Looking at Our Fund Analyst Picks by Fund Company
An examination of 11 years of our picks reveals a surprising performance by Fidelity and more.
An examination of 11 years of our picks reveals a surprising performance by Fidelity and more.
On our new Fund Analyst Picks page, you can see how each of our picks has performed. But I took a look at how our picks have done by fund company. Looking over the past 11 years, I grouped funds by company to see how well each firm fared.
Specifically, I looked at whether each pick had outperformed the median fund in its category during the time in which it was a pick. If a fund changed categories while it was a pick, then I calculated two separate time-period performances. I'll also let you know about some of our biggest hits and misses from each company. The data is as through May 2011.
American Funds
Our American Funds picks outperformed 73% of the time. As you might expect from well-run but widely diversified funds, most produced returns that were not that far off the middle of the category. Four did produce top-quartile returns in the time they were picks: American Funds EuroPacific Growth (AEPGX), American Funds Growth Fund of America (AGTHX), American Funds Income Fund of America (AMECX), and American Funds New Perspective (ANWPX). Although performance has been middling of late, these funds show how well they can do over the long haul. Only one pick finished in the bottom quartile, and that was American Funds New World (NEWFX). That fund is a mix of developed- and emerging-markets stocks, and its conservative mix has held it back versus its purely emerging-markets peers.
Fidelity
I was surprised to see Fidelity top the list, with 83% of our picks beating their median peer. You're probably surprised, too, as funds like Fidelity Magellan (FMAGX) and Fidelity Growth & Income (FGRIX) have been poor performers even as funds such as Fidelity Contrafund (FCNTX) and Fidelity Low-Priced Stock (FLPSX) continued to click. The key is that we largely avoided Fidelity's stock funds with our picks. Rather, we've focused on bond funds with a heavy emphasis on munis. With the unpleasant exception of one-time pick Fidelity Ultra-short Bond , Fidelity's bond funds have been wonderfully dependable vehicles.
Over the years, eight different Fidelity muni funds have been picks at one time or another and all produced above-median percentile rankings. We've had 11 taxable-bond picks, and two have lagged.
PIMCO
Including the Harbor bond funds that PIMCO subadvises, PIMCO fund picks outperformed 74% of the time. The two blots on the record were PIMCO Emerging Markets Bond and PIMCO Foreign Bond (U.S. Dollar-Hedged) . The latter was mostly a victim of a falling dollar. On the plus side, the likes of Harbor Bond (HABDX) and PIMCO Foreign Bond (Unhedged) have done well for investors.
T. Rowe Price
A total of 79% of our T. Rowe Price picks have outperformed. Some our best picks were sector funds like T. Rowe Price Media & Telecommunications (PRMTX) and T. Rowe Price Health Sciences (PRHSX). Only one fund among our picks had bottom-quartile returns while it was a pick--a testament to T. Rowe's steady nature. That fund, T. Rowe Price Value (TRVLX), was a pick from July 1999 to December 1999, so at least its stay was short.
Vanguard
Our Vanguard picks also won 79% of the time. Many of the laggards did so because they are positioned more conservatively than are their peers. I'd say our worst pick was one that would have been much better off if it had been positioned conservatively. Vanguard Growth Equity was a pick for nearly eight years, and its heavy dose of momentum proved dreadful for a value-driven decade.
Fortunately, some of our best picks were also in large growth in the form of the now-closed Vanguard Primecap (VPMCX) and Vanguard Primecap Core (VPCCX), which thumped peers. Vanguard Capital Opportunity (VHCOX) was also a pick from the beginning of our picks list in 1999. Most of our Vanguard index fund picks have fared well, with successes like Vanguard Total International Stock Index (VTIAX).
This article originally ran in the June issue of Morningstar FundInvestor.
FundInvestor Newsletter | ||||
Morningstar FundInvestor is a 48-page newsletter dedicated to helping investors pick great mutual funds, build winning portfolios, and monitor their funds for | greater gains. This one-year subscription consists of 12 monthly issues, a Reader's Guide, and four free investing reports. Learn more. | |||
$129.00 for 12 Print Issues | $119.00 for 12 PDF Issues | |||
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.