Fund Times: Awful Fund Headed for Well-Deserved Exit
Plus, TIAA-CREF makes a big mistake and China funds are on a roll.
Plus, TIAA-CREF makes a big mistake and China funds are on a roll.
We're not the only ones who notice that the funds we pan are lousy. Fund companies notice, too, and our Fund Analyst Pans have a pretty high mortality rate.
Phoenix funds added another fund to the list of extinct pans this week when it announced plans to merge the awful Phoenix Nifty Fifty into Phoenix Capital Growth . This extremely un-nifty fund has an annualized return of just 1% over the trailing 10 years. That's worse than 96% of large-growth funds. In short, the ticker says it all.
Nearly all of the bad results happened under Engemann Capital Management, but Phoenix recently fired Engemann and moved this fund and Capital Growth to Harris Investment Management, which runs the Harris Insight funds.
The merger is set to take place around Dec. 1, 2006.
TIAA-CREF Reports Error that Cost Fundholders
TIAA-CREF disclosed that it had shortchanged roughly 30,000 investors in the retirement share class of TIAA-CREF Institutional International Equity (TRERX). In a filing with the SEC, the firm said it wrongly allocated income and capital gains between share classes of the fund on May 26, 2006, leaving retirement share class holders with lower returns than they would have had otherwise. TIAA-CREF says it will compensate investors who lost more than $10 by this November. The firm has not provided a total dollar amount for the error.
Dreyfus and Putnam Among Firms Settling Performance Fee Case with SEC
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that four firms had settled with the agency and agreed to provide restitution to shareholders for errors made in calculating performance fees. Because they used the wrong method for calculating assets, the five firms overcharged fundholders. The firms are Dreyfus, Numeric Investors, Gartmore, Putnam, and Kensington. The five payouts totaled $7.4 million.
The firms improperly used average asset figures to calculate the amount of the fees. Dreyfus was tagged with the largest payout: $3.2 million. Gartmore was at the other end with a payout of $654,000.
Click here for the SEC press release. Click here for the Dow Jones news story.
China Funds Are Rocking
The list of international funds ranked by year-to-date returns is dominated by China funds. Eight of the top 10 slots belong to China funds, in fact. Heading the list are Oberweis China Opportunities (OBCHX) with a 40.7% return through Sept. 11, 2006. Next is Old Mutual Clay Finlay China with a 40.6% return.
The only non-China funds on the top-10 list are ING Russia up 33.3% and Metzler/Payden European Emerging Markets up 23.6%.
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.