Mutual Global Discovery Fund

or Register to post new content in the forum

30 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.
Dec 8, 2009 4:26 pm

Mutual funds are for suckers!

Dec 8, 2009 6:56 pm
Moraen:

Mutual funds are for suckers!

  except for "A" Shares....they rock!!! 
Dec 8, 2009 7:39 pm

[quote=iceco1d][quote=Squash1][quote=DeBolt][quote=Squash1]A lot… TEDIX currently is 63% equities(US 15%), 35% cash, 3% bonds(yeah over 100% but it is from their website) expense 1.30

  SGENX is 76% equities(US 25%), 11.2% gold, 5.1% bonds, 7.7% cash...expense 1.14[/quote] That's because they are short 3% equities.   But by your description above, how can SGENX replace TEDIX without disrupting the rest of a portfolio.   Maybe MAEGX, OAKWX or NWGAX would be more suitable...[/quote]   What?? Where is the disruption? other than better performance(note: i rarely use funds anymore, but STOP FOLLOWING MORNINGSTAR BOXES!!! )[/quote]   Please elaborate on this.  Are you talking about ignoring "Growth" vs "Value" or are you talking about ignoring capitalization?   And for FI, are you talking about ignoring duration, maturity, and credit quality, or were you simply reference equities?[/quote]   All the boxes, what is the point of being in small cap fund(that is tied up by prospectus) and has to buy sh&t even in a bad market because of cash allowances per prospectus..   Ever notice that some of the best funds are ones that have the least restrictions?   That comment that goes around from mutual funds "that 93% of returns is allocation" if you read the paper that is not what he meant... Kind of like "good fences make great neighbors" isn't what Frost meant.. read the paper by Brinson more carefully than the mutual fund industry did..
Dec 8, 2009 8:41 pm

The VOLATILITY of the returns can be explained by asset allocation not the actual returns.

Dec 8, 2009 8:48 pm

i PMd you because i think we somewhat agree.

Dec 8, 2009 9:04 pm

Why would I want to hire a large cap growth money manager that bleeds down to mid-cap growth for yield? If I wanted mid I would have hired a mid manager.

  Sometimes it is hard to find a good manager and you have to make do but still 99% of our mutual fund models are based off of a manager's ability to run a fund that selects the best large cap growth(or whatever category we are looking at) stocks and maybe shorts the worst. That's it.   If I were running a small model say a couple funds then I would use a manager that searches around some to get that extra yield.   How can you decide which fund to use if it is not tied to a "box". The only way is to use his history which the past two years should make that damn near impopssible. Good funds blew up and sh*tty funds came out strong. Now it is all "gut" feelings.   Thanks but no thanks. I will stick to our boring "boxed" funds for our cores.    
Dec 8, 2009 9:55 pm
AGEMAN:

[quote=Squash1]Dump it… don’t take the risk… buy SGENX or MDLOX instead…(though there is a risk with SGENX)

SGENX just got new managers as well[/quote]



Yes, but I don’t think they are going to shift strategy much. And Eviallard is staying on as a “special consultant” or some stupid title like that. He’s basically babysitting to make sure nothing goes haywire. But First Eagle has had a sound investment process in place for decades. Equity/Gold/Cash/Bonds they know what they are doing. They are very defensive, always looking for that “margin of safety” as Graham/Buffett always preached. They don’t speculate on the price of gold, but it always represents 10-20% of the portfolio (through a combo of bullion and mining stocks) as a defensive measure - one of the reasons they outperform/underperform in bears/bulls. And they make intelligent use of cash when necessary.



Using something like this fund is not about style boxes - it’s about getting large cap equity-like returns with less risk and more consistency than a large cap index fund (even though they have trounced large cap domestic and international over nearly every trailing time period). However, they underperform (sometimes wildly) during periods like the late 90’s when fundamentals and capitalization are out of synch.
Dec 8, 2009 10:03 pm
AGEMAN:

[quote=Squash1]Dump it… don’t take the risk… buy SGENX or MDLOX instead…(though there is a risk with SGENX)

SGENX just got new managers as well[/quote]   One new manager, but Abhay is still there..
Dec 9, 2009 9:08 am
Squash1:

[quote=AGEMAN][quote=Squash1]Dump it… don’t take the risk… buy SGENX or MDLOX instead…(though there is a risk with SGENX)

SGENX just got new managers as well[/quote]   One new manager, but Abhay is still there..[/quote]   Yeah, but even he is new relative to JME's tenure.   They'll be fine.
Dec 9, 2009 10:05 am

He has been there since 2000… JME was there before god was…