Is this what we think are the worse/best, or does it need to be supported?

[quote=Wet_Blanket]Is this what we think are the worse/best, or does it need to be supported?[/quote]

Your opinion. 

A separate, concurrent study will be conducted that will have a set of data garnered from the actual worst and best performing funds in those categories.

Many of the worst funds the last decade have been merged or liquidated.  Here’s a few that blow, that seem to be widely held.

I was trying to stay away from asset allocation funds.  I was thinking of doing a separate study with those, later on down the line.

Thanks for the help rank - I guess I will have to conduct this the old fashioned way and pick them myself.

Nobody has any favorites? 

I may just use Roogle.  I think that would be an interesting abstract;

…data was obtained by using the search function in the RegisteredRep Forum.  Called Roogle by it’s veteran users, it is a difficult search function and does not always find what you want it to…

I would give you something, but my opinion means nothing and I have never given it at all much thought.

It’s actually taking a previous study done in 2006 a few steps forward (and correctly!).  Since I do not relish the extra work involved, I have left passive funds off of the list.

But I will likely look into that as well, depending on how this study turns out.

The previous study looked into 100 “favorite companies” - basically companies that Fortune magazine thought was going to do well, and 100 “out of favor” companies - companies that Fortune didn’t think was going to do well. 

The authors hypothesized that the favorite companies would “regress towards the mean” - in this case the S&P 500.  So would the out of favor companies.  Thus, the out of favor companies would outperform over a given time period (in this case 15 years) and the “favorite” companies would underperform the S&P.

Notwithstanding the obvious flaws in the study, it is an interesting concept. 

The results were inconclusive.  Turns out that the basket of “out of favor” stocks and “favorite” stocks BOTH outperformed the S&P 500.  Regression to the mean appeared to be nonexistent, at least in the time frame allotted.

By the way, thanks Ron.

Not a problem. I figure one day you may need a janitor for your offices and you will remember me.

I don’t do mutual funds but would be very interested in your findings if you would be willing to share.

Ok guys.  Here we go again.  I had to drop a class and my committee has agreed to let me write a paper for three credit hours.

I have decided to use a different method to select a sample.  I decided to poll the forum here and select randomly from the answers you give.

What I need is at least five people to post their best and worst actively managed mutual funds from the following categories:

All-cap (U.S.)
Large cap (U.S.)
Mid cap  (U.S.)
Small cap (U.S.)
Large cap (Global)
Mid cap (Global)
Small cap (Global)
All-cap (Global)

A single fund (either best or worst) is not necessary.  Go ahead and post multiple funds if you like. 

It doesn’t matter if they are “large cap value” or “small cap growth”. 

Please no “small-mid” or “mid-large”.

Thanks in advance. 

[quote=Ron 14]

[quote=Gaddock]I don’t do mutual funds but would be very interested in your findings if you would be willing to share.[/quote]

I will send you a copy of the article when I finish it.  A guy like you will appreciate the outcome at least.

We’re not talking styles - we’re talking simply market cap.  I’m not worried about “style”.

Awesome … I will appreciate it and maybe find a golden nugget.