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: Fifteen years is a long time, but it hasn't been enough to erase the poor average annual returns of growth stock mutual funds for that period. The average growth mutual fund rose an average annual 0.58% in the past 15 years vs. 7.28% for its value-style counterpart, 6.83% for core funds and 4.38% for the S&P 500, according to Morningstar Inc. Regards, Ted http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MjAwMTcwODY=
A diversified allocation doesn't really care, since these things all tend to work themselves out. Over 10 years, growth has done better because of the last 3 and 5 years. Technology and health care have led the way, and these are rarely considered value sectors. Five years from now, we could be asking "when will value funds improve?"
I don't get why this guy and this series always include smallcaps, which skews everything and by definition prevents inclusion of the good performers in the larger group under discussion. Every time Ted posts one of these interesting (almost) articles, you have to go down the list and exclude the anomalous smallcap funds.
Comments