Columbia & Van Kampen

or Register to post new content in the forum

35 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Oct 21, 2009 4:49 pm
Squash1:

That came out 2 days ago… Joogle is behind

 
Oct 21, 2009 6:29 pm

[quote=chief123] [quote=Spaceman Spiff]

Just like everything else, evidently.

[/quote]

Are the still on the preferred list still?[/quote]   Yep.  Well, the WSJ just reported it yesterday.  We got the email this morning, which means that someone at HQ knew about it yesterday so they could put it in the Uptick for delivery this morning.  Had I been here last night later than 4:30, I would have known about it when that email actually got delivered.  Had I cared enough to look for it, there was evidently something on our mutual fund page yesterday that told us about the deal.  So, Joogle wasn't behind, just the flow of info to the FA was.  Our sources were as well and as timely informed as the WSJ, so that's actually not too bad.  I didn't, however, get my personal email from Tom Miltenberger letting me know what was going on.  Strange.  
Oct 22, 2009 1:41 am

You guys couldn’t be more wrong about Comstock.  Bob Baker is a long term contrarian pimp.  Granted, he’s on a 6 month cebatical.  Nontheless, the fund has killed it in the worst decade in market history.  As normalization in the market has returned, the fund is top 30% the last year and better than 17% ten years.  Don’t let a bad year dictate your long-term investment decisions.  Your should say thank you to your wholesaler at VK for having you load up on Comstock.

Oct 22, 2009 2:39 am

Baker is gone. Can you define killed it for me…?

Oct 22, 2009 3:37 am
rankstocks:

You guys couldn’t be more wrong about Comstock.  Bob Baker is a long term contrarian pimp.  Granted, he’s on a 6 month cebatical.  Nontheless, the fund has killed it in the worst decade in market history.  As normalization in the market has returned, the fund is top 30% the last year and better than 17% ten years.  Don’t let a bad year dictate your long-term investment decisions.  Your should say thank you to your wholesaler at VK for having you load up on Comstock.

  Van Kampen Comstock:   3 year trailing return - -5.97% 5 year trailing return - +1.39%   BlackRock Equity Dividend:   3 year trailing return - -1.66% 5 year trailing return - +5.93%   Riversource Diversified Equity Income: 3 year trailing return - -5.59% 5 year trailing return - +4.47%   Eaton Vance Large Cap Value:   3 year trailing return - -4.88% 5 year trailing return - +3.96%   These were just the 1st three examples of large value funds I thought of, and they each beat Comstock pretty badly.  Comstock is beating them all in 2009 YTD return basically because most of the investments they were wrong on in '07 and '08 are making up more of the ground they lost the past couple of years.  The other funds didn't have as much ground to make up.  Come to think of it I should have invested a ton of folks in Comstock in January of this year!
Oct 22, 2009 3:41 am
rankstocks:

You should say thank you to your wholesaler at VK for having you load up on Comstock.

  He got canned late last year.  Not sure the gesture would be as appreciated on his end.
Oct 22, 2009 2:05 pm
rankstocks:

You guys couldn’t be more wrong about Comstock.  Bob Baker is a long term contrarian pimp.  Granted, he’s on a 6 month cebatical.  Nontheless, the fund has killed it in the worst decade in market history.  As normalization in the market has returned, the fund is top 30% the last year and better than 17% ten years.  Don’t let a bad year dictate your long-term investment decisions.  Your should say thank you to your wholesaler at VK for having you load up on Comstock.

  Just on Jones' Preferred Fund list of Domestic G&I Funds, there are 13 funds with better 3 year numbers, 14 funds with better 5 yr numbers, and 6 Funds with better 10 yr. numbers (I didn't know Jones even had that many G&I funds on their list??).   Hey, their 15-year number and their 1-year numbers are pretty good.  It's just everything in-between that's sucked.  I guess market-timing works .   Rank, hopefully, you have just been drinking.  I usually like your commentary.
Oct 22, 2009 2:14 pm

Throw out 05-07 and Comstock would be a top decile fund over every time period.  Like I said before they made a bad call on dumping energy early and then loading up on banks.  Their 15 year number is phenomenal.  Just under 10% with two big bear markets and their sub par performance 05-07. 

Rank, I'm going to guess your a long time Comstock fan.  Most Jones FAs that have been around a while are.  Those of us who haven't been in the business that long haven't seen Comstock at the top of any list of great funds to own.  You may be right that it's a great fund, but they're really out of favor right now.  And they did it to themselves.  Hopefully they can make a comeback and get back to their great long term successes.  In the meantime, we're probably going to see a lot of money that, 10 years ago, would have gone to VK go to places like Oppenheimer or Hartford or FT. 
Oct 22, 2009 3:14 pm

[quote=Spaceman Spiff]

Throw out 05-07 and Comstock would be a top decile fund over every time period.  Like I said before they made a bad call on dumping energy early and then loading up on banks.  Their 15 year number is phenomenal.  Just under 10% with two big bear markets and their sub par performance 05-07. 

Rank, I'm going to guess your a long time Comstock fan.  Most Jones FAs that have been around a while are.  Those of us who haven't been in the business that long haven't seen Comstock at the top of any list of great funds to own.  You may be right that it's a great fund, but they're really out of favor right now.  And they did it to themselves.  Hopefully they can make a comeback and get back to their great long term successes.  In the meantime, we're probably going to see a lot of money that, 10 years ago, would have gone to VK go to places like Oppenheimer or Hartford or FT.  [/quote]   Not to beat a dead horse, but, if you throw out 05-07 there are a tremendous amount of funds that would be top decile over all time periods.
Oct 22, 2009 3:38 pm

[quote=noggin] [quote=Spaceman Spiff]

Throw out 05-07 and Comstock would be a top decile fund over every time period. Like I said before they made a bad call on dumping energy early and then loading up on banks. Their 15 year number is phenomenal. Just under 10% with two big bear markets and their sub par performance 05-07.



Rank, I’m going to guess your a long time Comstock fan. Most Jones FAs that have been around a while are. Those of us who haven’t been in the business that long haven’t seen Comstock at the top of any list of great funds to own. You may be right that it’s a great fund, but they’re really out of favor right now. And they did it to themselves. Hopefully they can make a comeback and get back to their great long term successes. In the meantime, we’re probably going to see a lot of money that, 10 years ago, would have gone to VK go to places like Oppenheimer or Hartford or FT. [/quote]



Not to beat a dead horse, but, if you throw out 05-07 there are a tremendous amount of funds that would be top decile over all time periods. [/quote]



Yeah no kidding “This would be a top tier fund if you threw out all the bad years and the fund manager and replaced it with whatever numbers look good”
Oct 23, 2009 6:43 am

<SPAN id=userPro163471 =msgSidePro title=“View Drop Down” =“showDropDown’userPro163471’, ‘proMenu163471’, 160, 0;”>3rdyrp2, why don’t you show the  1 or 10 year numbers on those funds compared to Comstock, or maybe 15?  Who really cares how a fund has underperformed or outperformed on a 1 or 3 year period.  5-10-15 year periods are where you should look.  Anyone can find a fund that has beaten another fund over a 3 or 5 year period, hindsite is 20-20.  The key is where is a fund going, what is the investment strategy, and how poised is the investment managment.  Why do you think investing in 1-star funds at the start of each year has outperformed investing in 5-star funds at the start of each year?  I define “killing it” over a 10 year period as being in the top quartile.  By the way, please name a fund that has been in the top quartile every year for the last 10-years…I’d really like to know if one exists…because I’ve never seen one.

Oct 23, 2009 2:32 pm

Where do you go to find quartile rankings?

Oct 23, 2009 2:38 pm

And do you go by Lipper or Morningstar for fund category…? Not being critical honestly asking…

Oct 23, 2009 2:50 pm

It’s 10 year Std Dev is through the roof.  The thing has had some odd ups and downs, and is definitely a “contrarian” fund.  But it is NOT for the faint of heart.  That thing is all over the palce.  Reminds me of a Putnam fund.

Oct 23, 2009 3:15 pm

For my money and my client’s I feel a lot more comfortable with something very similiar but better in my mind. I like MFS Value over Comstock…Std Dev much much lower over the last 10 years, beta 10% lower over last 10 years. MFS Value is a top quartile performer over the last 3,5 and 10 years, Comstock is only a top quartile over the last 10 years. The real interesting things is that over the last 10 years, 16.5% capital gains for MFS Value imbedded in performance and 31.8% capital gains imbedded in performance for Comstock.

Alphas are very different as well, MFS value has a positive one and Comstock is negative....