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.
Of course...true to script. Rate ARTYX because of star manager, yeah? ARTZX don't rate. And why? Because ARTYX does not have history of bad performance that ARTZX has. Or because ARTZX is run by a woman.
Look below for relative performance. Excuse me while I go throw up.
Vintage, according to what I see, ARTZX is rated a 3* fund, but yes, no Analyst Rating. It's as if ARTZX doesn't exist anymore. Still has only about $47 million, compared to ARTYX $1.4 billion. Clearly the parent company is pushing the newer fund with its "star" manager. Returns since the new one started are fairly even, although ARTYX has the edge. ARTYX has an almost 50% higher net expense ratio than ARTZX. We do not use either fund, and we see no compelling reason to own expensive ARTYX.
That's not my point. My point is ARTYX is no better than ARTZX. ARTYX manager is supposed to be a "star" who simply rode the emerging bull market and has not record in bad markets. ARTZX manager has toiled at Artisan with no thanks. Artisan could not attract assets to ARTZX and therefore started ARTYX. And now I guess the advertising dollars have yielded ARTYX a rating.
I'm not saying ARTZX manager is great. I'm saying manager greatness is BS here. ARTYX has not done anything to differentiate itself from ARTZX or other emerging market funds and that is clear to see.
I do not disagree with you, Vintage. The analyst rating has to include, formally or not, a recognition of the manager's former success at Thornburg, although I doubt this would be admitted. Otherwise, I agree with you that there is no way to conclude how it might do in a down market. I also agree that fund companies continually push aside funds that do not generate assets, have unknown managers, and that aren't on the "push these funds" list. My guess is that eventually ARTZX will be liquidated, with proceeds dumped into ARTYX. Personally I don't care how it's doing compared to SIGIX or the index, since it has such high expenses and its 3-year Downside capture is way too high for me.
There's GQGPX, managed by Rajiv Jain, who made his mark elsewhere in the same way that Louis Kaufman did. Investors do chase performance and/or a star. Don't know for a fact, but think EM might be a tough asset class to offer to the public without either or both of those attributes.
Comments
Look below for relative performance. Excuse me while I go throw up.
multiple photo upload
I'm not saying ARTZX manager is great. I'm saying manager greatness is BS here. ARTYX has not done anything to differentiate itself from ARTZX or other emerging market funds and that is clear to see.
That's how they do it over there, scoot aside the poor performers, gather assets, keep shareholders happy...