Like Tree85Likes

Which fund is better and at what price to buy?

Reply
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    13,503

    Personal view, any retail mutual fund issued in HK is a scam, regardless of if you get leverage or not. They are all overpriced for what they offer and the subscription fees are a joke.

    I say this as someone who had no idea a few years ago that 1% fees, while it sounds small is actually quite a lot.

    Dear OP, I don't know what you are actually looking for, but suggest you do some self education.


  2. #42

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    104

    management fee is the silent killer of returns . I've shared before, but worth repeating: Name:  vanguardfee.jpg
Views: 321
Size:  194.8 KB

    traineeinvestor, pin, shri and 1 others like this.

  3. #43
    bdw
    bdw is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,562
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBrit
    So, where is this growth? I didn't speculate on whether it was a good investment, I just said its misleadingly named. Its income, not growth!
    Point taken, I guess the objective is for both income and growth, maybe aimed at retirees or something. Also until a few months back a 3 year analysis would have shown it a bit healthier with some growth so just randomly taking different date ranges can show all kinds of results

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,913
    Quote Originally Posted by bdw
    Point taken, I guess the objective is for both income and growth, maybe aimed at retirees or something. Also until a few months back a 3 year analysis would have shown it a bit healthier with some growth so just randomly taking different date ranges can show all kinds of results
    Looking at the history, the trend is pretty clear! This is a downward sloping line. The NAV is being eroded over time. This is consistent with a fund paying out income from capital, i.e. paying the manager to slowly return your own money to you.



    This has not been due to falling equity markets, or falling bond prices. Both have risen strongly over that time. This is just comparing to MSCI World, the sort of thing you can easily buy a cheap ETF to track.

    shri, traineeinvestor, bdw and 1 others like this.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBrit
    Looking at the history, the trend is pretty clear! This is a downward sloping line. The NAV is being eroded over time. This is consistent with a fund paying out income from capital, i.e. paying the manager to slowly return your own money to you.
    the hefty 1.54% management fee accounts for some of that too. @bdw, with respect, I know it's worked out well for you, but should really consider the opportunity cost of the investments (i.e. vs a MSCI World) and not simply being content that there's no loss on principal.
    bdw likes this.

  6. #46
    bdw
    bdw is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,562

    Well guys like I said you can pick different date ranges and mess around with data to support what argument you want to make. But just looking at this MSCI thing for the last 3 years, unless I misunderstand which is quite possible, it appears to have risen from 1719 to 2178, which is 21%, which is exactly the same as Allianz income and growth fund (considering all fees) over the same 3 year period!

    Name:  MSCI.jpg
Views: 245
Size:  63.3 KB

    At the end of the day, I have a bunch of these funds from Allianz, Schroders, Fidelity, JPMorgan, Manulife, Templeton, etc and they serve a purpose for me. They have returned 5%-10% per year on average over last 3 years which for me is acceptable (I have borrowed money on average paying 1%-2%). They have hidden fees, I understand, but they also allow me to invest in a broad range of markets all around the world, securities, bonds, etc that I otherwise would have been clueless and put in the too hard basket. Also to re-emphasise these are not my only or even anywhere near my majority form of investment. I try all kinds of things in property, stocks, etc and these funds that I hold are just one part of my overall portfolio.

    I admit I'm quite an amateur in investing, so my strategy is to just to do a lot of different things, hope something sticks and does well while the others hopefully don't drag me down too much. Buying a property in Malaysia was by far a much worse decision than buying some Allianz funds I can guarantee you that! I wish I had put more money in funds than trying to be a smartarse and buying property in a foreign country.


  7. #47

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by foxwendal
    the hefty 1.54% management fee accounts for some of that too. @bdw, with respect, I know it's worked out well for you, but should really consider the opportunity cost of the investments (i.e. vs a MSCI World) and not simply being content that there's no loss on principal.
    Shifting from looking at past performance to speculating on future performance. Now that interest rates are lower than they were three years ago I'd have to assume that the fund's 1.54% management fee will be an even bigger drag on performance going forward than it was in the past? Or will they have to invest in higher risk and/or longer duration securities to maintain the same yield?

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    104

    @bdw, 3 year total return on MSCI World is closer to 40% as seen in IWDA LN as an ETF reference. Perhaps you're looking at the index net of dividends (and perhaps even moreso, net of that specific fund's management fees?)

    Regardless, I can appreciate that the fees - while astronomical to me - may be "worth it" for some who would otherwise be daunted by financial markets without an easy access point to them. but the point remains with a bit of homework, there are immense savings to be had.

    bdw likes this.

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by bdw
    I admit I'm quite an amateur in investing, so my strategy is to just to do a lot of different things, hope something sticks and does well while the others hopefully don't drag me down too much. Buying a property in Malaysia was by far a much worse decision than buying some Allianz funds I can guarantee you that! I wish I had put more money in funds than trying to be a smartarse and buying property in a foreign country.
    At the end of the day you (i) made money off your Allianz investment in both real and nominal terms and (ii) got access to cheap finance for other investments because of it. As you say, there are worse investments the could make – For my part, I could fill a book with all my bad investment decisions. Even Buffet has dropped money on some duds. This is why most of us spread the money around.
    shri and bdw like this.

  10. #50

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by traineeinvestor
    Shifting from looking at past performance to speculating on future performance. Now that interest rates are lower than they were three years ago I'd have to assume that the fund's 1.54% management fee will be an even bigger drag on performance going forward than it was in the past? Or will they have to invest in higher risk and/or longer duration securities to maintain the same yield?
    or simply paying back more principal? and with the inverted yield curve, no clear benefit even to taking on longer duration risk.

Reply
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... LastLast