can consistently outperform.
The NAV should just be total assets divided by the number of issued shares (of the fund). I don't think you should read any meaning into it, and you shouldn't compare the NAV of one fund to another. The number of shares is arbitrarily set by the fund. If a fund issues a ton of shares then it will have a low NAV; but a fund can just as easily issue fewer shares at a higher cost. Investors get fractional shares so it doesn't really matter how you slice it.
I know some people mentioned on this board (I think this was in reference to the new Grandeur Peak Funds) that a lower NAV could potentially be misleading to investors because it might not reflect smaller changes in the underlying stock prices. That's kind of a technical math issue and while I can see why that might be annoying, I don't think Wasatch or Grandeur Peaks are being intentionally malicious about it. Over long periods it shouldn't matter and maybe it actually deters very short-term trading in some cases.
Thanks for your better understanding of mutual fund share price.
I wish Yahoo Finance charts had a simple way to switch between a chart display that provided both price and dividend chart, not just a price chart. Morningstar charts (which I also included above) is where I go to get a price and dividend chart. Morningstar requires the new viewer (who opens the link) to add the comparison funds while Yahoo Finance will allow the linked featured fund to be linked with pre-selected funds already displayed.
That is wonderful Ted. Let the record reflect that I sold a position in MIDSX the first week of January. So far it is up over 14%. Oh, woe is me! Regards, Mindy
I've been in MSMLX for 3 years. I took money out of this fund as it tanked last summer/fall and am reinvesting into this fund now that it's tanked so much. Last year at this time central banks around the world were raising interest rates and reserve ratios at banks, now these same central banks are following loose money policies to spur their economies. The USA is an exception as our Fed has kept a loose money policy for over 3 years and counting.
Because of this shift in monetary policies by central banks around the world, including in emerging markets, these emerging markets funds could continue to do well this year after tanking so much last year. Kinda like what did poorly last year will do well throughout this year : )
Comments
A number of other EM or partial EM funds doing very well that did not last year, such as Ivy Asset New Opportunities.
Here's a price comparison chart:
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=WAEMX+Interactive#chart2:symbol=waemx;range=1y;compare=msmlx;indicator=dividend+volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=1;logscale=on;source=undefined
Here's Morningstar's chart (Price + dividend) just add MSMLX or your foavorite emerging market fund into the compare box:
http://quote.morningstar.com/fund/chart.aspx?t=WAEMX®ion=USA&culture=en-US
Lastly, what's up with Wasatch's share price? They seem extremely low. It presently trades at an NAV of $2.45...I never understood a Mutual funds NAV price. I always assume it is a weighted value of all underlying shares in the fund at the close of trading. Could this fund be made up of a lot of very low priced stocks?
It seems they attribute their outperformance to better companies and (I think more likely) investments in smaller markets in SE Asia, South America and Turkey.
I also hold MSMLX (but not WAEMX). WAEMX returned about -14% in 2011 compared to -20% for MSMLX. WAEMX certainly did better, but they both outperformed the index, so I am not too concerned. I think the Yahoo Finance chart you exaggerates the difference because of the big drop in December due to MSMLX's dividend (which was quite large, and maybe that's a different problem).
I have never felt compelled to invest in Wasatch funds because their expenses are so high! But I will continue to check if they can consistently outperform.
The NAV should just be total assets divided by the number of issued shares (of the fund). I don't think you should read any meaning into it, and you shouldn't compare the NAV of one fund to another. The number of shares is arbitrarily set by the fund. If a fund issues a ton of shares then it will have a low NAV; but a fund can just as easily issue fewer shares at a higher cost. Investors get fractional shares so it doesn't really matter how you slice it.
I know some people mentioned on this board (I think this was in reference to the new Grandeur Peak Funds) that a lower NAV could potentially be misleading to investors because it might not reflect smaller changes in the underlying stock prices. That's kind of a technical math issue and while I can see why that might be annoying, I don't think Wasatch or Grandeur Peaks are being intentionally malicious about it. Over long periods it shouldn't matter and maybe it actually deters very short-term trading in some cases.
Hi Claimui,
Thanks for your better understanding of mutual fund share price.
I wish Yahoo Finance charts had a simple way to switch between a chart display that provided both price and dividend chart, not just a price chart. Morningstar charts (which I also included above) is where I go to get a price and dividend chart. Morningstar requires the new viewer (who opens the link) to add the comparison funds while Yahoo Finance will allow the linked featured fund to be linked with pre-selected funds already displayed.
Derf
Because of this shift in monetary policies by central banks around the world, including in emerging markets, these emerging markets funds could continue to do well this year after tanking so much last year. Kinda like what did poorly last year will do well throughout this year : )