Mutual Fund Performance: Pacific Ex Japan
Fund
Fund performance is as of the close of business July 05
Top 10
Pacific Ex Japan Funds (ranked by one-year
performance)
Assets Returns
(Size In US$Millions) 1 YR% /3 YR% / 5 YR% /
YTD%
T Rowe Price Int:Asia (3,114.3) 73.06 / 183.13 / 246.69 /
30.89
Fidelity SoEast Asia (2,833.4) 68.50 / 200.55 / 253.80 / 34.00
DFA
Asia Pac Small Co (120.7) 66.30 / 152.52 / 297.86 / 36.39
iShares:MSCI
Malaysia (1,113.7) 64.90 / 93.11 / 129.48 / 30.75
Guinn Atkin:Asia Focus
(54.5) 63.10 / 159.72 / 237.99 / 32.95
iShares:MSCI S'pore (1,912.8) 60.1 /
141.48 / 200.49 / 22.1
Fidelity Adv Korea;A (34.4) 59.43 / 240.25 / 228.10 /
38.11
JPMorgan:Asia Eq;A (13.9) 56.97 / 135.93 / 151.90 / 25.58
Fidelity
Adv Em Asia;A (87.3) 56.56 / 180.99 / 211.61 / 24.04
TCW:Asia Pacific Eq;I
(29.0) 55.57 / 137.24 / 162.71 / 25.02
The above
compilation for Asia based funds (excluding Japan) is very interesting indeed.
Among the hundreds of funds investing in Asia, these are the creme de la creme.
My important conclusions:
a)
Brand name power - There is strength and reliability in brand
name power. Names like T Rowe Price and Fidelity topped the charts for a variety
of reasons. They are more able to attract and retain talent. They have a more
extensive and solid management structure to monitor, provide oversight and push
through ideas. They have a better supporting structure in economics, currency
strategy, big picture strategy, quant people, sophisticated data mining
channels, and by virtue of their size, they always get the analysts' first
call.
b) When
looking at these kind of tables, it is best to leave out those with small asset
size. It is much easier to perform well with fund size of under US$50m. I would
use that as the minimum benchmarking.
c)
iShares - iShares are indexed ETFs designed and run by Barclays
Global Fund Advisors. They do very well for their set out objectives. They have
two funds in the top 10 because they are indexed country funds. Two out of the
top ten performing funds are indexed funds - lends weight to the belief that
active fund management generally fails to outperform the index. Those that do
are really anomalies rather than the majority.
d) Assess
your own investments. Did they outperform the index? How many sleepness nights
did you have to endure to get your 50% return? You have no one to scold if you
lose 20% of your funds in bad stock selections. Let someone else do the worrying
for you. T Rowe Price and Fidelity 's 3 year and 5 year record can't be beat -
let them do the worrying for you. They have better weapons to fight the war of
attrition. If you MUST do some personal investing because you just have to do
it: why not park 60% or 70% of total funds with a solid house with at least 3-5
year track record, and keep the rest for your own investing
purposes.
We can
outperform the index and even top fund managers over certain periods, eventually
over the long haul it evens up a lot. I think people will have a lot less stress
by invetsing most of their funds in a good mutual fund. As more than 70% of EPF
withdrawers finish spending their lump sum within the first 3-5 years,
reinvesting the bulk of retirement funds in a couple of solid funds will ensure
for better protection, longer drawdown period or provide for a strong
annuity.