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
Oakmark Equity and Income Fund Reopens to New Investors
This is not a decision that I immediately respect. The fund has nearly $19 billion in assets, which is a huge, ungainly mass regardless of a fund's orientation. The fund also has a billion more than when it narrowed access, though it's also not facing the $3 billion of extra money that 2009 brought. One of its two managers retired this year and the fund has had three years of weak performance. I guess, on whole, I'm not seeing why gathering more assets is particularly in the shareholders' best interest.
Perhaps David Herro has convinced him of the great values in overseas bank stocks. I just don't understand this move at all. The fund already has a large cash position - so, it can't be because they need extra cash for new purchases.
I have a truck load of money invested in this fund. I'm just about ready to have Eric Cinnamond and David Samra manage all my equity investments. Maybe I'll toss in some Matthews funds for good measure and be done with it.
So maybe the Oakmark international team has convinced the OAKBX fund manager, Clyde, that they should be ready to start picking up some European bargains including European financial stocks?
In fact, in March of this year --- Spain's Banco Santander was a top 10 holding in OAKIX....a bold move that even I wouldn't be able to stomach. I like Banco Santander and Telefonica but I would rather wait things out longer while things shake'n bake in Spain including the recent downward spiral and volatility we've seen over there. Let the hurricaine winds and clouds hit and pass thru first before dipping the toe back into the waters.
Reply to @David_Snowball: David, Also they are not experts in the Fixed Income side.If they had someone with FI expertise like JPVTX ,then i would like buying this fund. I also emailed Oakmark about this but got a standard template reply. Balanced funds need managers who are experts in both equity and FI.You need a team approach for this. And Oakmark is not yet an expert in FI.
"If they had someone with FI expertise like JPVTX ,then i would like buying this fund."
I'm glad to see others taking notice of Perkins value plus income. I like this new fund so much that I made it part of my four fund Roth account. The four funds are FPACX, JPVTX, ARTGX, and MAPIX. We'll see how it does over the next few years.
“We see many opportunities in equities,” says Clyde McGregor, manager of the Fund. “By reopening, we hope to better balance the fund’s daily cash flows and also accommodate the many long-term investors who fundamentally believe in Oakmark’s value-investment approach, but have been restricted from buying shares in the Fund.”
http://www.fiduciarymgt.com/funds/shrpt/qly_shrpt_063012.pdf Overall valuations remain strangely elevated. Typically when the media and Wall Street are rife with negative macro commentary, stock market valuations reflect this. Normal contrarian indicators, like the May Financial Times piece saying the “cult of equities is dead,” harken back to the “Death of Equities” Business Week cover in 1979. Markets are generally swayed by big swings of emotion (fear and greed) and for a number of years the media has blared a steady tune of very significant negative realities. One could argue that the prevailing macro concerns are as wide and deep as have possibly existed since the early to mid-1970s. Yet valuations remain well above average from a long term historical basis and miles away from valuations that persisted in the 1970s. Each quarter we analyze approximately 48 different valuation measurements for the stock market, with most of the data series going back multiple decades. We’ve discussed these valuation parameters numerous times in previous letters. The median valuation decile of these 48 measures as of March 31 (there is always a quarter lag) was 7.5 (10 being the most expensive decile and 1 being the cheapest). After years of choppy stock markets and all of the negative publicity this must be an astonishing figure to casual observers.
One thing is almost certain: Only one will be correct
Reply to @David_Snowball: Hi David. The fund gets yanked around a bit by energy sector which has underperformed this year. Not sure about the % they have there, but a bit overweight compared to similar funds. And, of course they pretty much abandoned U.S. Treasuries year or more ago - but the dang things continue to run. FWIW
i dumped oakbx in 2009, they are a fat bloated fund. it is terrible they are reopening the fund, it is shamefull. if i was a shareholder i would dump the greedy fund. beter performing low beta funds to consider jpvtx, whgix, afsax, glrbx. i have a 5% position in each of them. when oakbx really shined it had a low asset base, its past glory will never be repeated. shareholders should wake up and sell it.
Comments
But I'll ask.
David
I have a truck load of money invested in this fund. I'm just about ready to have Eric Cinnamond and David Samra manage all my equity investments. Maybe I'll toss in some Matthews funds for good measure and be done with it.
Europe and Global Equity: It’s Better Than You Think
http://oakmark.com/opennews.asp?news_id=594&news_from=h
So maybe the Oakmark international team has convinced the OAKBX fund manager, Clyde, that they should be ready to start picking up some European bargains including European financial stocks?
In fact, in March of this year --- Spain's Banco Santander was a top 10 holding in OAKIX....a bold move that even I wouldn't be able to stomach. I like Banco Santander and Telefonica but I would rather wait things out longer while things shake'n bake in Spain including the recent downward spiral and volatility we've seen over there. Let the hurricaine winds and clouds hit and pass thru first before dipping the toe back into the waters.
Balanced funds need managers who are experts in both equity and FI.You need a team approach for this. And Oakmark is not yet an expert in FI.
I'm glad to see others taking notice of Perkins value plus income. I like this new fund so much that I made it part of my four fund Roth account. The four funds are FPACX, JPVTX, ARTGX, and MAPIX. We'll see how it does over the next few years.
“We see many opportunities in equities,” says Clyde McGregor, manager of the Fund. “By reopening, we hope to better balance the fund’s daily cash flows and also accommodate the many long-term investors who fundamentally believe in Oakmark’s value-investment approach, but have been restricted from buying shares in the Fund.”
http://www.fiduciarymgt.com/funds/shrpt/qly_shrpt_063012.pdf
Overall valuations remain strangely elevated. Typically when the media and Wall Street are rife with negative macro commentary, stock market valuations reflect this. Normal contrarian indicators, like the May Financial Times piece saying the “cult of equities is dead,” harken back to the “Death of Equities” Business Week cover in 1979. Markets are generally swayed by big swings of emotion (fear and greed) and for a number of years the media has blared a steady tune of very significant negative realities.
One could argue that the prevailing macro concerns are as wide and deep as have possibly existed since the early to mid-1970s. Yet valuations remain well above average from a long term historical basis and miles away from valuations that persisted in the 1970s. Each quarter we analyze approximately 48 different valuation measurements for the stock market, with most of the data series going back multiple
decades. We’ve discussed these valuation parameters numerous times in previous letters. The median valuation decile of these 48 measures as of March 31 (there is always a quarter lag) was 7.5 (10 being the most expensive decile and 1 being the cheapest). After years of choppy stock markets and all of the negative publicity this must be an astonishing figure to casual observers.
One thing is almost certain: Only one will be correct