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.
Hi guys, Some questions for the board..... Sometimes, I think Cramer has his own TV station. It's all I hear or see.....is him. Saying that, what are your thoughts on him? Your thoughts on the new Investor's Club he started? Any members? His advice seems so bland to me....so middle of the road.....and mostly hype for TV. Thoughts? God bless the Pudd p.s., I remember his oil rage. How fast that changed!
Thanks for the link. Market prognosticators make predictions that are often forgotten by investors. These individuals' past prediction history can be very revealing. The majority of "gurus" listed on the Guru Grades site have an accuracy rating of less than 50%*. I was surprised to learn that Ken Fisher had the second highest accuracy rating (66.4%). I've been bombarded with ads from his firm, Fisher Investments, over the years.
*I haven't researched Guru Grades' grading methodolgy.
He's offered some decent prognostication commentaries regarding markets and investing over the years but I would bever trade or make specific investment decisions from his show, which he even admits is entertainment first.
"Publicly available information on Fisher's funds and strategies showed mixed performance. The Purisima Total Return Fund, for example, returned well under half of the S&P 500 Index in its final 10 years before it was liquidated in 2016, according to data compiled by Bloomberg."
Good entertainment but dreadful substance. I watch CNBC every morning and have for years. Before the big run in energy Cramer was calling big oil dead money and uninvestable, said that ESG meant these could not be in mutual fund portfolios. This week he was praising Exxon like it's Apple from 15 years ago.
"Publicly available information on Fisher's funds and strategies showed mixed performance. The Purisima Total Return Fund, for example, returned well under half of the S&P 500 Index in its final 10 years before it was liquidated in 2016, according to data compiled by Bloomberg."
While I'm hardly defending Fisher here, comparing PURIX (Purisima Total Return Fund) with the S&P 500, as done in the cited article, is misleading.
From the fund's final prospectus, dated Dec 31, 2015: "The Fund seeks to achieve its objective by investing in a portfolio allocated between domestic and foreign common stocks and other equity-like securities ..."
The benchmark given in the prospectus is the MSCI World Index. The fund still significantly underperformed that benchmark (by around 0%-25% depending on timeframe). Lackluster at best, but nowhere near as great an underperformance as the article asserted in comparing the fund with the wrong benchmark.
FWIW, from that prospectus, the performance of PURIX ("The Fund’s year-to-date return as of September 30, 2015 was -5.43%"):
Comments
Thanks for the link.
Market prognosticators make predictions that are often forgotten by investors.
These individuals' past prediction history can be very revealing.
The majority of "gurus" listed on the Guru Grades site have an accuracy rating of less than 50%*.
I was surprised to learn that Ken Fisher had the second highest accuracy rating (66.4%).
I've been bombarded with ads from his firm, Fisher Investments, over the years.
*I haven't researched Guru Grades' grading methodolgy.
"Publicly available information on Fisher's funds and strategies showed mixed performance.
The Purisima Total Return Fund, for example, returned well under half of the S&P 500 Index
in its final 10 years before it was liquidated in 2016, according to data compiled by Bloomberg."
Link
Much rather tune in to Wealthtrack and Barrons weekly shows.
I'm too cheap to pay extra to watch Bloomberg, don't want to pay extra...CNBC is investment porn...
Best,
Baseball Fan
From the fund's final prospectus, dated Dec 31, 2015:
"The Fund seeks to achieve its objective by investing in a portfolio allocated between domestic and foreign common stocks and other equity-like securities ..."
The benchmark given in the prospectus is the MSCI World Index. The fund still significantly underperformed that benchmark (by around 0%-25% depending on timeframe). Lackluster at best, but nowhere near as great an underperformance as the article asserted in comparing the fund with the wrong benchmark.
FWIW, from that prospectus, the performance of PURIX ("The Fund’s year-to-date return as of September 30, 2015 was -5.43%"):
Liquidation was about six months after the prospectus:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1019946/000089418916009530/purisma_497e.htm
Thanks for the additional details regarding PURIX.