Quantcast
WHAT'S NEW? Our Latest Updates!

March 2008 performance review

By mid-March the market was not looking good, sliding to new lows as financial services stocks continued to suffer - but once again things turned around and ended basically flat for the month. The S&P 500 was down 0.43% in March – the 5th straight monthly decline. Other indexes did better; the Dow was up 0.12%, the Nasdaq 0.34%, and the Russell 2000 small cap index 0.42%. Higher quality bonds were up slightly as well, while riskier corporate debt and most of the mortgage bond market slipped.

New Fidelity Long Short Fund

While most of the new fund launches are ETFs these days, certain categories of mutual funds are popular breeding grounds for new old-fashioned funds. Funds that ‘short’ stock (borrow shares and sell them with the hope of buying them back at a lower price in future) are becoming increasingly popular with investors, and therefore fund companies are lining up with new offerings.

So far this category of ‘long-short’ funds is riddled with expensive but mediocre funds. Fidelity hopes to change all that with their new Fidelity 130/30 Large Cap Fund (FOTTX), launched this past week:

The main differences between a 130/30 fund structure and other funds is the use of leverage and shorting. 130/30 Funds employ a strategy of holding investments both "long" (or bought with the expectation that the stock will outperform the market) and "short" (or those borrowed and sold with the expectation that they will under-perform the market). This gives the fund manager the ability to further capitalize on stock selection skill by allowing him to fully express both positive and negative views on stocks...…Fidelity has a 15-year history of shorting stocks, mainly in institutional market-neutral portfolios.”

The fund’s minimum is an above average $10,000 for regular accounts, $2,500 for IRA’s and for purchases made through an investment advisor.

Keep in mind such a fund is NOT safer than a stock fund that is invested 100% in stocks. The core fees include management fees of 0.86% and other expenses of 0.37% for a 1.23% expense ratio BEFORE considering dividends owed on shorted stocks and other expenses related to shorting. With these fees total expenses are 1.89%. Note that dividends earned buying stocks with short proceeds is not deducted from quoted expenses so the 1.89% in some cases is a bit of an overstatement.

If this fund were to short stocks and invest the proceeds in say, government T-bills, investors could see some risk reduction as their overall portfolio would have net exposure to the stock market of under 100% (though there would still be risk the shorts would go up while and the longs down resulting in a risk profile of 100% long).

However, this fund and many like it take the proceeds of the shorts and buy more stock. This is even riskier than borrowing the 30% to buy more stocks (130% long) like many closed end funds do because there is a risk that both the shorts and the longs will lose money – in some cases an investor could have the risk profile of being 160% in stocks if the longs and shorts picks by the fund manager both perform poorly. In fact, since an investor can lose more than 100% of their money on a short, in theory this fund could approach the risk profile of being 200% in stocks, though I’m sure Fidelity would disagree with this assessment.

Risk warnings aside, this and other similar funds have a key advantage over individuals shorting stocks: use of short proceeds. Most investors not only have to keep the proceeds of the short with the broker, they may have to pay margin interest or put some of their own cash up against the short to cover the risk to the broker. Funds get to invest the proceeds of the short and put up the rest of the portfolio as collateral.

We expect this fund to perform in the top 20% of similar funds over the next year because the fees are lower than many others and Fidelity will be doing everything in its power to make sure this new small fund performs well.

For more on this new fund check out Fidelity’s website.

The Elusive Bottom and Limits of Diversification

The relatively low volatility stock market of the last few years seems a thing of the past. Today we see wild moves almost daily as the market swings from euphoria to panic.

New Vanguard Global Index Fund - It's About Time

Everybody loves indexing, and indexing pioneer Vanguard certainly doesn't shut their yap about the benefits of indexing, but for some strange reason Vanguard has yet to deliver a global stock index fund. Vanguard offers dozens of index funds - now in ETF format as well as traditional open-end funds - to cover U.S. stocks and foreign markets, but they don't have a one stop product that lets a truly passive investor buy a single stock fund that invests in world equity markets.

Well, soon they will:

Vanguard filed a registration statement on Wednesday, April 2, 2008, with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to offer a global equity index fund—Vanguard Global Stock Index Fund. The fund will offer three share classes—Investor, Institutional, and ETFs—that are expected to be available in the second quarter of 2008. This will be Vanguard's first passively managed global index fund.

The new fund will seek to track the performance of the FTSE All-World Index, a float-adjusted, market capitalization-weighted index designed to measure equity market performance of large- and mid-capitalization stocks worldwide. The fund will invest in a broadly diversified sampling of securities from the target benchmark, which comprises more than 2,800 large- and mid-cap stocks of companies in 48 foreign countries. Approximately 55% of the index is made up of stocks from outside the U.S."

The index fund open-end version's 0.45% expense ratio is not as cheap as other Vanguard U.S. index funds, and is just 0.19% cheaper than Vanguards actively managed global stock fund, Vanguard Global Equity (VHGEX).

Vanguard is also adding purchase fees to buy the open-end version of this new index fund, along with the usual redemption fees:

To offset the transaction costs associated with global investing and to protect the interests of long-term fund shareholders, the fund will assess a 0.15% purchase fee on all non-ETF share purchases and a 2% redemption fee on all non-ETF assets redeemed within two months of purchase."

This front and back fee levy should lead to slightly better quoted performance of the open-end fund than the closed end fund, even factoring in higher fund expenses (the ETF costs 0.25%).

Vanguard is really just playing catch-up here. Barclays iShares unit just launched a global stock ETF, iShares MSCI ACWI Index Fund (ACWI), which started just last week. Barclay's fund owns 711 holdings to mimic an index of 2,884 stocks and comes with an 0.35% expense ratio - more than the Vanguard ETF but less than the Vanguard open-end fund.

Global indexing made more sense before foreign stocks outpaced U.S. stocks, as they have for the past several years. At this point we expect U.S. stocks to beat foreign stocks going forward. Our predictions aside, for those looking for a one stop stock fund they can buy and ignore for twenty years, this is it. No word on where the one stop global stock AND bond index fund is - we need that even more, especially in 401(k) plans.

Can Too Many Funds Spoil a Good Portfolio?

03/31/08 - Investing Advice

Chuck Jaffe at Marketwatch says that when it comes to building a mutual fund portfolio, less is usually more. Jaffe's point is that owning more than ten or so funds is at best unnecessary, and at worst can turn your holdings into an overpriced index fund.

With actively managed mutual funds, more is not necessarily better. Studies show that owning four funds in the same asset category is virtually certain to create a 'closet index fund,' which means that the combined performance of the funds winds up doing no better than the index for that asset class

Plus, that index-or-worse overall performance comes at a much higher cost than simply owning a mutual-fund or exchange-traded fund tracking the index.

...Ultimately, an investor can build a winning portfolio with no more than six funds covering domestic and foreign markets, large- and small stocks, bonds and money-markets. Sector funds and other issues can be used to flesh out the holdings and tilt the assets to areas the investor prefers, without creating massive overlap with the core holdings.

A portfolio that's a little more complicated is fine, but going much further -- with closer to 20 funds than a half-dozen, and with too many decisions to make -- is almost sure to leave you with an unmanaged mess."

While it is true that the more funds you own, the closer your portfolio becomes an overpriced index fund, it is also true that 10 cheap good funds are better than five expensive mediocre funds. There is also the risk of over-relying on an expert manager by focusing too much on a few funds - something investors in Bill Miller's Legg Mason Value (LMVTX) are finding out right now. Moreover, it can be impossible to own just a few funds when you consider many investors own funds in several accounts - 401(k)s, IRAs, etc and collectively owning 20 funds is all but unavoidable.

The article also features this dubious advice from a Morningstar exec.:

'It's a good time to check up and see if your fund is performing worse than you would have expected in a tumultuous environment,' said Christine Benz, director of personal finance at investment researcher Morningstar Inc. 'If performance is worse than you expected, then maybe the fund is a bad match for your risk tolerance.'"

But wouldn't such behavior lead to buying high and selling low? Don't most people buy funds after they perform better than expected? In fact isn't that how funds get highly rated in the first place? Weren't all the Janus funds performing better than expected in the late 1990s? By this logic you would have sold them all after they fell harder than expected in 2000-2002, missing the better than expected returns from 2003-2007.

There is nothing wrong with a focused fund portfolio. Our MAXadvisor Powerfund Portfolios newsletter publishes seven model mutual fund portfolios, none of which have held more than ten funds and ETFs. That said, there are cases for smaller allocations to certain more targeted funds that could increase the number of portfolio holdings to more than that.