Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

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

Matthews View on Asia's Importance

https://matthewsasia.com/missing/?

As I have said previously, I sold most of my Matthews positions when Seafarer and Grandeur Peak opened their shops. The referenced article points out that many portfolios may be short of Asia coverage, even though international funds are held. I did a quick check of my holdings and concluded that I am well exposed to Asia with GPIOX, GPGOX, GPMCX, GPEOX, SFGIX, and MAPIX. FMIJX could be said to be light on Asia, ARTRX is about average for a global fund. I wonder if others share the Matthews view that Asia deserves a larger spot in their portfolios.

Comments

  • Not being sarcastic, but how do you know you are not OVEREXPOSED to Asia???
  • edited May 2017
    Ben...I do believe an out sized Asia stake would be worthwhile simply due to the potential consumer growth in the area.

    My holdings are similar to yours, with GPMCX, ARTGX, GPGOX, SFGIX and FMIJX. I do have an Asian pure play, which happens to be the first fund in this space I bought many years ago, and that's MAPTX, my only current Matthews holding.

    One thing I'm currently looking at is the weighting between China and India within all of these funds. I believe India will overtake China in performance very shortly. MINDX is on my pondering list.
  • edited May 2017
    Hi Ben, I've got an equity-light portfolio that's slightly overweight Asia vs. the MSCI ACWI, with MAVRX and MEASX as most of the Asia punch; MEASX is really loaded with consumer names, which makes the overall Asia component pretty consumer heavy.

    My int'l and global funds don't contribute nearly as much to Asia holdings. I also have a new position in Asia debt that I'm planning to build as long as the coast is clear, in MAINX. The only other significant source I have for international fixed income is Pimco, and they tend to own very little Asia, but quite of bit of Latin America.

    Like Press, I also keep MINDX on watch - have owned it in the past, including recently, but don't particularly like it as a long-term holding with the P/E elevated as it's been.

    Best -- AJ
  • I have almost 25% of my portfolio and two-thirds of my international exposure in Asia while I'm underweight Japan and the other developed markets, so I completely agree with Matthews on this one. I own the usual suspects as others have mentioned- GPIOX, GPEOX, GPMCX, MEASX, MAPIX and SFGIX all have big if not total allocations to Asia, but I also own KGGAX, OBIOX, QUSOX, EWX, TVRVX and WAFMX which each have 30% or more in Asia. That might be too many funds but I'm not uncomfortable at all with the large allocation because the stats on all these funds in terms of P/E, P/B, ROA, ROE and expected EPS growth seem very good pretty much across the board. Since I've built several of these positions over the last couple of years as emerging markets have suffered, I would also eventually reduce holdings if and when emerging markets/these funds have higher valuations. I'd expect that could ultimately reduce Asia to less than 20% of my portfolio with pretty much all of that coming out of emerging markets when it happens.
  • For Asia investing Matthews is pretty much the only game in town. Other companies will have China/Japan/Asia funds, but Matthews has a comprehensive portfolio.

    I invest with Matthews but stay away from the "targeted" fair. That is no Korea, India, Japan, etc. funds. I'm not smart enough to take narrow bets like that. I prefer Matthews to take those bets for me through their other funds.

    Finally, I will say, it is Matthews job to promote Asia. You will not see them explain you the importance of Latin America. IMO the only reason to go with a Matthews fund is because a lot of "international" funds actually hardly venture beyond Europe, and into Asia or Latin America in a meaningful way. I wager a guess "international" fund are more likely to invest in Latin America than Asia besides Europe. Asia is less understood, Africa even less.

    So if you really feel you need exposure to Asia because you are indeed seeking that then Matthews is probably the best way to go. Else trust your international fund manager. I only invest in Matthews in my IRA. I have no other specific Asia investments.
  • We used to invest with Matthews who have done well for us. More recently we invest with Andrew Foster's Seafarer fund exclusively. His long term record including those from Matthews Asian Growth & Income is excellent, particularly during market downturn.
  • Sven said:

    We used to invest with Matthews who have done well for us. More recently we invest with Andrew Foster's Seafarer fund exclusively. His long term record including those from Matthews Asian Growth & Income is excellent, particularly during market downturn.

    I also have a smattering of SFGIX but I don't consider it an Asia fund. Unless I'm mistaken one of the reasons Foster struck out on his own was so that he could "diversify" out of Asia if he wanted to. You can see from his fund he has done exactly that. Also, look at his "developed" vs "developing" split. Not exactly all "emerging".

    Anyways, for me investment in SFGIX is investment in the manager first and foremost. Just like it is for Matthews funds. I'm trusting their expertise. I'm assuming manager risk more than market risk. If I want to literally overweight Asia, I would buy index fund and assume market risk. If I had Vanguard Pacific Index or something in my 401ks, I would allocate to it.
  • How do some people make a living writing that you don't need ANY dedicated international equity exposure??? ...big U.S. multinational companies provide all you need???
  • @MCPO. God incarnate John Bogle has often proclaimed most investors do not need any international exposure. The logic is you are "exposed" to international economy because stocks in the S&P 500 index derive a large portion of their revenues/profits through overseas sales and operations.

    First and foremost, stop overthinking. Don't Analyse, but ANALyse. Who cares what anyone else is writing. You do what you think is right. I may be wrong about my thoughts on Education being overrated, but Investment Expertise is most certainly overrated. Remember, that over the "long term", which starts and ends based on when one wants to write an article you will find whether you invest internationally or domestically, you will get your number between 8% or 15% to proclaim victory over the other.

    I'm not making living writing anything, but here and now I can offer you advice. You should only invest in internet stocks. Below is the proof. Now pay me.

    Screen_Shot_2017_05_27_at_12_29_12_PM
    fb upload image
  • For disclosure purposes... I do own OAKIX, WAIGX and TAREX. Some of my domestic equity mf's have anywhere from 0-20% international exposure. My portfolio currently sits @20% international equity... enough??? Do I need 8-10 mf's dedicated to international/Asia??? Just saying...
  • edited May 2017

    For disclosure purposes... I do own OAKIX, WAIGX and TAREX. Some of my domestic equity mf's have anywhere from 0-20% international exposure. My portfolio currently sits @20% international equity... enough??? Do I need 8-10 mf's dedicated to international/Asia??? Just saying...

    I will let someone else attempt to give you a definite answer. I will give you mine.

    IMHO, you have demonstrated you have a sound head already. You have already concluded you do not, or you wouldn't have asked the question. Because it is quite clear it does not make sense to you. Or sense FOR you. Don't let anyone convince you otherwise. If it indeed has to be so then YOU in time will figure it out, and that is good enough. I have learnt from my mistakes. I never learnt from OTHER people's mistakes.

    If you listen to "expert" telling you US is dead, International reigns supreme, you could go 100% international. Whatever you decide one thing to remember is that you don't make a living the same way as this "expert" does. HE (and I don't say SHE because we know gender diversity does not exist in the field of "expertise" we are talking about) has already made his money shoving his "expertise" down your throat. Those are HIS earnings. What you do makes no difference to HIM. It will make a difference to YOU.

    YOU decide. And once again, when I say "expert" I meant the financial pron stars. MFO "experts" are not experts, they are your well wishers and your "teachers". That's how I see it.

    Happy Anniversary to ME. No, REALLY. Now let me sell some of my international holdings and show my wife a good time.
  • @VF
    Thanks! Enjoy your Holiday weekend! I bet your wife enjoys your ANALysis too!!! Stay safe!
  • @VF
    Thanks! Enjoy your Holiday weekend! I bet your wife enjoys your ANALysis too!!! Stay safe!

    NO. She will divorce me. She has a PhD. She can spot people who speak from their behinds all the time. I got lucky.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
Sign In or Register to comment.