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.
How many funds do you have which have lost more than 5% but which you will hold/add to? I have one - ARTSX. Just trying to get ideas for high conviction funds on the board.
I am thinking you are talking ytd on losing five percent or better. I have none that are ytd losers. My three best are TOLLX (+16.63%) ... THOAX (+13.70) & SVAAX (+10.29%). My three worst are LALDX (+1.97%) ... LPEFX (+2.35%) & ANWPX (+3.35%). Even my small cap funds have done reasonably well IIVAX (+4.24%) ... PCVAX (+5.64%) & PMDAX (+7.54%).
My weakest funds are small value (Artisan SCV, Wasatch MCV) and my automatic investment in them remains unchanged, but no one meets the (5%) threshold.
My strongest funds come in various flavors, led by emerging markets (TRP Africa & Middle East up 19%, plus Grandeur Peak EO, MACSX and Seafarer) but there's an inexplicable potpourri of others as well - real assets, global growth, midcap value. As with the losers, it's on auto.
Nothing here is down ytd by -5% or greater. I hold some of the same funds that I see David is holding. TRAMX is the best performer. Worst is PRESX TRP Europe, down -1.54% ytd.
I am thinking you are talking ytd on losing five percent or better. I have none that are ytd losers. My three best are TOLLX (+16.63%) ... THOAX (+13.705) & SVAAX (+10.29%). My three worst are LALDX (+1.97%) ... LPEFX (+2.35%) & ANWPX (+3.35%). Even my small cap funds have done reasonably well IIVAX (+4.24%) ... PCVAX (5.64%) & PMDAX (+7.54%).
Old_Skeet
No I meant I'm looking for funds doing badly, worse than 5% loss YTD. I mean if we have any funds losing 10% YTD but which are still "good" funds I would be interested in knowing as well. I used 5% just as way to start conversation. I want to allow for poor small cap performance this year so chose -5%.
My HSGFX is down 3.4% I think. If he cannot hedge I'm going to tell and buy inverse S&P 500 fund. I don't have problem with his economics which is why I have persisted with him. What I can't understand is WTF he cannot hedge. Now, I'm straying off topic.
So far then ARTSX is the only fund down more than 5% that Observers are holding?
Yeah, micro and growth. I used to own this fund very long time back and sold long time back, after concluding my WHEN vs WHAT mantra. Not sure if you own this fund, but we take diversification to extreme when we think about such funds. On one end I do own BRLIX. Next correction I plan to buy BRSIX - the other end.
PS BUFOX showing down 10 percent not 14, but maybe you seeing different reported number. BUFSX also down 9 plus. Another fund I owned but sold long time back. Such funds to be bought after heavy correction, and sold 3 years later and use to improve quality of life.
No. Got nothing down 5%! One is down. That's QRAAX, a "commodities futures derivatives" fund as best I understand it. It's down 1% this year. It won't do well until raw materials reverse their lethargic trend. And yes, I've added to it recently, but the investment is still very small - about 5% of total. (At $2.95 you can buy a lot of shares. A bit like having a fat wallet stuffed with $1s.)
I have two funds underwater YTD out of 28 open end funds and ETF's that are on my crowded portfolio. Bringing up the rear are RYSEX at -1.36% and PRSVX at 0.99%. My top two are BRUFX at 15.25% and PRHSX at 16.28%. All these funds I've owned for several years.
This year I started trimming some funds to keep my AA closer where I want it to be, which is 55% stock funds. I am an old guy at 64, retired, living off my investments. The trimming has been very gradual and gentle.
What Sven said. Small cap funds, every excellent ones, have underperformed, but considering their previous run-up it's hard to argue that their relatively mild dip is worth buying.
I had a All Cap fund with a small amount that was lagging this year. I decided to switch that into a unconstrained bond fund. That also helped me as I decided to get a bit more conservative in my allocation.
So are you guys adding to these down funds? I am considering adding to my worst fund so far this year (SUBFX, -2.43%) because its fits my preferred formula: good long term record, stable management, and short-term underperformance.
Thanks for the comment Derf... wasn't actually trying to "catch" you.... just wasn't sure what we were looking at. I'm giving MFLDX a bit more rope- how about you?
While you are extending the rope for MFLDX ... Mainstay thanks you. I believe in giving a fund manager ample time to position the fund but when Mainstay kept the fund open rather than closing it to where it could be well managed based upon ever changing macro themes ... Well, I recently decided to book my profit in the fund and move on. It has now got to turn some good investment tricks to move the nav. By the way MFLDX shorted DUK during its merger with PGN and it moved the nav big time. With its size today this play would now amount to no more than a drop in a big bucket.
The same thing happened in Ivy Asset Strategy. I held that fund for a good number of years and as the assets under management kept increasing I noticed so did the time it took the managers to reposition the fund. And, it became so large that it was noted and alleged by some that its repositioning and rapid selling of some S&P 500 futures caused and lead to the great ... Flash Crash. With that, I let it go.
Sometime things just get too big to manage.
That leads me to BankAmerica ... It to got too big for its britches, by my thinking, and look what has transpired. Glad I sold the family stock in that monster before it tanked. And, now there is Duke Energy another Charlotte, NC based company. When the board of directors of Duke hoodwinked the North Carolina regulators about the planned merger with Progress Energy ... Well, I sold off my DUK stock too. And, I still do not feel good about the size that DUK has become. From my thinking ... It is just now too big to effectively manage and I am looking for something to crop up if it has not already ... Look at the problems they now face with those toxic coal ash ponds.
Simply stated when I feel things have gotten too big to be managed ... I move on.
Ha! That's a "Catch 22" if you ask me. Funds mentioned favorably here at MFO grow very large very rapidly it seems. Than, in so year or two they're too big to manage. What a bummer. Of course, the manager can choke off inflows anytime as Skeet says.
Why does all this remind me of Dodge and Cox in 2009? Go back and read the archives (FA/MFO) if you can find them. Too big, too bloated, and unmanageable were cited frequently as reasons to flee. Seems they've managed to confound their skeptics and make some $$ for those who held on. Having low ERs in the vicinity of .50% hasn't hurt them either.
You may be correct that this fund can function successfully only with a smaller asset base. But, I wouldn't bet on it. There are economics of scale as well. I do think stability of assets is more important than size. So, if they haven't been able to convince their clients to hang in there for longer than a year or two without jerking out their $$ than that's a failing on their part which will come back to bite them.
Don't like any of these goanywhere funds. But hate to see folks flee a fund so quickly. Less than two years ago MFLDX was darling of the board. You could almost hear their cash register going "ka-ching" every time somebody invested in the fund. I think another issue is that these funds by nature will sometimes appear "out of sync" as they are trying to run against the grain and do something different than the general mob. My prediction is that on August 31, 2017 the commentary here will be decidedly favorable towards MFLDX. No special knowledge - just think the odds favor that.
"I think another issue is that these funds by nature will sometimes appear "out of sync" as they are trying to run against the grain and do something different than the general mob."
Exactly, Hank. That's why I'm holding up to this point and willing to watch for a while longer to see what might develop.
I think this was a wrong way to ask for ideas. The thread has either been hijacked or subverted. Of all the places I would have expected THIS thread to not cause one person to tout their good performing funds.
"Less than two years ago MFLDX was darling of the board."
It was? I don't think a fund can be a darling of the board when there are people who act as if the existence of alternative funds is - for some bizarre reason, as they don't have to invest in them - terribly upsetting. It's a fund that some people have taken to, certainly, but the Marketfield religion is not as large as those that follow some other popular funds.
As for questions of asset bloat (and people say Marketfield has taken in too much while investing in other funds that have larger AUM....) and other issues with the fund, this article provides a detailed summary.
“The strategy is based off of multiple themes and a large chunk of them didn't perform well.” I'm not seeing how this is really any different than a number of long-only managers over the years who have lagged because they made bets that didn't pay off or took longer to pay off then expected.
"But hate to see folks flee a fund so quickly."
It's the way things are these days. People buy a conservative fund only to eventually be disappointed when it lags and sell probably when it would be best to have it, people hold aggressive funds too long and bail when they should be buying, etc etc etc....
Comments
I am thinking you are talking ytd on losing five percent or better. I have none that are ytd losers. My three best are TOLLX (+16.63%) ... THOAX (+13.70) & SVAAX (+10.29%). My three worst are LALDX (+1.97%) ... LPEFX (+2.35%) & ANWPX (+3.35%). Even my small cap funds have done reasonably well IIVAX (+4.24%) ... PCVAX (+5.64%) & PMDAX (+7.54%).
Old_Skeet
My strongest funds come in various flavors, led by emerging markets (TRP Africa & Middle East up 19%, plus Grandeur Peak EO, MACSX and Seafarer) but there's an inexplicable potpourri of others as well - real assets, global growth, midcap value. As with the losers, it's on auto.
David
My HSGFX is down 3.4% I think. If he cannot hedge I'm going to tell and buy inverse S&P 500 fund. I don't have problem with his economics which is why I have persisted with him. What I can't understand is WTF he cannot hedge. Now, I'm straying off topic.
So far then ARTSX is the only fund down more than 5% that Observers are holding?
PS BUFOX showing down 10 percent not 14, but maybe you seeing different reported number. BUFSX also down 9 plus. Another fund I owned but sold long time back. Such funds to be bought after heavy correction, and sold 3 years later and use to improve quality of life.
This year I started trimming some funds to keep my AA closer where I want it to be, which is 55% stock funds. I am an old guy at 64, retired, living off my investments. The trimming has been very gradual and gentle.
Best wishes,
Dave
Derf
Regards,
Ted
FBTCX: 17.97% YTD
PRHSX: 17.89% YTD
QQQ 13.99% YTD
PFF 12.27% YTD
SPY: 9.91% YTD
VWELX: 7.52% YTD
Average 13.25% YTD
Ouch Funds 2014
None
Derf
While you are extending the rope for MFLDX ... Mainstay thanks you. I believe in giving a fund manager ample time to position the fund but when Mainstay kept the fund open rather than closing it to where it could be well managed based upon ever changing macro themes ... Well, I recently decided to book my profit in the fund and move on. It has now got to turn some good investment tricks to move the nav. By the way MFLDX shorted DUK during its merger with PGN and it moved the nav big time. With its size today this play would now amount to no more than a drop in a big bucket.
The same thing happened in Ivy Asset Strategy. I held that fund for a good number of years and as the assets under management kept increasing I noticed so did the time it took the managers to reposition the fund. And, it became so large that it was noted and alleged by some that its repositioning and rapid selling of some S&P 500 futures caused and lead to the great ... Flash Crash. With that, I let it go.
Sometime things just get too big to manage.
That leads me to BankAmerica ... It to got too big for its britches, by my thinking, and look what has transpired. Glad I sold the family stock in that monster before it tanked. And, now there is Duke Energy another Charlotte, NC based company. When the board of directors of Duke hoodwinked the North Carolina regulators about the planned merger with Progress Energy ... Well, I sold off my DUK stock too. And, I still do not feel good about the size that DUK has become. From my thinking ... It is just now too big to effectively manage and I am looking for something to crop up if it has not already ... Look at the problems they now face with those toxic coal ash ponds.
Simply stated when I feel things have gotten too big to be managed ... I move on.
Old_Skeet
Regards- OJ
important as you point out. The noose is growing tighter by the day for MFLDX.
Stay dry, Derf
Why does all this remind me of Dodge and Cox in 2009? Go back and read the archives (FA/MFO) if you can find them. Too big, too bloated, and unmanageable were cited frequently as reasons to flee. Seems they've managed to confound their skeptics and make some $$ for those who held on. Having low ERs in the vicinity of .50% hasn't hurt them either.
You may be correct that this fund can function successfully only with a smaller asset base. But, I wouldn't bet on it. There are economics of scale as well. I do think stability of assets is more important than size. So, if they haven't been able to convince their clients to hang in there for longer than a year or two without jerking out their $$ than that's a failing on their part which will come back to bite them.
Don't like any of these goanywhere funds. But hate to see folks flee a fund so quickly. Less than two years ago MFLDX was darling of the board. You could almost hear their cash register going "ka-ching" every time somebody invested in the fund. I think another issue is that these funds by nature will sometimes appear "out of sync" as they are trying to run against the grain and do something different than the general mob. My prediction is that on August 31, 2017 the commentary here will be decidedly favorable towards MFLDX. No special knowledge - just think the odds favor that.
Exactly, Hank. That's why I'm holding up to this point and willing to watch for a while longer to see what might develop.
I request this thread be closed.
It was? I don't think a fund can be a darling of the board when there are people who act as if the existence of alternative funds is - for some bizarre reason, as they don't have to invest in them - terribly upsetting. It's a fund that some people have taken to, certainly, but the Marketfield religion is not as large as those that follow some other popular funds.
As for questions of asset bloat (and people say Marketfield has taken in too much while investing in other funds that have larger AUM....) and other issues with the fund, this article provides a detailed summary.
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20140612/BLOG12/140619969/the-20-billion-mainstay-marketfield-funds-chicken-or-egg-problem#
“The strategy is based off of multiple themes and a large chunk of them didn't perform well.” I'm not seeing how this is really any different than a number of long-only managers over the years who have lagged because they made bets that didn't pay off or took longer to pay off then expected.
"But hate to see folks flee a fund so quickly."
It's the way things are these days. People buy a conservative fund only to eventually be disappointed when it lags and sell probably when it would be best to have it, people hold aggressive funds too long and bail when they should be buying, etc etc etc....