Breaking News

Vanguard Splits ETFs For Mysterious Reasons

June 4, 2008

Vanguard Splits ETFs For Mysterious Reasons

Apparently Vanguard has been a little too successful in attracting smart, fee-conscious, long-term investors.

Its relatively new exchange-traded (ETF) fund lineup has achieved remarkable success, hitting $50 billion in assets - $8.5 billion came in so far in 2008 alone. So why is Vanguard messing with such a good thing, using gimmicks the firm wouldn't use with its traditional funds?

This article off the Dow Jones Newswire offers possible explanations including:

The effect of Vanguard's share split will be to allow investors to trade the funds in smaller amounts. For now, each of the three ETFs' share price is more than $100. Shares of Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF are about $138, meaning that's the de facto minimum investment for any investor who wants to buy the fund, and the smallest increment in which existing investors can buy and sell. After the split the new number will should closer to $69."

But investors with less than $100 should probably not be investing in ETFs at all. Even at a cheap discount broker an ETF investor is going to pay $7 in commissions - which is a big chunk of a sub-$100 ETF investment. That kind of cost runs counter to one of exchange traded funds' main selling points - their cheapness of ownership. ...read the rest of this article»

Fidelity Sued By Former Employee

March 27, 2008

The Boston Globe reports on a lawsuit by former Fidelity Investments employee Jackie Hosang Lawson that alleges Lawson was forced to resign after calling attention to problems with the the mutual fund industry giant's financial statements:

In her complaint, Lawson alleges Fidelity retaliated against her after she pointed out violations of federal rules 'relating to fraud against shareholders of Fidelity mutual funds.

...She raised concerns that initially drew praise but also hostile responses from others, she claims, and eventually led Fidelity to give a promotion to another employee 'to cover up fund profitability issues.'

She continued to raise issues and also contacted federal agencies including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the suit states. (The head of the SEC's Boston office, David Bergers, declined to comment.)

According to Lawson's suit, she was yelled at, berated, and assigned unrealistic deadlines for projects as a result, leading her to resign last fall. She also said Fidelity wouldn't allow her to speak with the trustees.

I am currently in a predicament where I can no longer honestly stand behind the financials that are presented to the Fidelity Mutual Fund Board of Trustees,' she wrote colleagues in a resignation letter."

We have no idea if these allegations have merit (much less what the impact on Fidelity fund shareholders might be), but it could relate to our long held belief that fund companies sometimes favor smaller and newer funds to boost returns and marketability (often at the expense of other funds within the same family). These new fund advantages could include allocating them shares of favorable IPO (initial public offering) or sticking some fees with larger funds where the performance impact will be minimal.

LINK

OMG! Vanguard Shows GMO The Door

February 26, 2008

Vanguard U.S. Value (VUVLX) and Vanguard Explorer (VEXPX) may be among the cheapest actively managed value and growth funds (respectively) around, but Vanguard apparently has had it with their lagging performance:

Vanguard's Quantitative Equity Group (QEG) has begun managing the portions of Vanguard U.S. Value Fund and VVIF–Small Company Growth Portfolio previously managed by Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Co., LLC (GMO). QEG has also assumed primary responsibility for the assets previously managed by GMO for the Vanguard Explorer Fund.

QEG joins AXA Rosenberg Investment Management LLC as a co-advisor for Vanguard U.S. Value Fund. QEG now oversees approximately one-third of the fund, employing a quantitative investment approach to select stocks from the Russell 3000 Value Index that it deems attractive.

QEG will share advisory responsibilities with Granahan Investment Management for managing VVIF-Small Company Growth Portfolio. The firm will also expand its portfolio management role for Vanguard Explorer Fund, assuming responsibility for most of GMO's former portfolio, with the remainder allocated to the other advisors of the fund.

"Vanguard brings a vast amount of experience and expertise to its quantitative mandates and the funds' boards of trustees are highly confident in the group's ability to complement the strategies of the existing advisors and produce competitive long-term returns," said Mr. Brennan. "GMO has provided advisory services to Vanguard funds since 2000 and, on behalf of our shareholders, we thank them for their efforts."

Vanguard U.S. Value has been a fund favorite around here since 2002, largely because of low fees, and GMO's detailed and often doomsday-grade outlooks on the U.S. markets. While a MAXfunds favorite it has beat the S&P 500, but more recently the fund's managers have made some missteps. We have downgraded our outlook for large cap value funds in general due to years of outperformance and asset growth at many value funds - but this fund has underwhelmed in a weak category recently. In 2007 the fund underperformed the Russell 1000 Value Index (an index of larger cap value stocks) by about a half percent. In 2006 the fund missed the mark by around eight percent.

GMO (Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo) uses a quantitative take on value investing: like many other value managers, they screen for low value stocks (preferably ones that are unpopular with other investors) by looking at their interpretation of intrinsic value and price-to-normalized earnings. In addition, they look for stocks with some positive momentum. Unfortunately, this screen put GMO into too many retailers like Home Depot (HD), Dollar Tree Stores (DLTR), and Kohl's (KSS), financial services companies like Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC) and First American (FAF), and healthcare stocks like Pfizer (PFE), Merck (MRK), Unitedhealth (UNH).

GMO manages some $150 billion (and falling after this news...) largely in foreign stocks. GMO's own foreign funds (institutional funds) have done well next to competitors, however, their own U.S. stock funds have performed near the bottom of the heap.

The funny thing is we expect GMO's foreign funds to have more problems going forward than their domestic funds. By dumping GMO, Vanguard is in effect playing the same game they tell us not to play: performance chasing. (Or perhaps Vanguard just wants to manage more of their portfolios themselves. Better for profit margins...)

We are currently reviewing U.S. Value for possible expulsion from Our Favorite Funds lists, large cap value category.

LINK

Castro Quits, Fund Rises

February 20, 2008

News of the end of Castro's long tenure as president of Cuba boosted the one lone fund investing in Cuba - or rather in companies that benefit from economic activity in the Caribbean. The tiny closed-end fund offers only a fixed number of shares, which can lead to big swings in share price with minimal underlying change in the actual investments in the portfolio - as was the case yesterday:

The closed-end Herzfeld Caribbean Basin fund (NASDAQ:CUBA) CUBA, the only Cuba fund, shot up 17% to 8.70 on Tuesday. A record 1.44 million shares traded after the ailing 81-year-old dictator announced he will resign as president. Castro has held power since overthrowing Gen. Fulgencio Batista in 1959.

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation and invests in companies from 20 countries in and around the Caribbean.

As a closed-end mutual fund, the Herzfeld fund trades at prices that might differ from the per-share value of their assets. The fund was trading at a 9.61% discount to its net-asset value prior to Tuesday.

Its surge signals hope that Cuba's future will be far different than the past 49 years under Castro. U.S. trade embargoes, enacted to protest Castro's Communist regime, have made life tough on the island nation."

Open-end funds would just issue more shares and would not jump so much in price on one-day on investor enthusiasm alone. We don't recommend buying closed-end funds trading a big premiums to NAV (net asset value).

LINK

Ritchie (a little less) Rich

February 6, 2008

With all the news of the real estate bubble trouble dominating financial headlines, mutual fund investors may have forgotten perhaps the greatest systematic fraud perpetrated on fund shareholders - namely, the great mutual fund skimming scandal (known aliases: fund late trading, fund timing).

Fear not, dear fund investor, the money police (SEC or Securities And Exchange Commission) is still hot on the trail of fund cattle rustlers. Today's Chicago Sun Times reports on the latest and greatest:

Ritchie Capital Management, founder Thane Ritchie, an employee and the Ritchie Multi-Strategy Global Trading Ltd. hedge fund are paying a total of $40 million to settle charges of illegal late trading.

The settlement is one of the largest the SEC has secured since it started an industrywide crackdown in 2003 against alleged mutual-fund trading abuses.

The SEC said that from January 2001 through September 2003, Ritchie Capital placed thousands of late trades in mutual fund shares and used news and information breaking after the market closed to make its trading decisions while receiving the same day’s value for the funds traded.

Late trading involves favored customers receiving the market-closing price for mutual fund shares for orders placed after the stock market closes for the day at 4 p.m. EST."

LINK

Dodge & Cox Reopens Funds

February 2, 2008

Apparently fund investors are sick and tired of all the scary recession talk and stock market volatility. In recent weeks many closed funds have reopened to new investors amidst a flight of old investors. The latest and perhaps greatest to announce the lock is off the door is Dodge & Cox funds. The value oriented firm will be reopening Dodge & Cox Stock (DODGX) and Balanced (DODBX) funds on Monday:

Dodge & Cox Funds, one of the most popular U.S. mutual fund families, said it will reopen to new investors its flagship Stock fund and its Balanced fund, which invests in stocks and bonds, after performance lagged its peers for the first time in more than a decade.

The $63 billion asset Stock fund and $27.1 billion balanced fund will reopen on Monday. Dodge & Cox had in 2004 stopped accepting money from new investors after assets in the funds had grown too rapidly for it to invest easily. It continued to accept money from existing investors."

Dodge & Cox is losing investors for an unusual reason for this top-performing family, underperformance:

In a statement on Friday, Dodge & Cox said investors have recently been redeeming money from the funds because of weak returns and volatile markets....the Stock fund last year returned 0.1 percent, trailing 61 percent of its 'large-value' peers, while the Balanced fund returned 1.7 percent, lagging 89 percent of its 'moderate allocation' peers. Both funds had outperformed a majority of their peers in every year over the previous decade..."

Investors still love Dodge & Cox International Stock (DODFX) - a good sign this fund and international funds in general will underperform U.S. stock markets going forward.

LINK

Merrill Lynch: Suckers For A Bubble

January 17, 2008

There seems to be quite a bit of surprise among Wall Street today at how much money Merrill Lynch (MER) lost in the great housing bubble:

Merrill Lynch & Co., the world's largest brokerage, lost nearly $10 billion in the last three months of 2007, its biggest quarterly loss since it was founded 94 years ago, after writing down $14.6 billion of investments slammed by the ongoing credit crisis….Merrill Lynch posted a net loss after preferred dividends of $9.91 billion, or $12.01 per share, compared to a profit of $2.3 billion, or $2.41 per share, a year earlier….Wall Street analysts had been forecasting a loss of $4.93 per share…"

This shouldn’t surprise mutual fund investors: Merrill Lynch is a sucker for bubbles.

Sure most investment banks are guilty of letting irrational exuberance get in the way of rational analysis, but Merrill Lynch has earned a special place among big money managers as the firm that thinks rising tides that lift all boats never recede.

One gem is this New York Times editorial by Bruce Steinberg (then chief economist for Merrill Lynch) penned in October 1999, countering the growing belief among skeptics that the stock market had become a dangerous bubble:

But the doomsayers are looking for signs of disaster where none exist. The American economy has performed better in the 1990's than at any time in history, and there is no end of that success in sight….The bubble theory rests on arguments that the stock market is overvalued…Assets are said to have become overvalued, leading to overconsumption and an overheating of the economy that will inevitably end in a violent correction -- a stock market crash. But this argument will not stand up to a careful analysis…

The pessimists' misinterpretations begin with stock prices, which have indeed grown rapidly... However, values are highest in the sector where growth prospects are highest and demand is accelerating: technology. With the technology stocks excluded, the price-earnings ratio for the rest of the companies in the index is around 19. Adjusted for interest rates, that's comfortably in line with the experience of the past few decades."

This was less than five months before the S&P 500 peaked and then promptly fell around 50%. The S&P 500 today is almost exactly at the level it was over eight years ago when this cry for more insanity was penned (Merrill Lynch stock is currently lower than it was then, but that hasn’t stopped hundreds of millions in bonuses from being paid). Steinberg was fired in 2002 at the very bottom of the market. ...read the rest of this article»

2007 - The Year In Funds (The Short Version)

January 1, 2008

Lots o' ups, lots o' downs, but in the end, 2007 was a good year for the vast majority of mutual funds.

To sum up 2007, growth beat value, large cap beat small cap, foreign beat domestic, safe bonds beat risky bonds, and emerging markets and natural resources topped the charts. If you avoided financials and real estate, you probably did fine in 2007.

The typical diversified U.S. stock fund was up around 6% in 2007 - not bad, but underwhelming for their risk. Lets not forget for most of the year you could get over 5% in Vanguard money market funds, good CDs, and FDIC insured online savings accounts.

As Investor's Business Daily notes in their 2007 fund review, just about everything was up except funds tied to the deflating real estate bubble:

Stock mutual funds made 2007 the fifth year in a row of gains. But it often didn't feel like the market was advancing.

The year was marked by volatility. U.S. diversified stock funds lost ground in four months -- February, June, July and November.

The main culprits were the subprime lending crisis and ensuing credit crunch. Investors also worried about inflation, soaring key commodity prices, slowing U.S. economic growth and a falling dollar. And don't even ask about geopolitical tensions.

Still, the market grew. U.S. diversified stock funds racked up a total return of 6.85% for the year through Dec. 27, according to Lipper Inc. That lagged their five-year average annual return of 13.95% and 15-year average annual gain of 9.98%. Growth walloped value in all size groups. Mid-cap growth beat all other categories, averaging 17.04%.

The leading sector was natural resources, which skyrocketed 40.01%."

LINK

Looking to start 2008 on the right financial foot? Consider joining the MAXadvisor Powerfund Portfolios - seven expertly managed model portfolios from the founders of MAXfunds.com. Click here to learn more.

Islamic Funds Outperforming

November 19, 2007

Carolyn Cui at the Wall Street Journal reports that mutual funds that invest in accordance with Islamic doctrine have been among this year's top performers. This outperformance is in large part because Islam forbids charging interest; funds following these rules have avoided investing in banks and mortgage companies that have been hard hit by the sub-prime meltdown. In fact, of the nine broad sectors in the S&P 500, only two are negative this year: financials and consumer discretionary.

Most mutual funds that invest based on Islamic principles have largely weathered the recent credit turmoil. Two Islamic funds offered by Azzad Asset Management, smaller than the Amana and its $333.1 million of assets, also are beating the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index since the start of this year, after trailing the broad market for several years.

Dow Jones Islamic Fund is up 13.3% year to date, which ranks it in the top 4% of its category of large- market-capitalization stocks. The fund, managed by Allied Asset Advisors, tracks the Dow Jones Islamic Market Index, which is a product of Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal.

A sister Amana fund, Amana Growth Fund, isn't doing quite as well. The fund has $680 million of assets and invests in companies whose earnings are expected to rise faster than the broader market. It has returned 11.5% this year. While that beats the broader market, it still trails its growth-type peers by 1.4 percentage points."

The chart-topping performance of the two Amana funds has apparently attracted plenty of non-Muslim investors as well. As the article states, assets in the funds has ballooned to $1 billion in the past 18 months.

LINK

Less is More

November 16, 2007

In a move that would have been timely about a decade ago, the Securities and Exchange Commission is 100% in agreement to think about ways to help fund investors compare funds.

Under the proposed changes, investors would receive a summary of information about a fund, on paper or electronically, depending on their preference. The SEC also proposes encouraging mutual-fund companies to make greater use of the Internet, giving investors the choice to request a printed copy of the full prospectus or obtain more-detailed information online.

The SEC will seek public comment on the proposal for 90 days. Adoption of any changes requires a second SEC vote."

Pretty soon we should see summary info about funds online and maybe companies like Vanguard will have websites to compare their funds. It’s just amazing what The Internets can do.

LINK

Syndicate content