The Poor Investor

"Faber est suae quisque fortunae" -Appius Claudius Caecus

Thank You Facebook and Morgan Stanley

There is much to be said about the Facebook IPO but suffice it to say it was a huge disaster.  There was even talk in the Wall Street Journal about how the whole debacle may have hurt overall investor confidence.  Not surprisingly, the average Joe is probably more than likely to avoid IPOs in the future.  But would the average Joe be right to do so?  Maybe investors should thank Facebook and Morgan Stanley for botching the offering and turning them away from IPOs.

“Three out of four have been long-term disappointments,” said famed investor Peter Lynch of IPOs.  Let’s see if he is right.

From November 1st, 2010 to May 26, 2011 there were 157 IPOs for which I found accurate data.  If you had invested $100 in each of them at their initial offering price, you would have $14,735 today— a total loss of $965.  If you include brokerage fees, assuming $7 per stock bought, you’d be in the red by $2064, not including the fees to sell.  Your chance of investing in one of those 157 IPOs and actually making money (>$1): 36.3%.  Doubling your money or greater: 5.7%.  Hitting a ten-bagger: 0.0%.  Losing 50% or more: 24.2%.  Losing it all: 1.9%.

Turns out Peter Lynch wasn’t too far off.  Out of the IPOs investigated, approximately 3 out of 5 turned out to be long-term disappointments.

After looking over the data it’s unlikely that you’re going to do well with an IPO.  The odds are stacked against you.  Even worse, most companies are too new to have a history to go off of.  There’s also no guarantee that you’re going to get the IPO price.

When asked which stocks he’d avoid in the market at the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting, Charlie Munger replied, “new issues.”  Perhaps investors should heed that advice.

Where to Look for Opportunities

In light of the recent plunge in Green Mountain Coffee Roasters’ (GMCR) share price, I thought it rather fitting to talk about where to look for opportunities in the stock market.  In my opinion, there are always opportunities out there.  Sometimes they’re hard to find, such as Vermillion, sometimes they’re right out in front of you, such as GMCR.  However, the real crux of the situation lies in deciphering whether they’re good opportunities, like buying shares of BP after the spill turned out to be, or bad ones, like buying shares of Kodak.  In choosing one versus the other, I’ll leave that up to you.

So just where do we find opportunities in the market?  Well, the question may not always be best posed as “where,” but instead, sometimes, as “when.”  The easiest when to look for opportunities is during a bear market, like the one that just occurred in the 2007-2009 period.  During this time, untold numbers of stocks were dirt cheap.  Berkshire Hathaway, perhaps one of the safest investments (perhaps even safer than US treasuries) was selling at nearly half of today’s price.  Another when is during a period of extreme panic or distress for an individual company, such as is the case of the aforementioned shares of GMCR, BP, and EK.  Even whole industries succumb to such malaise from time to time.  Coal, for example, is one such industry; shares of Peabody Energy Corp. and Arch Coal could prove to be bargains at these prices.  During a company’s turnaround also provides another when for shareholders looking for opportunities.  Successful turnarounds such as Ford Motor Co. and Nautilus Inc. (chart) come to mind here.

Sometimes market opportunities are pretty obvious.  Look for companies that are buying back their shares.  Warren Buffett bought IBM while it was reaching new highs partly due to the company’s diligent use of capital to buy back its own shares.  Look for companies trading below book value, below sales, with high dividend yields, at low price-to-earnings, low price-to-cash flow, near current company cash levels, and those growing at high returns on capital.  Current stocks that fall into some of these categories are names such as Hewlett-Packard, Chevron, and Exxon Mobil.  Companies on the verge of merging and those that are going private may also provide more obvious opportunities for investors.  US Airways, on the verge of a merger with American Airlines, could provide one such opportunity.

Sometimes the opportunities aren’t so obvious.  Companies that are on the bleeding edge of technology or the verge of new breakthroughs are of this type.  Vermillion, for instance, shot through the roof when it received FDA approval for its OVA1 cancer test.  Dendreon (DNDN) also saw its shares soar after receiving FDA approval for its cancer drug, Provenge.  In these instances, knowledge is your most important ally.  If you had followed the latest cancer research, as well as all the companies involved, with extreme dedication and focus, you may have also uncovered these opportunities.  Although these types of stocks can be found in any type of market, healthcare, biotechnology, cloud computing, and energy are some of the more common ones at this time.  Other less-than-obvious opportunities come in the form of companies exploring for vast natural resources or those that are highly leveraged, though these, especially the latter, require shrewd calculating as to what really is the risk-reward and whether or not its favorable.

The opportunities in the stock market are nearly limitless.  It all depends on the level of involvement you are willing to have to unearth them.  The list above is not nearly as exhaustive as it could be but hopefully serves as it was intended, to give you an idea of how to think about where to find market opportunities.  Don’t limit yourself to the obvious, as Ken Fisher says in his book, The Only Three Questions that Count, “Go crazy. Be creative. Flip things on their heads, backwards, and inside out. Hack them up and go over their guts. Instead of trying to be intuitive, think counter-intuitively—which may turn out to be way more intuitive.”  Sometimes finding opportunities means knowing where not to look just as much as knowing where to look.  And lastly, don’t mistake an opportunity for a good investment, only invest when the risk-reward is in your favor.

“Sell in May and Go Away!”

After reading this week’s Barron’s I saw an interesting little chart that showed the growth of $100 if the “sell in May” strategy were followed, also known as the Halloween indicator (original research paper).  Surprisingly, if you had followed a strategy of investing $100 in the S&P 500 since 04/30/45 during October – April periods versus May – September periods, your $100 would have turned into $9329 in the former period versus $99 in the latter.

The chart in Barron’s:

One would think, after seeing this chart, that selling in May, or maybe even April to get ahead of the curve, would be a prudent investment strategy.  However, if you extend the timeline out a bit more you get a picture that looks like this (this chart uses May-Oct. and Nov.-April, however, it is more representative due to the fact that the months are split 50/50, as opposed to 58/42 in the above chart):

Now, you may have noticed that November – April still outperformed.  However, clearly, if you had ignored the period from May – September you would have missed out on some nice gains during this time frame, as a buy-and-hold strategy through all periods worked best.  But what is the difference in periods due to?  If you look at the average returns by month since 1925, you’ll see quite readily:

It seems one of the major culprits is September.  So why not sell in September?

As Ken Fisher points out in his book “Debunkery,” from which this chart was first found, the two worst Septembers (which are notably in the May – October period) were down 29.6% in 1931 and 13.8% in 1937, due to the Great Depression.  All other months, on average, offered gains over the long haul.

What else accounts for the big downtrend in the May – October period:

  • Panic of 1901: May 17, 1901
  • Panic of 1907: October 1907
  • Black Monday: October 19, 1987
  • Friday the 13th mini-crash: October 13, 1989
  • Economic crisis in Asian: 1997 mini-crash: October 27, 1997
  • September 11th attacks: September 11, 2001
  • Internet bubble bursts: October 9, 2002
  • Global Financial Crisis starts: September 16, 2008
  • 2010 Flash Crash: May 6, 2010

To name a few…

Who is to say the next big stock market crashes won’t happen to coincide with April or July, the best performing months on average?

Bottom line: Don’t rely too much on statistical anomalies and try to “time the market” or you might be left holding the bag.

—-Written by: The Poor Investor

Is Diversifying Your Portfolio Harder Now?

I was reading an article from Fidelity called “Where to Look for Returns” and came across an interesting table I wanted to share with all of you:

For those of you looking to diversify your portfolios this appears to be a lot more difficult nowadays.  It also appears that these high correlations are not going to change anytime in the near future.  Furthermore, it is my belief that return enhancement via the effects of rebalancing (great article about rebalancing) may be reduced due to these high correlations.

Note: Personally, I use TIPS for portfolio diversification since historically (and currently) they still have the lowest correlation to equities.

—-Written by: The Poor Investor

Are You Wired for Investing?

Dear Readers,

Recently I came across a website that offers a variety of tests for investors and investment advisors: MarketPsych.com.  The test I found most beneficial on the website is for individual investors and is based off the Five Factor Model, also known as the “Big Five.”  In order to not interfere with the test validity I will not discuss too much more about it.

Link to test:

Individual Investor Personality Test

Here is another test, which tests your “Wall Street Risk IQ.”

Feel free to post your results and comments regarding whether you agree or disagree with the personality test.

—The Poor Investor

IQ and Successful Investing

Robert Shiller, professor of economics at Yale, recently wrote an article about a study in the Journal of Finance that showed high-IQ investors tend to outperform low-IQ investors.

The study can be summed up to some extent in this line from the study itself:

“Lack of cognitive skill is so fundamental as a driver of nonparticipation that it deters large amounts of wealth from entering the stock market.”

The bottom line is that those with higher cognitive ability tend to participate more in the stock market, as illustrated below:

(Please forgive my lack of artistic ability and accuracy).

What’s astonishing is that external factors in the study such as wealth, income, age, and occupation were controlled for.  Participation rates are just higher for those with higher IQs, period.

Even more importantly though, the study goes into the decisions made by those with higher IQs and finds that their investment decisions are much better than those with lower IQs as well.  What did they find?

High IQ Investors:

  • Diversify their portfolios more
  • Favor small capitalization and value stocks
  • Favor high book value in relation to market price
  • Are more likely to hold mutual funds
  • Hold larger numbers of stocks
  • Have lower-beta portfolios
(These findings corroborate much of the information you’ll find in the education section of this website).
In the “conclusion” section of the study some other important findings (such as those from other studies) are noted:
“While we have not fully resolved the participation puzzle, our results suggest the intriguing possibility that the odds are stacked against low-IQ investors when they do participate in the financial markets. Calvet et al. (2009) show that investors who make some investment mistakes tend to make many of them. Grinblatt, Keloharju, and Linnainmaa (2011) document that high-IQ investors’ stock purchases earn larger risk-adjusted returns, that their purchases and sales experience lower trading costs, and that their trades are less subject to profit-eroding behavioral biases like the disposition effect. Grinblatt, Ikaheimo, Keloharju, and Knupfer (2011) observe that high-IQ investors pay lower effective mutual fund fees by constructing “home-made balanced funds,” that is, portfolios of equity and bond funds.”
So does this mean you’re doomed to poor performance if you have a low IQ?  Not necessarily.  It just means that investing in the stock market might be more of an uphill battle for you.  However, if you understand the reasons why high IQ investors tend to perform better and emulate those same characteristics there is a high probability that you will also do well in the stock market.  However, it might not hurt to take an intelligence test just to see where you stand.
—-Written by: The Poor Investor

Insights for the Long-Term Investor

Dear readers,

I just wanted to draw everyone’s attention to an article I came across recently:


http://thepoorinvestor.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/pgi.pdf

I think you will find this to be a valuable article.

An excerpt:

“This punishing volatility has understandably dissuaded many investors – including individual investors saving for retirement– from putting their money to work. Also weighing on the minds of investors is the “lost decade,” a time period covering roughly the fi rst ten years of the current century when equity investments essentially netted zero returns. Both are understandable concerns, but I would suggest that giving up on equities would be a big mistake. Ownership of equity can be expected to give the highest return available to the retirement investor.”

Thanks,

The Poor Investor

Note: For those who may be curious as to the lack of posts or content on this blog, my philosophy is that quality always trumps quantity.  I refuse to post anything unless I feel that it adds significant value to the individual investor.  Also, in this day and age we are burdened with information to the extent that no one has nearly enough time to absorb all that one would like.  With this in mind, I am using a strong filter for all the posts and content here.

Investing: Life Lessons

From the last issue of The Marathon Perspective, written by Jim Kennedy of Marathon Capital Management.

LESSONS FOR LIFE:

1. At the heart of every investment is a value proposition. Sometimes it’s disguised as a good balance sheet, other times as a prospective stream of future earnings or cash flow, and other times as the seed of an idea by a competent management team. Regardless of the proposition, with some conviction you need to identify both the future investment return and the anticipated time frame for that return. The key words here are “conviction, return and time frame.” Strive to have all three before you enter into an investment. None of us will be right 100% of the time, but having these three partners at your side will increase your odds of success.

2. Stay away from “story” stocks and water cooler tips. As investors, we are bombarded by ideas 24/7: the Internet, friends, talking heads on network shows, publications, etc. Use the simple rules noted above (conviction, return, time frame) and you will be able to cut through the clutter and avoid the less than honorable promotions. Just remember that every “story” or idea can be made to sound terrific by the right promoter. Take the time to look behind the curtain and do a little homework. Walk away from things that don’t smell right. A simple perusal of SEC filings and other research materials can save you lots of heartache and money.

3. Learn from your mistakes. To paraphrase Einstein: the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different outcome. We all make investment mistakes. The sad truth is that we don’t always learn from them. As painful as it sometimes is, revisit your bad investment decisions and try to figure out why they went south. Not only will this exercise reveal weakness in your investment process, but it will make you a better investor in the long run. No one gets it right every time, but by understanding your mistakes, you increase the odds of success going forward.

4. Sell your losers. Remember our premise from above: conviction, return, time frame? If one or more of these change and the equation becomes unacceptable based on your risk tolerance and investment goals, sell. Too many investors hang on to losing positions even as the red flags mount. Strike the phrase “I’ll sell when I get back to break-even” from your vocabulary. Your only thought should be “opportunity cost.” Think about it this way. Suppose you put $10,000 into XYZ stock and it went south on you. At the end of the year it was worth $5,000, but your conviction in the name has been cut in half because management did not deliver on its promise. At the same time, you research ABC stock and are enamored with its prospects. You wish you had funds to put into ABC, but you’re “stuck” in XYZ for now. The wise investor sells XYZ (remember that loss of conviction?) and redeploys that capital into ABC. The foolish investor will not admit a mistake and will “hope” that things turn out okay with XYZ. Fast forward 18 months: the foolish investor feels pretty good because XYZ is up 20% from its nadir, while the wise investor has made twice as much on ABC and is ready to redeploy capital again. Compound this type of behavior over a multi-decade investment time frame and the “opportunity cost” to the foolish investor is enormous.

As a side note: try to differentiate between a “mistake” and “steak on sale.” We are big proponents of averaging down on an investment, but only if your conviction is high and it satisfies your other investment criteria.

5. Check your emotions at the door. Woven throughout these discussions is an undercurrent of emotional investing. As difficult as it can be, you should approach every investment opportunity and decision rationally. Think about the past two years: when were you the most nervous about your investments? We’ll bet it was right near the bottom of the markets.

As Warren Buffett says: be greedy when others are fearful, and be fearful when others are greedy. Our phone rings off the hook when the markets are going through a rough patch. But history has shown time and time again, the best time to invest is when everyone else is scared. Were you taking money off the table in late 1999 and early 2000? Probably not, as most investors believed that trees do grow to the sky. Hindsight is always 20/20, but so is rational, fundamental investing.

6. Do your homework. One of the ways to remain rational while those around you are running for the hills is to understand what you own. If a stock is nothing more than a symbol and quote in the newspaper, then you will be subject to the foibles of investing. On the other hand, if you believe that by owning stock you actually own part of a business, you will become somewhat immune to the short-term fluctuations in share price. The foolish investor flits from idea to idea without doing any serious homework, while the wise investor digs into a story and either develops a reasonable level of conviction or moves on to the next idea. Most investors do more homework and research buying a new refrigerator than putting $10,000 to work in the stock market. There’s something wrong with that equation.

7. Read and think. If we had a nickel for every time someone asked “where do you get your ideas?,” we’d be long retired. Ideas come from every direction, but if you aren’t ready to assess them and make rational decisions, you may as well throw your money out the window. This is where reading and thinking enter the equation. The more you read, the more knowledge you will acquire on a wide variety of topics. This base foundation of knowledge is the bedrock of the investment process. It doesn’t mean you become an expert in any particular area, it just means that you are that less likely to make a mistake. Thinking is just as important. Many of us read, but how many of us think about what we’re reading? One of our favorite sayings is “research is to see what everyone else has seen, and to think what no one else has thought.” Turn off the Internet, T.V. and iPod and think for one hour a day. You’ll be amazed at what you find.

8. Management, management, management. We have an advantage over the average investor, in that management teams are more willing to meet with institutional money managers than with individual investors. It doesn’t mean they won’t talk to you on the phone or meet with you on occasion, but it’s a rare individual investor that has the time and perseverance to undertake such activities. With that said, there are ways for individuals to get to “know” management. Read the SEC filings that detail management’s background and pedigree; look at the top executives that a CEO has chosen to run the organization; listen to quarterly conference calls, particularly the unscripted Q & A session at the end of prepared remarks; ask friends, relatives and acquaintances if they know anyone in the industry; look at the board of directors – is it independent with the background and experience necessary to guide the organization? At the end of the day, a bad management team can run a good company into the ground. If you can not develop a reasonable level of confidence in management, move on to your next idea.

9. To concentrate or diversify. This one is a function of your willingness to embrace the investment process, being mindful of your risk tolerance and time frame. Think about your life – how many jobs, spouses, pets, houses, kids, cars, etc. do you have? Most of us are willing to concentrate our “investment” in just about everything else in life, except when it comes to the stock market. This is not an endorsement
of concentration in the stock market – that would be too risky for the vast majority of investors. But for those willing to do a lot of homework, concentration can be very rewarding. The average investor might own 5 – 10 mutual funds investing in a variety of equity classes (e.g., large companies, small companies, international, etc.). This is a prudent way to spread equity risk, but at the end of the day, you end up
owning hundreds and sometimes thousands of individual stocks within these funds. Most people become closet indexers without ever realizing it. Contrast that with owning 10 – 20 individual equities that you know well. Sure it takes a lot of work, and you will lose money on a number of your choices (remember, we all make mistakes), but if you’ve done your homework and develop conviction through your reading and research, we think this can be a very rewarding investment approach.

10. Don’t lose money. This one comes back to the Warren Buffett school of investing: Rule #1 is don’t lose money; Rule #2 is don’t forget Rule #1. This one is much easier said than done, and yet, even Warren Buffett has lost money on some of his investments. But the key message here is that permanent loss of capital is very difficult to come back from.

Here’s a very simple concept that is foreign to most investors. When you first look at an idea, focus on how you can lose money, not on how much you can make. We are all enamored with how much we can make in any given investment, but how many times has your judgment been clouded by the “upside.” It is human nature to dismiss the red flags when you are excited by the tremendous potential of something. Our recommendation is to catch your breath, step back from the “story”, and look at the situation rationally. It’s okay to take a flyer on something that has lots of upside, but you can’t build a portfolio around too many ideas that result in goose eggs. So weigh the risk vs. reward carefully before investing a dime, and make sure that you stay within your investment discipline and risk tolerance.

11. Last but not least, wait for your pitch. You can not be an expert at all facets of investing, but you can become very good at certain approaches and styles. Don’t be afraid to say this one’s “too hard” to figure out and assess; there’s another pitch coming your way soon. Wait for the one that’s in your sweet spot and swing away.

We’ll leave you with a final cautionary note on the proliferation of Exchange Traded Funds (ETF’s). For the uninitiated, ETF’s are similar to mutual funds in that they allow an investor to put money to work in a particular sector or focused approach. As opposed to open-ended mutual funds that set their Net Asset Value (NAV) and allow buys/sells at the closing price each day, ETF’s trade continuously throughout the day.
These “trading vehicles” have taken Wall Street by storm and have attracted billions in assets. Call it a hunch, a cool breeze at the end of summer, or maybe just the ramblings of an old buy-and-hold investor unwilling to pass the torch, but there’s something going on here that just doesn’t feel right. That doesn’t mean that all ETF’s are questionable, but we highly recommend that you understand the structure of what you are investing in, asking such common sense questions as: does the ETF hold the underlying assets (e.g., stocks, bonds, gold, commodities, etc.); does it use leverage; is it a financial derivative of some other financial investment; what guarantees sit behind the “fund”; do you as an investor “own” the underlying asset in the event of liquidation; who “manages” the fund and where does it reside?

The bottom line after the last couple of years in volatile markets: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. If someone can not explain something to you in plain English, and you have trouble understanding what you are investing in, walk away.

Notes from The Poor Investor:

The Marathon Perspective is another casualty among what is quickly becoming a dying breed: quality newsletters and writings pertaining to investing (among other topics).  In Jim Kennedy’s own words, “Eventually, the strong will survive and the choices will narrow, but for now the online universe is a thousand miles wide but only an inch deep.”  In other words, it’s becoming increasingly hard to “separate the wheat from the chaff” when the internet offers so much more “chaff.”  For most of us the lessons of investing will be hard-learned, especially when many of us foolishly emulate advice from books and websites which offer little value and insight.  My hope is that this website will provide investors with an abundance of “wheat.” 

Moats: The Competitive Advantages of Buffett and Munger Businesses

Recently I wrote a small portion of a chapter for a book entitled, “Moats: The Competitive Advantages of Buffett and Munger Businesses” by Bud Labitan.   This book gets its name from Warren Buffett who coined the term moat to describe any type of competitive advantage a business may have that keeps its competitors at bay.  As Buffett says in his own words, “In business, I look for economic castles protected by unbreachable ‘moats’.”  The book describes the nature of 70 of these “economic castles” purchased by Buffett and Munger for Berkshire Hathaway Inc.  In the book there are 70 chapters, one for each Berkshire business, each written and researched by a different business expert (with the exception of a few chapters), so you’re not just getting one person’s perspective.  The hope is that this book will serve as a useful resource for investors, managers, and students of business.

For more information about the book and to see a full list of all the contributors to it, please click here.

I will leave you with what I think is Buffett’s best quote about moats:

“The best moat you can have is your own talent. They can’t take it away from you. Inflation can’t take it away from you. Taxes can’t take it away from you. Develop the habits of success. Look around you at the people you admire and list what makes you admire them that looks equally strong or equally talented. Those are the things that you can do. Just write them down. And people like people if they are humorous or they’re friendly; if they give credit to the other fellow. They don’t like them if they are stingy, if they overpraise. Well that’s the decision you make so I encourage everybody to build your own moat around yourself.”

—-Written by: The Poor Investor

Mutual Funds: Stealing Money from Investors Since 1890

When it comes to performance, mutual funds are hardly a model for success.  Now, to be fair, while it is often said that 80% of mutual funds fail to beat the market, this is not really true.  In fact, Jeremy Siegel, in “Stocks for the Long Run,” found that the number of mutual funds which beat the S&P (excluding fees), varied between 10-85% from 1970-2000.  Although, the first study on mutual funds (Jensen 1969) showed that “active mutual fund managers were unable to add value and, in fact, tended to underperform the market by approximately the amount of their added expenses” (Malkiel).  In Malkiel’s own study he found that “about three-quarters of actively managed funds have failed to beat the index.”  Jensen’s original study, he found, was influenced largely by survivorship bias.  Suffice it to say that, though, overall, the data is hardly reassuring.

So, if mutual funds are so terrible why are most people still paying mutual fund managers to underperform?  The answer lies in a quote by John C. Bogle, the creator of index funds and the founder of Vanguard:

“Well I don’t run Vanguard any longer, but I will take plenty of responsibility for having those active funds in all of the years I ran it. And the answer to that is really a couple of things. One, a lot of investors, no matter how persuasive the case for indexing is, and it’s overpoweringly persuasive, just don’t quite get it. They want a little more activity. They want something to watch. Index funds, as you all know, are roughly as exciting as watching paint dry or maybe watching the grass grow. They create great returns but they’re not that exciting.”

For many of us it is hard, or just extremely boring, to throw in the towel and surrender to the index fund.  Others, probably the majority, most likely care very little which fund their money is thrown into or just don’t have the time or inclination to want to deal with the hassle of selecting a fund, opting instead for maybe a target date fund or other funds their employer’s account representative throws them into.  Others still, probably don’t know the data that has shown mutual funds to be consistent underperformers.  For these various reasons, and probably a whole host of others, people are, by and large, throwing away their hard-earned money.

If you have the choice of where to put your money most of us should opt for index funds.  As Warren Buffet has said, “If you buy equities across the board, which means an index fund, and if you do it over time so that you don’t put all your money at the wrong time, and it’s a low-cost index fund, that’s probably the best investment that most people could make.”  By following his advice, investors can also take advantage of dollar-cost averaging.  Furthermore, if a percentage of your paycheck automatically goes into buying an index fund you can take a set-it-and-forget-it mentality.  You don’t have to worry about how your fund is performing or if you bought at the right price.

For those that are still hellbent on buying a mutual fund, there’s a few things you should know.  First of all, lower fee funds have beaten out higher fee funds in terms of performance (source).  Secondly, investors that pay higher up-front fees, called load fees, tend to do better than those who pay none.  Why?  According to James O’Shaughnessy, in How to Retire Rich, “The fee that load investors paid helped them keep their money in the market longer, and they ended up doing better as a result, even after paying the load.”  If, psychologically, you can handle staying in a fund through thick and thin, avoid the fee, if not, you might want to consider it.  Third, the fund manager is probably the most important aspect of a fund’s success.  Just like us, fund managers are subject to the same investing foibles: buying into hype, buying too high, selling too low, etc.  So, you need to make sure the fund manager has a long history of success, at least five years.  Then, make sure that same fund manager still runs the fund when you buy into it as fund managers often change.  If one guy ran the fund beating the market for several years, like Peter Lynch did with Fidelity Magellan, and then another person takes over, that new person may run the fund straight into the ground.  Fourth, look for a fund with low turnover.  Turnover is very costly (explanation).  Also, turnover is most likely, though not always, a sign of a bad manager.  Fifth, know that fund size erodes performance.  And lastly, know that fund performance increases with the size of other funds in the same family.  (Information about these last two is found here in this data).

Some examples of well-run mutual funds are the following (links shows performance relative to the S&P 500):

  • Weitz Partners III Opportunity: WPOPX
  • Fidelity Contrafund: FCNTX
  • Davis New York Venture Fund: NYVTX
  • CGM Focus Fund: CGMFX

—-Written by: The Poor Investor

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 38 other followers

%d bloggers like this: