I was looking at the MultiSearch and Dashboard results for ZEOIX. After consulting their website (ZEO now has a real website) ZEOIX looks like a superior mattress to me. (that's a compliment). What puzzled me on the Premium toosl was the characterization of David's take on this fund as "mixed". It was actually Chip's take but that's fine. I just can't find anything mixed in the 2014 description of this fund. It look entirely positive. Have I missed a subtly stated reservation? (other than saying this fund is not for everyone. But neither is RPHYX, with a "positive take". )
You won't get very good CD or money market rates at a brokerage, so if that's the case ZEOIX may be a good option. But if you are talking money that has more options, money that you want to stash in a safe place, I wouldn't go there. I'd start looking at CD's.
Going up the ladder, I use SEMPX and SPFPX for more risk and more yield.
I choose these vehicles based on their lack of volatility, but by no means are any of them cash or Money Market substitutes. They all can lose money on occasion.
BTW, why go with a brokerage when you can go directly to the fund transfer agent and pay no fee?
As for CD rates even at 6 years I don't see anything right now quite as "high" as ZEOIX's modest returns. In a mutual fund the money is liquid. But yeah, CDs are likely to go up. But meanwhile......
I appreciate everyone's opinion, including Ted's, even though I think I disagree about this fund's turkeyness. Thanks for chiming in. However my real question is "why is Chips's 2014 evaluation described by MFO as "mixed"?
Ted, the problem you're making in your analysis is to compare this against a pool of high-yield bond funds...the same mistake that MS makes, and which has been discussed more than once in the MFO commentary.
The time frame is from May 31, 2011 to current date.
Can you link Chip's writeup you are referring to? Thanks
Management’s stake in the fund
As of the last Statement of Additional Information (April 2013), Mr. Reddy and Mr. Cook each had between $1 – 10,000 invested in the fund. The manager’s commitment is vastly greater than that outdated stat reveals. Effectively all of his personal capital is tied up in the fund or Zeo Capital’s fund operations. None of the fund’s directors had any investment in it. That’s no particular indictment of the fund since the directors had no investment in any of the 98 funds they oversaw.
The reported expense ratio is 1.50% which substantially overstates the expenses current investors are likely to encounter.
Effectively none. Zeo.com contains the same information you’d find on a business card. (Yeah, I know.) Because most of their investors come through referrals and personal interactions it’s not a really high priority for them. They aspire to a nicely minimalist site at some point in the foreseeable future. Until then you’re best off calling and chatting with them.
Venk and Paige were kind enough to provide an update via telecom last month and after discussion with David, we're trying to set-up a visit with them in mid December for a profile update in January commentary.
Since 2014, they've doubled in AUM ... much better website now, lower er (if not low enough), not sure of director stake yet. But, in any case, they remain genuinely thoughtful in approach to investing and investor solicitation.
Here are some of their impressive risk numbers (click screen to enlarge):