MUHLX

What do you think of this fund? Has good track record and no-load and
expenses are more than compensated for returns.


MUHLX (Muhlenkamp)

Re: MUHLX

Got in ANDEX midsummer but I think they raised min. in to 250,000.
I'd look into NPRTX then FTQGX. I want returns over some expeses, more
or less, while with more returns.


wrote:
> What do you think of this fund? Has good track record and no-load and
> expenses are more than compensated for returns.
>
>
> MUHLX (Muhlenkamp)

Re: MUHLX

"Flasherly" <> wrote

> Got in ANDEX midsummer but I think they raised min. in to 250,000.

They have other share classes that will take $2,500.

> I'd look into NPRTX

The manager started at the end of 1998 and has done a great job. I just have
no interest in large cap blend funds. This would be a good choice if LCB is
what you're looking for.

> then FTQGX.

Bottom 15% of category over 5 years. New manager started last year and has
done much better but still it's another LCB fund. Besides, I'm totally
unimpressed with Fidelity. For a focused fund, I like Ken Heebner's CGMFX.

MUHLX is a good fund, the manager usually has more invested in the
financials sector than I'm comfortable with but he has done a good job.

Re: MUHLX

Ed wrote:
> > then FTQGX.
>
> Bottom 15% of category over 5 years. New manager started last year and has
> done much better but still it's another LCB fund. Besides, I'm totally
> unimpressed with Fidelity. For a focused fund, I like Ken Heebner's CGMFX.
>
> MUHLX is a good fund, the manager usually has more invested in the
> financials sector than I'm comfortable with but he has done a good job.

I don't look much over a year or two these days. Don't expect to hold
them if I find something new to squeeze. Really? Although I took no
more than a cursory glance, I like what I see. But that's on returns
for the year - my bias. 80% equities, value/growth, foreign/domestic -
then to top it off they use a model stategy, computer generated,
likely. Real hodgepodge for a focus. I'm pulling a different fund
category off Yahoo's financials for MUHLX - a narrower field
comparison. Thing that stuck was the 6% YTD. Appears total-return
oriented. CGMFX ... no fair, that's midcaps. Will look more at that
later.

Re: MUHLX

I was on the wrong page when I initially looked, misread the subject as
largecaps when calling CGMFX out of place. So, score 2 points - it's a
swish for CGMFX. Fair leeway to include foreign objectives, as well as
an ambiguouity in a stated variance for focus, to include short
allowances. Suitably cagey for someone starting from economics in 1965.
I see he also got caught raking in the oil at the moment - wham, got
nailed 10% last week while I was looking over Profunds short offerings.
MUHLX seems nicely to compliment CGMFX on quarterly profit readings
over a couple years, and there's no overlap on focus (MUHLX @5% nailure
last week). I'll also back off from FTQGX after looking over quarterly
profits in comparison to each of the above. Though it has had
something of a hot spot lately, and is presently keeping up with MUHLX,
still, CGMFX appears to be carrying the meat ahead of both. To be
totally unimpressed with Fidelity, would be the same as saying I'm
totally unimpressed with Janus. What is otherwise impressive
institutional resources from a major investment house is reason I
wouldn't apply if ever again I am to gain from their advantage.

> Ed wrote:
> > Bottom 15% of category over 5 years. New manager started last year and has
> > done much better but still it's another LCB fund. Besides, I'm totally
> > unimpressed with Fidelity. For a focused fund, I like Ken Heebner's CGMFX.
> >
> > MUHLX is a good fund, the manager usually has more invested in the
> > financials sector than I'm comfortable with but he has done a good job.
>
> Flasherly wrote: CGMFX ... no fair, that's midcaps. Will look more at that
> later.