The Top 10 Fund Value Creators and Destroyers
Which funds generated the greatest dollar returns in 2005?
Which funds generated the greatest dollar returns in 2005?
A company's bottom line is its profits expressed in dollar terms. For mutual funds, we usually think of the bottom line in total return percentage figures. However, there's something to be said for looking at a mutual fund's results in dollar terms, too.
If you back out cash flows and simply look at how much value a fund created or destroyed for its shareholders, you effectively have the bottom line of the fund's investors. Once a year, I like to do this to see which funds made the most money for shareholders in dollar terms. Specifically, we're looking at how much the fund's portfolio appreciated or depreciated without the effects of inflows or outflows. In other words, what return did the fund's investments generate?
If you prefer to see return figures, you should go to our Fund Quickrank tool and run the figures yourself.
Who Created the Most Value?
What I like about this measure is it shows which large funds were able to produce results after they became huge. To be sure, looking at it in dollar terms biases things in favor of the largest funds, but, hey, it's only a once-a-year thing.
Not surprisingly, American Funds, which dominates the list of biggest funds, also dominates the list of biggest value creators in a year when most stock funds had positive returns.
2005's Value Creators | |||
Category | NetValue($Mil) | 2005Return | |
American Funds Growth Fund of America (AGTHX) | Large Growth | 15,136 | 14.23% |
American Funds EuroPacific Growth (AEPGX) | Foreign Large Blend | 11,882 | 21.12% |
Fidelity Contrafund (FCNTX) | Large Growth | 7,901 | 16.23% |
American Funds Capital World Growth & Inc (CWGIX) | World Stock | 6,348 | 14.72% |
American Funds Investment Comp of America (AIVSX) | Large Value | 5,132 | 6.87% |
Vanguard 500 Index (VFINX) | Large Blend | 4,956 | 4.77% |
Fidelity Diversified International (FDIVX) | Foreign Large Growth | 4,654 | 17.23% |
American Funds New Perspective (ANWPX) | World Stock | 4,466 | 11.28% |
Dodge & Cox Stock (DODGX) | Large Value | 4,410 | 9.37 |
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index (VTSMX) | Large Blend | 3,781 | 5.98 |
Morningstar data. |
The top five funds on this list are particularly deserving of kudos. Not only are they large, but they also outperformed their peers. In fact, Growth Fund of America (AGTHX), EuroPacific Growth (AEPGX), and Fidelity Contrafund (FCNTX) shot the lights out with top-decile returns. For Growth Fund of America, energy stocks plus Google (GOOG) and Corning (GLW) produced those awesome returns. For EuroPacific Growth, big investments in Japan and Latin America produced another outstanding year. For Contrafund, manager Will Danoff made a great bet on energy, but he also had winners in other areas like Genentech and Google.
The other noteworthy performance came from Dodge & Cox Stock (DODGX), which was our runner up for Manager of the Year. The fund produced top-quartile returns thanks to a diverse bunch of names such as Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), Cardinal Health (CAH), and Matsushita .
Dodge & Cox Stock and Fidelity Diversified International (FDIVX) also merit bonus points as being the only funds on this list that knew when to push away from the table and close to new investors. The two Vanguard index funds get a pass since asset size isn't a problem for index funds.
Who Destroyed the Most Value?
Now to the matter of which funds lost the most in dollar terms. Most parts of the market made money, so there weren't a lot of sizable funds racking up losses.
As proof of how tough it is for fund investors to make good macroeconomic calls, there are a number of foreign bond funds on the value destroyers list. Betting against the dollar seemed like a sure thing, but the greenback had a surprising rally instead. That in turn burned most foreign bond funds because most don't hedge their currency exposure.
2005's Value Destroyers | |||
Category | Net Value($Mil) | 2005Return | |
Allianz OCC Renaissance (PQNCX) | Mid-Cap Value | -394 | -4.35% |
T. Rowe Price International Bond (RPIBX) | World Bond | -156 | -8.18% |
Rydex Juno Investor (RYJUX) | Bear Market | -151 | -4.95% |
Weitz Value (WVALX) | Large Value | -135 | -2.77% |
Oakmark I (OAKMX) | Large Value | -103 | -1.31% |
American Century International Bond | World Bond | -101 | -8.23% |
SEI International Fixed-Income (SEFIX) | World Bond | -97 | -9.85% |
White Oak Select Growth (WOGSX) | Large Growth | -97 | -5.11% |
BlackRock International Bond | World Bond | -81 | -9.76% |
American Funds Capital World Bond (CWBFX) | World Bond | -72 | -2.86% |
Morningstar data. |
Some stock funds did make the list, though. Not only did they pick some poor performers, but they also avoided hot commodity areas such as energy and metals. Allianz OCC Renaissance (PQNCX) suffered from a lack of big winners and a few weak picks like Waters (WAT), which makes instruments for the drug industry, Royal Caribbean (RCL), and Pfizer (PFE).
Two very good value investors, Wally Weitz and Bill Nygren, also made the list. Besides underweighting energy, the two also suffered a typical fate of the value investor: They were early. Weitz, in particular, bought some falling stocks that continued to drop for Weitz Value (WVALX). He also held a fair amount in cash, which held the fund back a bit. At Oakmark (OAKMX), Nygren thought some neglected blue chips were much more attractive than energy. So far, the market has disagreed, but we still like the fund. I'm less enthused about White Oak Select Growth (WOGSX), which seems to disagree with the market every year.
For world-bond funds, it really was just a matter of foreign currency exposure. Some had either U.S. bonds or a currency hedge to limit the damage. Those that didn't wound up on this list.
Transparency is how we protect the integrity of our work and keep empowering investors to achieve their goals and dreams. And we have unwavering standards for how we keep that integrity intact, from our research and data to our policies on content and your personal data.
We’d like to share more about how we work and what drives our day-to-day business.
We sell different types of products and services to both investment professionals
and individual investors. These products and services are usually sold through
license agreements or subscriptions. Our investment management business generates
asset-based fees, which are calculated as a percentage of assets under management.
We also sell both admissions and sponsorship packages for our investment conferences
and advertising on our websites and newsletters.
How we use your information depends on the product and service that you use and your relationship with us. We may use it to:
To learn more about how we handle and protect your data, visit our privacy center.
Maintaining independence and editorial freedom is essential to our mission of empowering investor success. We provide a platform for our authors to report on investments fairly, accurately, and from the investor’s point of view. We also respect individual opinions––they represent the unvarnished thinking of our people and exacting analysis of our research processes. Our authors can publish views that we may or may not agree with, but they show their work, distinguish facts from opinions, and make sure their analysis is clear and in no way misleading or deceptive.
To further protect the integrity of our editorial content, we keep a strict separation between our sales teams and authors to remove any pressure or influence on our analyses and research.
Read our editorial policy to learn more about our process.