English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

sbi global contara fund that gave 750% returns in 5 years!

risk included.

2007-03-21 00:42:13 · answer #1 · answered by Sidd 7 · 0 0

A mutual fund with a lower expense ratio leaves more money for the investor other things being equal. That is one of the reasons that index funds are so popular today. Their expense ratios are much much lower than the average mutual fund.

Unfortunately, other things are not equal. It therefore can become a challenge to pick a good mutual fund. One indicator is past performance. If a fund has performed well in the past, hopefully it will also perform well in the future. Not necessarily so but nevertheless something to consider.

There are mutual funds that have different investment objectives. Some are growth funds, some value funds, some small cap funds, some invest in a certain industry, and so on.

I would invest in a particular mutual fund based on past history and also upon my portfolio requirements. If I were short of small cap stocks, I would pick a mutual fund that invests in small cap stocks that has a good track record. Or maybe a low cost index fund that indexes small cap stocks.

2007-03-20 02:10:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Mutual funds are appropriate for some and the wrong investment for a increasingly growing number of people.

For me, I would NOT invest in mutual funds if it weren't for having a 401K.

Overall, Mutual funds are not good (once you're educated in investing) and many people should not invest in mutual funds unless you have to (like if it were a requirement in a 401K).

Here's why.

First of all, mutual funds exist to take average person's money.

Second, mutual funds seem to be "happy" just to do better than the S&P index, since that's often the gauge. A monkey, yes monkey, can usually outpick most mutual funds. Over 60% of the mutual funds out there can't even outperform the market (CNBC just reported the current # was 72%). That's VERY SAD!

Third, mutual funds have embedded management fees in their costs. Most of these mgmt fees are 0.5% to 2% annually. This is one of the reasons they can’t outperform the market; they take a cut out regardless of how well or poorly they do!

Fourth, most mutual funds exist not to earn you a lot of money, but are more interested in NOT "losing" you lots of money. That way you stay with them and they continue to collect their fees. Did they not highlight to you that they take this fee each and every year regardless of how poorly they do?

Fifth, mutual funds are not as liquid as one might think. If you're in mutual funds and a Bush talks in the morning and you call your broker to sell because the market is now tanking, the broker will gladly take your order, but the order will not be executed until the day is over and the negative impact is already priced into the fund.

Sixth, many mutual funds charge extra "fees" if you buy/sell their fund within a certain amount of time, meaning you must keep your money in the fund 90 days to 2 yrs before you're free from the fees (read the fine print on trying to get a withdrawal). These fees can be up to 3% or so of your money as well.

Seventh, mutual funds have to be in the market. So if the market is crashing or going down like it has between May and now, then the funds still have to be in the market and taking those losses too. With some practice, you can time your monies to avoid some of those losses (it'll take practice).

Convinced yet? Need more?

Eighth, mutual funds have to be pretty diversified and so if there are hot and cold sectors, they are probably in both the hot sectors and cold sectors. However, as an investor, you can buy into just the sectors you want, like metals, or housing, or energy, etc. or right now, Brokers/Dealers, Retail, and insurance!

Ninth, mutual funds are so big, they can only invest in certain companies. A small mutual fund with $10 billion in assets. 1% of that money is $100 million. How many companies are this big where $100 million investment isn't the whole company? Do you want to limit yourself to just those larger companies like Times Warner, Microsoft, home depot, Cisco, Ebay which have been sideways for years? I think not.

A better way would be to buy ETFs (exchange traded funds) or holders. These trade like stocks, so are very liquid, and do not have the high fees like the mutual funds. Further, you can buy/sell them as you wish. They represent sectors or indexes, so buying them gives you the same diversification as the sector/industry/index, but with much less overhead!

See Amex.com (american stock exchange) or ishares.com, holders.com for more info.


You need to invest for yourself. If you can't, then sure, use mutual funds. But be aware of the shortcomings (and as you can see, there are many).

Let me know if you have further questions.

Best of luck!

2007-03-21 10:47:05 · answer #3 · answered by Yada Yada Yada 7 · 0 0

ELSS (Equity linked tax savings) followed by Equity diversified mutual funds of leading mutual fund houses are good as dividend is tax free on equity linked funds and long term gain (holding over one year) is totally tax exempt.

2007-03-19 19:32:55 · answer #4 · answered by Santosh 3 · 0 0

Budget has nothing to do with any particular MF. All are good. Invest in any IPO of any MF with best track.

2007-03-19 23:16:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

specify ur tgt obj

no 2 MF at this level

trade urself

more on my blog

2007-03-20 17:43:37 · answer #6 · answered by dinu_pawar 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers