Nitwit needs good book on mutual funds.

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
currently have all my money buried in the backyard (some also being held by offshore sportsbooks)

do not have a mutual fund nor do I know what one is.

any help would be appreciated.
 

selkirk

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 16, 1999
2,147
13
0
Canada
Buddy no US Mutual fund books to recommend because I live in Canada. However you may want to start the portfolio out by investing in index funds.

then as you learn you can diversify into managed funds. the majority of managed funds do not outperform index funds. I would buy a fund that covers a lot of stocks, many of these products you can also buy and trade like stocks.

If you buy index funds; prefer no loads, with the lowest MER you can find.


a friend of mine recently wanted to invest in fund (funds) that generate income, tired of getting just 2-3% on a GIC/CD. went to see a brokerage who offered a group of load mutual funds. also the MER was in most cases 2.80% (Management expense ratio) this is to high considering most of the funds held 75% bonds yielding only 4%. Inflation running at 3% (in Canada anyways) and MER of 2.80% what is the investor making.

after you build up your funds look into some managed mutual funds that have a history of good performance.


thanks
selkirk
 

Iowa Child

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 28, 2002
158
0
0
I agree with you sellkirk. I've just bought into some exchange traded funds myself. Seems like that's the way to invest cheaply and simply.
 

Doughboy

Hoo-Hoo
Forum Member
Jan 2, 2001
559
2
0
50
Austin,TX
Guy in my office gave me a book that I have not read yet, but it might be a good start from the looks of it.

It is called

Mutual Fund Investors Guide 2002
written by: Kirk Kazanjian

Me personally, I do not prescribe to some of the notions that others so with MF's. I do think that there are some good no-load MF families like Vanguard, however if you look at Putnam, which is no-load, their funds suck.

I think that you get what you pay for in some aspects. I know that the best fund managers in the world do not work for the no-load families because they will not make the kind of money they want. Also if you look at performance over the past years, you will usually not see no-loads with the best average returns. I know that in Barron's recently the top fund families were listed in order 1-10 over the past 10 years were

1. GE Asset Management
2. American Funds
3. Hartford Mutual
4. Legg Mason
5. WM Group
6. Van Kampen
7. Janus
8. Waddell and Reid
9. Morgan Stanley
10. Calvert/Acacia

The top 6 are all loaded funds, and I think with fee based accounts out there, you can buy them without loads anyway and switch around without paying additional fees. This gives you the ability to buy any fund out there with fairly low fees.

When I was in college though, I did invest in a no-load fund called Weitz Value Fund. It is a small fund family, and their minimums are high, but their returns have and are excellent as compared to the indices.

Enough blathering from me, and yes I am in the business, but this is my opinion, and I have always told my clients what is best for them, not me when it comes to mutual funds. If you want, shoot me an e-mail or post back here what you are looking for, whether diversified or in any specific sector and I will put together a list for you that you can choose from and buy on your own directly from the mutual fund, or through your online trading account.

Doughboy
 

Doughboy

Hoo-Hoo
Forum Member
Jan 2, 2001
559
2
0
50
Austin,TX
And one other thing, I have never had a wealthy client tell me that fees were too high. They look for the best returns net of fees. I have clients in hedge funds that have blown away returns in the market, and my clients have payed front end fees, ongoing management fees, and back end fees that are a percentage of the gains. That sounds expensive to some, but for those who have invested in them, they are the happiest investors in the world with 15-20% returns over the past 15 years.

Just my 2 cents though.
 

selkirk

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 16, 1999
2,147
13
0
Canada
Iowa Child it is a good way to start investing.

Doughboy agree with you on some things and disagree on some others. First of all when looking at the returns one should looks at the net returns. Also some load funds families (most) allow you to transfer from funds in the same family without fees. Many have good numbers and I would also look at the net returns. Some of these funds are worth considering, of coarse you have to pick the top 5-10%.

some hedge funds have done well and know a few that charge a management fee and a performance fee, that is fine if they can continue to outperform the market. my main concern is there seems to be more hedge funds be introduced and some of the fees seem brutally high. some charge around 3-5% management fee and then also charge a 30% performance fee. Better when the fund has to return a certain percentage before (say 10% ) before the performance fee kicks in. Also these are riskier vehicles but I feel many investors will lose large some of money on these funds that are being created and pushed out the door. sort of like mutual funds, lot of garbage has been created.

Like many mutual funds the top 10%-20% are worth looking at, and the rest will probably underperform or just give you grief.

as for the Management fees they are important.. all of the fees are important. Now if you have a load fund that charge you an MER 2.48% but outperforms the market then that is a good fund. (ie. in Canada Ivy Cdn. load fund that has held up well)

however for the last five years in Cdn. the average equity funds did a annual compound return of -.5%. the average MER during this time was 2.50%. That means these funds would return 2% a year if you take away the MER. the MER ate up all of your returns. most investors should calculate every year what percentage of returns get eaten by the MER.

An investor should look at the returns but should be aware of the fees as they may effect performance. (I also know some wealthy investors and they tell you all the MERs they are charged.....maybe they are cheaper up here LOL )


as for
"I think that you get what you pay for in some aspects. I know that the best fund managers in the world do not work for the no-load families because they will not make the kind of money they want."

do not agree, would need to see proof. I mean (have seen good load and no loads) in Canada I would put the returns of Saxon and Philips Hagar and North against any load fund. There also some good loads fund families.

know some mutual funds no load where the managers own the fund company or have an ownership stake. MER s are often split by the broker, brokerage, fund company. so the fees being charge are not going straight back to the fund manager.


thanks
selkirk
 

Doughboy

Hoo-Hoo
Forum Member
Jan 2, 2001
559
2
0
50
Austin,TX
Selkirk,

All good points. When I say good returns, I always mean net of fees. Also you can pay a yearly fee to a broker/money manager and go in at NAV into any fund family at any time and move in or out as you want. Usually the fee is between 1 and 3%. I also understand that give or take, 70-80% of mutual funds underperform the indices. My main problem is with people and saying just invest in index funds, and you'll be fine. I strongly disagree with that statement. If you were invested solely in index funds 10 years ago and were going to retire this year or next or even the next, you would have a great shortfall and may have to work longer to cover your shortfall. I preach diversification. I know for you, and this is a complement, that diversification is a no-brainer, but for the average investor who thinks investing solely in index fund, I think they are setting themselves up for a dissappointment.

On to Hedge funds:

I strictly invest for my clients in fund of funds, which is a diversified group of hedge fund managers who use hedging strategies when investing. This creates an un-correlated portfolio that just like a portfolio of mutual funds, should perform better than holding one fund. When I say hedge fund, I know you may get defensive because they are unregulated by the SEC here in the U.S. I do agree that along with mutual funds, there are good and bad, and now that they have become popular, just like with anything, there will be plenty of poor managers. However, the hedge fund managers I use have track records, do report to the SEC and have an outsuide auditor look at their books. Now with the fees, here is how ours is set up, and it varies widely from my company to any other company. Let's use a million dollar investment as a hypothetical starting point. My client is going to pay 3% up front, so $970,000
goes to work. There is an annual fee of 2% to the client no matter whether the fund is up or down. Now on to the back end. The client is liquid after 2 years and can access their money quarterly. The back end load is dependent on performance. The fund has to average at least 7.5% average annual returns net of fees which includes the front load for the managers to earn anything for themselves. The grid goes like this 7.5%-10%, managers earn 5% of total profits. 10%-20%, they earn 7.5% of profits and anything above 20%, they earn 10% of profits. I personally like this because it puts you on the same side of the fence as the manager, in that if you don't make money, neither does he outside of the yearly managment fees which get split up between the broker, the fund, the wirehouse, and also general expenses. I know am being long-winded here, so please bear with me. I can tell you that my clients who have been in the fund, have been extremely happy, as our fund is (without having the numbers in front of me right now) flat for the year. I would say that 90% of all investors would be extremely excited to have that return this year. I know you will ask me historical returns, and I don't have them in front of me, but I know that they are great. I would never even suggest however that more than 25% of any client of mines wealth be allocated to this fund either, because again I preach diversification. Hedge funds #1 goal should be wealth preservation and #2 growth.

If I rambled and sounded incoherent, please forgive me, but my entire arguement here is that one should weigh all options, do all due diligence, and then make an educated decision. Not all investments are for everyone.

In closing, I value your opinions because you are probably smarter than I am, but I know that do-it-yourself investors and brokers/money managers rarely see eye to eye on fund choices and fees. Many of my clients though are way too busy with their work, families, social life to focus on their investments, and don't want to worry what the mmarket is doing, they just want to make money, and that is where I come in.

Oh, and one mmore thing, you are right about companies creating funds because they are marketable. They know what will sell and what the consumer wants, whether it is a good time or investment.

I will also work on finding numbers on the best fund managers in the world and who they work for,whether load or no-load, and how they are compensated.

So, I now close this novel, and am heading to bed.
 

selkirk

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 16, 1999
2,147
13
0
Canada
Doughboy good points. one should be diversified and also know some people that would not think about their investments for 20 mins a year. do not think that is a good idea but that is just the way they are...have a friend who told him how he could combine two loans and save 3-4% on a loan, also a way to make it tax deductible. saving him thousands a year, this would take a few phone calls and a visit to the bank, so maybe an hour or two. two months later and still has not done anything and it will be months or a few years :shrug: before he gets around to it.

2 more friends could get them 1% lower rate on their line of credit, they just have to visit their same bank and ask for it, after 1 year still has not done that. many people need a broker or a financial advisor to help them plan.

some of my posts are critical of brokers, and brokerages there are many good ones out there that could help investors.

as for fees sometimes you pay for good advice and management and sometimes you pay for nothing. one more person I know had an account with a brokerage of $40,000 (national brokerage in Canada that the Bank who owns them would not mind selling) anyways for the past year he has had $30,000 cash and $10,000 in a load mutual fund with an mer over 2.50%

he has talked to the broker twice briefly this year, if that, does quite a bit of trading and has much larger accounts elsewhere. also he and his wife have large incomes and would be considered well off. so his broker says the account is to small during a phone call and trasfer him to another broker. He will be charged $150 for not trading enough during the year. He asks the other broker who he is transfered to how much needs in the account. answer $150,000. the broker will charge him 2.5% on top of the regular trading charges and mutual fund charges. so what does the broker have his high net clients in the past 2 months. Bonds paying 4%. so they are fully taxed on the interest say 50% (unless for a RRSP,ect. ) then inflation is running at 2-3% in Canada and he charges 2.5%. what is left for the client......nothing. Not wrong to have his clients in bonds/cash but I think Bonds have done very well and would question 100% of the portfolio in 4% bonds at this time. by the way he transferred out to another brokerage and put in more cash so it is their loss.

agree with most of your points Doughboy as for knowledge you have quite a lot, and I make plenty of mistakes, have found out that you learn more with time. also hopefully from the dumb mistakes you make, which each year I make some stupid trades/investments, just hope learn from them.

thanks
selkirk
 
Last edited:
Bet on MyBookie
Top