Skip to main content

Sound Advice: July 29, 2020

Fund Facts

Navigating the world of mutual funds can be an interesting adventure.  Indeed, for other than professionals (and probably for some of them), working one’s way through this forest of some 8,000 funds may be overwhelming.  Even so, here is some assistance in understanding.

Mutual funds have been around for decades.  They become popular in the 1970s and 1980s.  Fifty years ago, most funds were load funds.  Load is another word for sales charge.  Back then, it was not uncommon for load funds to have initial charges of 8% or so when making investments.  So on Day One, your $100,000 investment was worth only $92,000.

As time passed, investors became increasingly concerned about these sales charges.  Then several things happened.  The mutual fund companies created different classes of shares.  Typically, Class A included the stated load when the initial investment was made.  For investors who balked at that, they created Class B, which had no charge up front.  The hitch was that the charge was applied when shares were sold.  

Some folks were uncomfortable with either of these charges, which led to Class C.  Class C came with no front- or back-end charges.  It did, however, come with an annual fee.

All of these fees were in addition to the ongoing administrative and management fees, which were usually in the range of 1% to 2% per year.  These fees in aggregate were increasingly resisted and the universe of no-load (no sales charge) funds emerged.  Today, no-load funds are dominant.

In addition to the matter of fees, it’s important to be wary of duplication of underlying holdings. That’s especially true when considering the largest funds.  Why? Because as assets under management increase, fund managers have to focus on stocks that are actively traded, i.e., highly liquid.  They must buy huge positions.  For that reason, as the fund’s assets increase, the range of investment choices decreases.  It should come as no surprise, therefore, that there is considerable duplication of underlying holdings among the biggest funds.

Accordingly, it’s a good idea to avoid huge funds and concentrate on mid-sized funds.  Smaller funds may also be of interest, though one would be well advised to limit consideration to those with $100 million or more under management so that the fund’s expense ratio is within a reasonable range.

Pay attention also to the tenure of the fund’s manager.  Often, investors are tempted to concentrate on funds that have had the best returns in recent years.  This may not a wise approach.  What is wise is noting the tenure of the current fund manager.  If the manager has been aboard for an extended period, the fund’s record is that manager’s record.  But if it’s a new manager, it is essentially a new fund.

The task of sifting through the pile of fund information may be challenging, but these guidelines should help avoid mistakes that might otherwise be problematical.


N. Russell Wayne, CFP

www.soundasset.com
www.soundasset.blogspot.com

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sound Advice: January 3, 2025

2025 Market Forecasts: Stupidity Taken To An Extreme   If you know anything about stock market performance, you can only gag at the nonsense “esteemed forecasters” are now putting forth about the prospective path of stocks in the year ahead.   Our cousins in the UK would call this rubbish.   I would not be as kind. Leading the Ship of Fools is the forecast from the Chief Investment Strategist at Oppenheimer who is looking for a year-end 2025 level for the Standard & Poor’s Index of 7,100, a whopping 21% increase from the most recent standing.   Indeed, most of these folks are looking for double-digit gains.   Only two expect stocks to weaken. In the last 30 years, the market has risen by more than 20% only 15 times.   The exceptional span during that time was 1996-1999, which accounted for four of those jumps.   What followed in 2000 through 2002 was the polar opposite: 2000:      -9.1% 2001:     -11.9% ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Sound Advice: January 15, 2025

Why investors shouldn't pay attention to Wall Street forecasts   Investors shouldn't pay attention to Wall Street forecasts for several compelling reasons: Poor accuracy Wall Street forecasts have a terrible track record of accuracy. Studies show that their predictions are often no better than random chance, with accuracy rates as low as 47%   Some prominent analysts even perform worse, with accuracy ratings as low as 35% Consistent overestimation Analysts consistently overestimate earnings growth, predicting 10-12%                 annual growth when the reality is closer to 6%.   This overoptimism can                 lead investors to make overly aggressive bets in the market. Inability to predict unpredictable events The stock market is influenced by numerous unpredictable factors, including geopolitical events, technological changes, and company-specific news.   Anal...
Post a Comment
Read more

Sound Advice: July 16, 2025

Fixed annuities are poor investments Fixed annuities are often criticized as poor investments for several reasons, despite their reputation for providing stable, predictable income.  Here are the key drawbacks and concerns:   High Fees and Commissions Internal Fees:  Fixed annuities can carry a range of fees, including administrative charges, mortality expense risk fees, and rider fees. These can add up to 2%–4% per year, significantly eroding returns over time. Commissions:  Sales agents and financial advisors often receive high commissions for selling annuities—sometimes as much as 5%–8% of the invested amount. This creates a financial incentive for advisers to recommend them, even when they may not be the best fit for the client. Comparison to Other Investments:  Mutual funds and ETFs typically have much lower fees and commissions, making them more cost-effective for long-term growth. Limited Growth a...
Post a Comment
Read more