Tag Archives: mutual-fund

Is It Worth Investing In China? 3 Mutual Fund Picks

Slowdown in the manufacturing sector and the export business taking a hit are compelling China to turn into a consumer driven economy. This phase of transition is expected to be painful. But for patient investors, the returns are expected to be encouraging if they choose to remain invested in the service sector over the long run. While the service sector was on an expansionary mode in February, retail sales registered double-digit growth during the first two months of this year. China’s regulatory measures, on the other hand, raised hopes of a much stable economy. Hence, it will be prudent to invest in China focused mutual funds that have significant exposure to the service sector. GDP Slows Down, Foreign Trade Hit Badly China’s GDP came in at 6.9% last year, the lowest in almost a decade. The International Monetary Fund has trimmed China’s economic growth to 6.3% this year. China’s economy continued to be weighed down by sluggish demand at home and abroad. China’s trade surplus narrowed to $32.6 billion in February from January’s all-time high of $63.3 billion. Exports in February tanked 25.4% from last year’s figure, while imports including oil, iron ore and copper nosedived 11.2%. Even though this fall is partly due to the Lunar New Year holidays that fell in February, the overall trend is downward. In January, both exports and imports had declined by 11.2% and 18.8%, respectively. Moreover, in 2015, China’s foreign trade shrank by 8% from 2014. Manufacturing Slows Down China has mostly been a manufacturing hub. But of late, its manufacturing sector is slowing down. The official manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) came in at 49.0 in February, lower than January’s reading of 49.4. In fact, China’s factory activities contracted for the seventh straight month in February. The Caixin manufacturing PMI also came in at 48 in February, a five-month low. Manufacturing was hit mostly by the beleaguered construction sector, which generally boosts demand for industrial products. Major funds such as Oberweis China Opportunities (MUTF: OBCHX ), AllianzGI China Equity A (MUTF: ALQAX ) and Matthews China Investor (MUTF: MCHFX ) fell 11.8%, 8.4% and 13.1%, respectively, on a year-to-date basis, mostly due to significant exposure to the industrial sector. Service Sector Expands, Retail Sales Rise Due to weakness in the manufacturing sector, China is looking to shift its focus to the service and consumption based sector. The official services PMI came in at 52.7 in February, down from January’s figure of 53.5. Also, the Caixin services purchasing managers’ index (PMI) for February was at 51.2 compared to 52.4 in January. Even though these figures went down in February, it remained above the key figure of 50, indicating expansion in service activities. He Fan, chief economist at Caixin Insight Group said that “overall, the services sector has outperformed manufacturing industries, reflecting continued improvement in the economic structure.” Meanwhile, retail sales of consumer goods gained 10.2% on a year-over-year basis during the first two months of 2016, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). Retail sales were mostly driven by online sales. Online sales in the first two months of this year surged by 27.2% year on year to 636.1 billion yuan. 3 China-Focused Mutual Funds to Buy Given this scenario, China’s service sector remains the only bright spot, which might help its economy to navigate through troubled waters. Moreover, China’s financial market regulators’ promising moves to boost the economy such as imposing a ban on initial public offerings, restrictions on margin trading, allowing government-managed pension funds to invest in equity markets and restricting large shareholders from shorting stocks will help investors in the long run. Here we have selected three China focused mutual funds that mostly invest in the service sector, which includes retail, financials, information technology, telecommunications and healthcare. Funds have been selected over stocks, since funds reduce transaction costs for investors and also diversify their portfolio without the numerous commission charges that stocks need to bear. Further, these funds boast a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 (Strong Buy) or #2 (Buy), have positive 4-week and 3-year annualized returns and carry a low expense ratio. Fidelity China Region (MUTF: FHKCX ) invests a large portion of its assets in securities of Chinese issuers. As of the last filing, Tencent Holdings Ltd. ( OTCPK:TCEHY ), China Construction Bank Corp. ( OTCPK:CICHY ) and AIA Group Ltd. ( OTCPK:AAGIY ) were the top three holdings for FHKCX. FHKCX’s 4-week and 3-year annualized returns are 10.3% and 1.4%, respectively. Annual expense ratio of 0.96% is lower than the category average of 1.76%. FHKCX has a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #2 and has a minimum initial investment of $2,500. Matthews China Dividend Investor (MUTF: MCDFX ) invests the majority of its assets in dividend-paying equity securities of companies located in China. As of the last filing, New Oriental Education SP (NYSE: EDU ), SERCOMM and China Construction Bank Corp. were the top three holdings for MCDFX. MCDFX’s 4-week and 3-year annualized returns are 9.6% and 4.2%, respectively. Annual expense ratio of 1.19% is lower than the category average of 1.76%. MCDFX has a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 and has a minimum initial investment of $2,500. ProFunds UltraChina Investor (MUTF: UGPIX ) seeks returns that correspond to two times the daily performance of the BNY Mellon China Select ADR Index. As of the last filing, Alibaba Group Holding Limited (NYSE: BABA ), China Mobile Ltd. (NYSE: CHL ) and Baidu Inc. (NASDAQ: BIDU ) were the top three holdings for UGPIX. UGPIX’s 4-week and 3-year annualized returns are 38% and 7.8%, respectively. Annual expense ratio of 0.75% is lower than the category average of 1.99%. UGPIX has a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 and has a minimum initial investment of $15,000. A higher minimum investment helps the fund manager to control cash flows, which eventually helps management of assets on a regular basis. Original Post

Are Hedge Funds Really That Evil? Challenging The Common Hedge Fund Myths

Click to enlarge I will not surprise anyone by concluding that the coverage of hedge funds in the media and the general public opinion about them is negative, including some regulators and representatives of the Academia. This is counter intuitive, because, as I explained before , properly selected hedge funds demonstrate great results and have the potential to improve any investment portfolio. But what we see in the headlines most of the time is “average performance”, “high fees”, “flashy” lifestyles of hedge fund managers or fraud related “scandals”. Indeed such topics generate more buzz than news about good performance, but part of the reason is that hedge funds are slightly mysterious and not fully understood, especially by individual investors, “grey area” in the investment field thus surrounded by many rooted myths. In this article I summarize, discuss and try to bust some of the most prevalent hedge fund myths and misconceptions. MYTH NO. 1: Hedge funds are only accessible to institutional investors and (ultra) high net worth individuals – they are not available to retail investors like me and you. REALITY: Due to structural innovations, e.g. liquid alternatives, UCITS funds, etc., hedge funds are lately as accessible to retail investors as ever since their minimum investment amount may be as low as USD10k or even USD1k. Moreover, some hedge funds are traded on exchanges (e.g. London Stock Exchange Hedge fund list or Eurekahedge UCITS database), while funds of hedge funds may pool private investors’ money together and invest into hedge funds otherwise harder to access. Finally, there is a wave of fin-tech startups engaging in various ways to replicate hedge fund strategies or pool investors’ capital that are entering the scene (e.g. Sliced). On the other hand, hedge funds are complex structures requiring knowledge and experience to comprehend, thus it is naive to expect and strive to have every mom and dad be able to invest with them. Besides, hedge funds are dedicated for long term investment and create the most value over long investment horizons, thus higher minimum investment amount makes sure to filter those who can afford themselves quarterly or even annual liquidity, i.e. are less likely to experience sudden liquidity needs. MYTH NO. 2: Hedge funds are very risky. REALITY: All investment tools, vehicles and strategies bare both general and their own unique risks. Most of hedge funds’ structure and operational risks are addressed via proper due diligence process, while if we define riskiness by the standard deviation of performance, hedge funds as a group are less volatile than such traditional assets as stocks. Click to enlarge So it means that owning stocks has significantly more downside risk than owning hedge funds, because the latter are more flexible, active and have a wider toolkit of strategies at hand, including shorting. Moreover, since hedge funds exhibit low correlation to most traditional asset classes (see below), once added to an investment portfolio, they are able to reduce the volatility of the overall investment portfolio. Click to enlarge Source: Natixis MYTH NO. 3: Investing with hedge funds, investors have to give up liquidity and access to their capital. REALITY: Liquidity profiles of hedge funds can range from daily liquidity (e.g. liquid alternatives), to very common monthly liquidity, to quarterly or annual, so if liquidity is the main criteria of an investor, (s)he definitely has a range of options. However, firstly, liquidity profile determines and affects directly the opportunity set the manager is able to tackle, so it is difficult to expect a daily liquidity fund post the same results as annual liquidity vehicle, and secondly, if your main criteria is liquidity, hedge funds might not be the place for you at all. To conclude, yes you can access highly liquid options in hedge fund space, but then you might need to give up some of the less liquid (but naturally higher potential) opportunities that hedge funds are only able to tackle due to their structure in the first place. MYTH NO. 4: Hedge funds are too expensive. REALITY: It depends very much who you are comparing to. Yes, hedge fund fees are higher in absolute terms than e.g. mutual fund fees. However, this is the price not only for the access to different, complex, unique, niche tools and strategies hedge funds provide, but also the risk management infrastructure in place to handle difficult situations in the markets better than yourself or a long only mutual fund manager would. Moreover, hedge fund fee structure serves in aligning the interests of investors and managers which are both interested in better results, while you can’t really call mutual fund fees “motivating”. Finally, hedge funds’ results we see are already after-fee results and they obviously satisfy investors and justify the fees since industry assets are at all-time highs and large part of the hedge fund inflows come from very sophisticated institutional investors. MYTH NO. 5: Hedge funds don’t help in a market crash. REALITY: As demonstrated earlier, hedge funds exhibit lower correlation to traditional asset classes, providing the real diversification (and downside protection) exactly when it is needed the most – during crises and market crashes. As seen in the picture below, hedge funds proved to fare better than stocks during each of the recent market downturns. Click to enlarge Hedge funds: HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index. World stocks: MSCI World Net Total Return hedged to USD Source: Bloomberg, MSCI, Man Group MYTH NO. 6: The most important thing in hedge fund selection is a large house and a respected name. REALITY: While many investors see these attributes as an assurance of quality and investor trust, they are no way a substitute for proper due diligence on a fund. The same way as large and well-known banks appear to engage in rate fixing scandals, there are plenty examples of “large houses” and “respected names” among hedge funds that have conducted fraud, abused investor rights and/or blew up, the classic ones being the Galleon Group, SAC Capital, Madoff Investment Securities. It is true that large investment houses provide an exceptionally high level operational infrastructure, but these days even a 100-million fund is able to access most of those solutions. Moreover, due to being nimble, innovative and diligent, smaller and newer funds reportedly outperform many of the large renowned peers. To conclude, large house and a respected name should not be a hedge fund selection criteria: neither it protects from fraud, nor guarantees superior performance. However, hedge fund due diligence and selection requires specific expertise and experience-based judgment so it is advisable to consult specialists anyway. MYTH NO. 7: Hedge fund managers are dishonest, unscrupulous fraudsters. REALITY: This is exactly the public opinion formed by the media which tends to catch and escalate the juicy stories of exuberant lifestyles and securities fraud. However, those stories are relatively few compared to almost 15 thousand hedge funds existing out there so there are as many cheaters in the hedge fund industry as there are in oil and gas, pharmaceuticals, politics and anywhere else. The majority of the hedge fund managers are very talented investment professionals with a unique idea or skillset trying to exploit it and make a living by earning investors return and their capital. It is investors’ concern to ascertain who are they trusting their money with. MYTH NO. 8: Hedge funds are unregulated “blackboxes”. REALITY: In the aftermath of the recent financial crisis, hedge funds became as regulated as ever with such impactful regulations as AIFMD, UCITS, MIFID, Dodd-Frank etc. introduced in order to maintain the perceived stability of financial sector. It depends on certain jurisdictions, but generally the times of two dudes with a laptop at a garage are gone – it takes time, money and expertise to get and maintain all the operational, compliance, reputation checks from the regulators while investor expectations and standards, especially if you target institutional investors, has also brought operational and governance practices to a new level. When it comes to transparency, the industry standard has gone further away from opaque reporting and the current best practice is monthly distribution including, depending on a strategy, a certain level of portfolio transparency allowing for a picture of strategy implementation. On the other hand, a complete or regulated transparency would take away hedge funds’ competitive advantage that allows them to generate returns in the first place. MYTH NO. 9: Hedge funds are evil and does bad to the society REALITY: Besides helping people and institutions achieve their financial goals, hedge funds serve to the financial industry and society in general. They are sometimes the last resort buyers of assets no one else wants to buy providing liquidity to the markets. They often provide capital to innovative projects as well as small and medium size businesses that face difficulties raising capital from more traditional sources. Hedge funds employ very talented and professional people for highly paid roles, who in turn pay large amount of taxes. Hedge funds not only donate significant amounts to non-profits and charities, but also when included in investment portfolios of foundations and endowments help earn money to support communities, improve education, health, economic areas, foster cultural development. Included in investment portfolios of endowments, hedge funds help them fund scholarships while included in investment portfolios of pension plans hedge funds allow them provide retirement security to millions of people. In fact, most of the money recently flowing into the hedge fund industry is exactly the institutional money. Due to some or all of the mentioned myths rooted around hedge funds, some investors miss the opportunity to access unique ideas, niche strategies and innovative tools and achieve the portfolio enhancement hedge funds provide. While the negative views on hedge funds and the whole financial industry may continue attracting the media attention, what is important for an investor is to evaluate critically, realistically and objectively the information, avoid generalization and trust their own or their advisors’ competence in finding the best solutions. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it. I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Additional disclosure: MC Investments is a hedge fund due diligence and manager selection advisory.

3 Top-Rated Government Intermediate Bond Mutual Funds To Consider

Mutual funds investing in debt securities are among the most secure investment options which provide regular income while protecting the capital invested. Funds which are part of this category bring a great deal of stability to portfolios with a large proportion of equity, while providing dividends more frequently than individual bonds. U.S. government bond funds usually invest in Treasury bills, notes and securities issued by government agencies. They are considered to be the safest in the bond fund category and are ideal options for the risk-averse investor. Meanwhile, intermediate-term funds usually provide a safer option for investors, when compared to small-term funds. Fixed income securities having an average maturity period between 3 and 10 years are classified as intermediate securities. These funds are believed to ensure more stability and provide a higher return than what short-term funds offer. Below, we will share with you 3 top-rated government intermediate bond mutual funds. Each has earned a Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) as we expect these mutual funds to outperform their peers in the future. To view the Zacks Rank and past performance of all government intermediate bond funds, investors can click here to see the complete list of funds . Hartford US Government Securities HLS IB (MUTF: HBUSX ) invests a major portion of its assets in securities that are affiliated to the U.S. government or its entities. HBUSX invests in U.S. treasury instruments and other securities of the U.S. government. HBUSX may also invest in mortgage-backed securities of the U.S. government. The Hartford US Government Secs HLS IB fund has a three-year annualized return of 1.2%. Michael F. Garrett is the fund manager since 2012. AMG Managers Intermediate Duration Government (MUTF: MGIDX ) seeks total return more than that of market indices related to mortgage-backed securities. MGIDX primarily invests in debt securities of the U.S. government or other agencies authorized by the government. MGIDX invests in securities having an impressive credit quality to reduce risk. The AMG Managers Intermediate Duration Government fund has a three-year annualized return of 2.6%. As of June 2015, MGIDX held 369 issues with 11.99% of its assets invested in Freddie Mac Gold Single Family TBA 4% 2046-03-01. Performance Trust Strategic Bond (MUTF: PTIAX ) invests a large portion of its assets in fixed-income instruments which include corporate, government and municipal bonds, asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities and other fixed-income instruments issued by various U.S. governments, municipal or private-sector entities. PTIAX seeks interest income and potential capital appreciation. The Performance Trust Strategic Bond fund has a three-year annualized return of 3.8%. PTIAX has an expense ratio of 0.84% as compared to the category average of 1.01%. To view the Zacks Rank and past performance of all government intermediate bond mutual funds, investors can click here to see the complete list of funds . By applying the Zacks Rank to mutual funds, investors can find funds that not only outpaced the market in the past, but are also expected to outperform going forward. Pick the best mutual funds with the Zacks Rank. Original Post