Tag Archives: mutual funds

Best And Worst Q2’16: Information Technology ETFs, Mutual Funds And Key Holdings

The Information Technology sector ranks fourth out of the ten sectors as detailed in our Q2’16 Sector Ratings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. Last quarter , the Information Technology sector ranked third. It gets our Neutral rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 29 ETFs and 122 mutual funds in the Information Technology sector as of April 18, 2016. See a recap of our Q1’16 Sector Ratings here . Figures 1 and 2 show the five best and worst rated ETFs and mutual funds in the sector. Not all Information Technology sector ETFs and mutual funds are created the same. The number of holdings varies widely (from 25 to 384). This variation creates drastically different investment implications and, therefore, ratings. Investors seeking exposure to the Information Technology sector should buy one of the Attractive-or-better rated ETFs or mutual funds from Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1: ETFs with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5 Click to enlarge * Best ETFs exclude ETFs with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity. Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings Figure 2: Mutual Funds with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5 Click to enlarge * Best mutual funds exclude funds with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity. Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings Five mutual funds are excluded from Figure 2 because their total net assets are below $100 million and do not meet our liquidity minimums. The Van Eck Market Vectors Semiconductor ETF (NYSEARCA: SMH ) is the top-rated Information Technology ETF and the Fidelity Select Communications Equipment Portfolio (MUTF: FSDCX ) is the top-rated Information Technology mutual fund. Both earn a Very Attractive rating. The First Trust Dow Jones Internet Index Fund (NYSEARCA: FDN ) is the worst rated Information Technology ETF and the Invesco Technology Sector Fund (MUTF: IFOAX ) is the worst rated Information Technology mutual fund. FDN earns a Dangerous rating and IFOAX earns a Very Dangerous rating. 506 stocks of the 3000+ we cover are classified as Information Technology stocks. Cisco Systems (NASDAQ: CSCO ) is one of our favorite stocks held by FSDCX and earns a Very Attractive rating. Over the past decade, Cisco has grown after-tax profits ( NOPAT ) by 7% compounded annually. Cisco has improved its return on invested capital ( ROIC ) from 14% in 2005 to a top-quintile 17% in 2015. The company has generated a cumulative $32 billion in free cash flow ( FCF ) over the past five fiscal years. However, in spite of the operational strength exhibited by Cisco, CSCO is undervalued and presents an excellent buying opportunity. At its current price of $28/share, Cisco has a price-to-economic book value ( PEBV ) ratio of 0.8. This ratio means that the market expects Cisco’s NOPAT to permanently decline by 20%. If Cisco can grow NOPAT by just 6% compounded annually for the next decade , the stock is worth $43/share today – a 54% upside. ServiceNow (NYSE: NOW ) remains one of our least favorite stocks held by IFOAX and earns a Dangerous rating. ServiceNow was placed in the Danger Zone in December 2015. Since going public in 2012, ServiceNow’s NOPAT has declined from -$29 million to -$154 million while its ROIC declined from -29% to -41% over the same time frame. The drastic decline in profits and profitability is in stark contrast to ServiceNow’s revenue growth, as the company adopted a “grow revenue at all costs strategy,” which clearly ignores profits. Making matters worse, when we placed NOW in the Danger Zone, its valuation implied significant profit growth and despite NOW falling 21% since the publish date of our report, those expectations remain unrealistically high. To justify its current price of $63/share, ServiceNow must grow immediately achieve 15% pre-tax margins (-15% in 2015) and grow revenue by 23% compounded annually for 13 years . In this scenario, 13 years from now, ServiceNow would be generating over $14 billion in revenue, slightly below Facebook’s (NASDAQ: FB ) 2015 revenue. It’s clear how the expectations embedded in NOW remain overly optimistic. Figures 3 and 4 show the rating landscape of all Information Technology ETFs and mutual funds. Figure 3: Separating the Best ETFs From the Worst ETFs Click to enlarge Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings Figure 4: Separating the Best Mutual Funds From the Worst Mutual Funds Click to enlarge Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings D isclosure: David Trainer and Kyle Guske II receive no compensation to write about any specific stock, sector or theme. 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.

4 Best-Rated Fidelity Mutual Funds To Invest In

Fidelity Investments is one of the largest and oldest mutual fund companies in the world. The company serves nearly 25 million individual customers. As of December 31, 2015, it had total assets of $5.15 trillion, with $2.04 trillion under management. Fidelity Investments carries out operations in the U.S. through 10 regional offices and over 180 Investor Centers. It also has its presence in eight other countries of North America, Europe, Asia and Australia. The company provides investment advice, discount brokerage services, retirement services, wealth management services, securities execution and clearance and life insurance products to its clients. At Fidelity, a large group of investment professionals carry out extensive and in-depth research on potential investment avenues worldwide. Below, we share with you four top-ranked Fidelity mutual funds. Each has earned a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 (Strong Buy) and is expected to outperform its peers in the future. To view the Zacks Rank and past performance of all Fidelity mutual funds, investors can click here . Fidelity Select Telecommunications Portfolio No Load (MUTF: FSTCX ) invests the majority of its assets in securities of companies primarily involved in the manufacture and sale of communications services or communications equipment. It invests in both domestic and foreign issuers. Factors including financial condition and industry position, as well as market and economic conditions are considered before investing in a company. The fund is non-diversified and has a three-year annualized return of 7.5%. As of March 2016, FSTCX held 51 issues, with 22.18% of its assets invested in AT&T Inc. (NYSE: T ). Fidelity Select Retailing Portfolio No Load (MUTF: FSRPX ) seeks growth of capital. It invests a large chunk of its assets in securities of firms involved in merchandising finished goods and services to consumers. FSRPX focuses on acquiring common stocks of companies throughout the globe. Factors including financial strength and economic condition are considered before investing in a company. The fund has a three-year annualized return of 18.3%. Deena Friedman has been the fund manager of FSRPX since 2014. Fidelity Select Software & IT Services Portfolio No Load (MUTF: FSCSX ) invests a major portion of its assets in companies whose primary operations are related to software or information-based services. It primarily focuses on acquiring common stocks of both domestic and foreign companies. FSCSX uses fundamental analysis to select companies for investment purposes. It has a three-year annualized return of 15.9%. FSCSX has an expense ratio of 0.76%, as compared to a category average of 1.45%. Fidelity International Small Cap Opportunities Fund No Load (MUTF: FSCOX ) seeks capital appreciation. It invests the majority of its assets in small-cap companies located outside the U.S., including those from emerging countries. FSCOX emphasizes investing in common stocks of companies with market capitalization below $5 billion. The fund invests in securities issued in different countries. It has a three-year annualized return of 6.2%. Jed Weiss has been the fund manager of FSCOX since 2008. Original Post

Best And Worst Q2’16: Healthcare ETFs, Mutual Funds And Key Holdings

The Health Care sector ranks seventh out of the ten sectors as detailed in our Q2’16 Sector Ratings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. Last quarter , the Health Care sector ranked sixth. It gets our Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 22 ETFs and 80 mutual funds in the Health Care sector. See a recap of our Q1’16 Sector Ratings here . Figures 1 and 2 show the five best and worst rated ETFs and mutual funds in the sector. Not all Health Care sector ETFs and mutual funds are created the same. The number of holdings varies widely (from 23 to 351). This variation creates drastically different investment implications and, therefore, ratings. Investors seeking exposure to the Health Care sector should buy one of the Attractive-or-better rated ETFs or mutual funds from Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1: ETFs with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5 Click to enlarge * Best ETFs exclude ETFs with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity. Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings Figure 2: Mutual Funds with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5 Click to enlarge * Best mutual funds exclude funds with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity. Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings Saratoga Advantage Health & Biotechnology Portfolio (SBHIX, SHPCX) and Live Oak Health Sciences Fund (MUTF: LOGSX ) are excluded from Figure 2 because their total net assets are below $100 million and do not meet our liquidity minimums. iShares Global Healthcare ETF (NYSEARCA: IXJ ) is the top-rated Health Care ETF and Schwab Health Care Fund (MUTF: SWHFX ) is the top-rated Health Care mutual fund. IXJ earns an Attractive rating and SWHFX earns a Neutral rating. BioShares Biotechnology Products Fund (NASDAQ: BBP ) is the worst rated Health Care ETF and Alger Health Sciences Fund (MUTF: AHSAX ) is the worst rated Health Care mutual fund. Both earn a Very Dangerous rating. 354 stocks of the 3000+ we cover are classified as Health Care stocks. Gilead Sciences (NASDAQ: GILD ) is one of our favorite stocks held by IXJ and earns a Very Attractive rating. Gilead has built a highly profitable business in the biotech industry and has grown after-tax profit ( NOPAT ) by an impressive 39% compounded annually since 2005. Over the same time frame, Gilead has increased its return on invested capital ( ROIC ) from an already high 37% in 2005 to a top-quintile 88% in 2015. Over the past five years, Gilead has generated a cumulative $26 billion in free cash flow. Despite the operational successes, GILD remains undervalued. At its current price of $98/share, GILD has a price-to-economic book value ( PEBV ) ratio of 0.6. This ratio means that the market expects Gilead’s NOPAT to permanently decline by 40%. However, if Gilead can grow NOPAT by just 4% compounded annually for the next five years , the stock is worth $181/share today – an 85% upside. Eli Lilly (NYSE: LLY ) is one of our least favorite stocks held by AHSAX and earns a Dangerous rating. Over the past five years, Eli Lilly’s NOPAT has declined by 12% compounded annually. The company’s ROIC has fallen from 21% in 2010 to only 8% in 2015. NOPAT margins have followed a similar path and fallen from 24% in 2010 to 14% in 2015. In the meantime, LLY has increased 25% over the past two years, which has left shares overvalued. To justify its current price of $75/share, Eli Lilly must grow NOPAT by 8% compounded annually for the next 14 years . This expectation seems awfully optimistic given the deterioration of LLY’s business operations. Figures 3 and 4 show the rating landscape of all Health Care ETFs and mutual funds. Figure 3: Separating the Best ETFs From the Worst ETFs Click to enlarge Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings Figure 4: Separating the Best Mutual Funds From the Worst Mutual Funds Click to enlarge Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings D isclosure: David Trainer and Kyle Guske II receive no compensation to write about any specific stock, sector or theme. 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.