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.
If I am correct they have 2 series of funds Gotham and Formula. Gotham are long-short funds (which explain the cost) and Formula are "regular" OEFs (they are relatively expensive as well). The attractions of the funds are a wonderful best seller wrote by Greenblatt and supposedly their commitment to value investment. The results are inconsistent but all the funds are young (0-3 years old). I don't own the funds but started following them recently (after I read Greenblatt book). L.
I'm crazy about Professor Greenblatt's philanthropic efforts and his book "The Little Book That Beats the Market." But he charges too much for his ETFs and funds for me to take them seriously, regardless of how intelligently compelling they may seem.
The video was a pleasant infomercial for his funds. I'm sure a link to the interview will be up on the Gotham site in the very near future.
I appreciated his somewhat dismissive comment about RAFI, which I'm sure will elicit a grin and eyeroll from Rob Arnott:
"But there's no price component in what they are doing, so they are not actually investing, they are randomizing errors."
I wonder how Prof. Greenblatt explains to his Columbia students the effects of very high actual fund expenses (GARIX 3.24%, GENIX 3.62%, GONIX 3.77%) on future value- investing returns. Might high expenses prove to be significant headwinds for future fund performance ? Just curious. And maybe he could present objective evidence (1) that common investors need funds such as his in their taxable, retirement or pension accounts, and (2) that investors should use funds such as his instead of much lower cost index funds.
For now and likely for as long as I have a pulse, I see no reason to invest in the Gotham funds, but I will put them on my watch list merely to monitor.
Reply to @scott: Wondering if has something to do with proxy vote on merging both funds...or, deep valued stocks just getting hammered lately. But honestly while I see some heavy losses today, nothing that would account would such a large drop at the portfolio level. Hmmm.
The high fees, high minimum and high turnover may be a turn off, but I wonder if Joel Greenblatt's record of eye popping returns over an extended period (albeit in a very concentrated hedge fund vehicle) make these Gotham funds worthy of consideration for someone interested in a long/short strategy.
The return for Garix was impressive, I have not found a better one in the LO space, the fee is still reasonable compare to other options in the same space.
Comments
The results are inconsistent but all the funds are young (0-3 years old).
I don't own the funds but started following them recently (after I read Greenblatt book).
L.
Brucea. Where have you found information about funds merger?
L.
L.
I appreciated his somewhat dismissive comment about RAFI, which I'm sure will elicit a grin and eyeroll from Rob Arnott:
"But there's no price component in what they are doing, so they are not actually investing, they are randomizing errors."
I wonder how Prof. Greenblatt explains to his Columbia students the effects of very high actual fund expenses (GARIX 3.24%, GENIX 3.62%, GONIX 3.77%) on future value- investing returns. Might high expenses prove to be significant headwinds for future fund performance ? Just curious. And maybe he could present objective evidence (1) that common investors need funds such as his in their taxable, retirement or pension accounts, and (2) that investors should use funds such as his instead of much lower cost index funds.
For now and likely for as long as I have a pulse, I see no reason to invest in the Gotham funds, but I will put them on my watch list merely to monitor.
Kevin
http://basehitinvesting.com/superinvestors/joel-greenblatt/