CEF's & ETF's

Top 5 year to date:

PowerShares
PBW +23.15%
PSI +19.20%
PHO +13.41%
PGJ +12.30%
PXN +11.23%

Asia
IIF +29.18%
CHN +28.99%
IF +26.04%
GCH +25.92%
IFN +20.51%

Latin
BZF +28.05%
EWZ +26.46%
LDF +21.09%
LAQ +20.16%
ILF +16.38%

Europe
TRF +27.12%
RNE +19.25%
GF +15.11%
CEE +11.52%
EWO +9.21%

Emerging Markets
MSF +16.79%
EMF +14.29%
EEM +12.07%
VWO +9.89%

The above results are limited to those ETF's & CEF's that I track. It is
possible that a higher performing fund could exist in one or more
categories.

Inexperienced investors should not use this list as a buy list but rather a
starting point for further study. Some of these funds were much higher at
one point this year and if purchased at the high would have resulted in a
meaningful loss.

Re: CEF's & ETF's

Most of those have an emerging mkt flavor.
Strange that the mutual funds seem to trump
etfs in that area by so darn much. I thought Ed
was a fan of the first on this list, on which almost
every single fund beats Ed's best-etf returns:

Re: CEF's & ETF's

"dumbstruck" <> wrote in message
news:
> Most of those have an emerging mkt flavor.
> Strange that the mutual funds seem to trump
> etfs in that area by so darn much. I thought Ed
> was a fan of the first on this list, on which almost
> every single fund beats Ed's best-etf returns:
>

When I click on your link, I must get a different list than you do.
My list says the category returned 9.73%.
If I were to integrate the funds I track:

1. MSF +16.79%
2. EMF +14.29%
3. #1 on your list is TRP Em Eur & Med +13.45%
4. EEM +12.07%
5. VWO +9.89%

I think you need to have a cup of coffee and look again.

Re: CEF's & ETF's

> I think you need to have a cup of coffee and look again.

Oh, right, you were talking about just the 6 weeks YTD. Gives a nice
show and tell, but I think for investment decisions you need to focus
more on like 6 months (and keeping 1, 3, 12, 24 in mind). So I drowsely
switched to the issue that I thought was key although shouldn't have
implied you being wrong.

I recalled observing how well many actively managed gen Emerg Mkt funds
were doing vs some of the hot emerg country or region funds, and so
spot checked that theory out against your etfs:

Pretty cool, yahoo now lets you overload the number of tickers with
only an error msg.

Spot checks like that suggested funds like tremx or femkx, which offer
much less stress than something like one country alone, doing quite
competitively recently. Usually you take a huge penalty for this peace
of mind, but it looks like now you can leave to a mgr to sweat out when
to sell superhot Latin American positions, for example, without so much
loss. Maybe also hold India and east Europe funds, which are underheld
by the general emerg funds IIRC.

Re: CEF's & ETF's

"dumbstruck" <> wrote .com...

>> I think you need to have a cup of coffee and look again.
>
> Oh, right, you were talking about just the 6 weeks YTD. Gives a nice
> show and tell, but I think for investment decisions you need to focus
> more on like 6 months (and keeping 1, 3, 12, 24 in mind). So I drowsely
> switched to the issue that I thought was key although shouldn't have
> implied you being wrong.

I disagee, 6 months can be a long time in one of these funds. As far as
keeping the past in mind,
tell me how to buy it 6 months ago.

A few things:
1. The list has nothing to do with my personal returns
2. It is a list of CEF's and ETF's that I track
3. What your time frame is has no relevance to the list
4. None of the funds are five letter funds
5. It's informational only, not a buy list

> I recalled observing how well many actively managed gen Emerg Mkt funds
> were doing vs some of the hot emerg country or region funds, and so
> spot checked that theory out against your etfs:
>
> Pretty cool, yahoo now lets you overload the number of tickers with
> only an error msg.

They are not "my" ETF's.

> Spot checks like that suggested funds like tremx or femkx, which offer
> much less stress than something like one country alone, doing quite
> competitively recently. Usually you take a huge penalty for this peace
> of mind, but it looks like now you can leave to a mgr to sweat out when
> to sell superhot Latin American positions, for example, without so much
> loss. Maybe also hold India and east Europe funds, which are underheld
> by the general emerg funds IIRC.

For me, the problem with buying a fund like TREMX is that I often sell
before three months have past. This would trigger a 2% redemption fee
putting the best fund on the Morningstar list right out of first place.
ETF's and CEF's have the advantage for short term investors.

BTW, do you really consider TREMX to be a 'diversified' emerging markets
fund?
Morningstar does, I don't think TRP does. It has no Asia or Latin America.

Re: CEF's & ETF's

Ed wrote:
> I disagee, 6 months can be a long time in one of these funds. As far as
> keeping the past in mind,
> tell me how to buy it 6 months ago.

No. I never presented 6 months returns boiled to a number. On the
graph I included you can fluidly focus on longer and shorter periods,
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY progressively weight the more recent portions to
the right as more relevant. You can visually ID responses to
particular events, even guessing at year end distributions, etc,
although probably pull in alternate total return data when seriously
approaching a decision.

> A few things:
....
> They are not "my" ETF's.

You made that so clear in the first place so there seemed no need for
me to respecify - I treat this not as a legal proceeding but a
brainstorming medium.

> For me, the problem with buying a fund like TREMX is that I often sell
> before three months have past. This would trigger a 2% redemption fee
> putting the best fund on the Morningstar list right out of first place.
> ETF's and CEF's have the advantage for short term investors.

Right, but I was saying less agressive folks don't so much HAVE to play
this stressful game for emerging countries so much as they did in the
past. Not sure why, but the generic funds seem to be doing smarter
trading than a year or so ago when you were almost forced into the more
specific fund/etfs for returns. I think they are smarter in allocation
among countries, and maybe doing stock picking the etf's can't with
their indices.

> BTW, do you really consider TREMX to be a 'diversified' emerging markets
> fund?
> Morningstar does, I don't think TRP does. It has no Asia or Latin America.

Dunno, because I only know of some many month old report that tremx has
for holdings which is a pain to download anyway. Seem to be heavy in
Russia and Turkey, but not suffering much from the risk. FEMKX has
their country mix updated for YE easy to view - wow, it just amazed me
with some of it's clever (for then) asset allocations...

Re: CEF's & ETF's

dumbstruck wrote:
> No. I never presented 6 months returns boiled to a number. On the
> graph I included you can fluidly focus on longer and shorter periods,
> AND MOST IMPORTANTLY progressively weight the more recent portions to
> the right as more relevant.

I do. At a high/low, no concessions, straight approach to stock trade
comissions, I weigh ETF/CEFs very much respective to a market momentum
sectors exhibit. As if within alpha coefficients to compare by an
index, a specie ETF might evolve by, truer to an object focus field for
profit to personify, if and while not a beta operand volatility
progressively follows, overall, through broader emerging markets to
factor a phylum most pertinent.

> I was saying less agressive folks don't so much HAVE to play
> this stressful game for emerging countries so much as they did in the
> past. Not sure why, but the generic funds seem to be doing smarter
> trading than a year or so ago when you were almost forced into the more
> specific fund/etfs for returns. I think they are smarter in allocation
> among countries, and maybe doing stock picking the etf's can't with
> their indices.

If I thought I truly understood why, I'd suspect I'd be deluding
myself.

> Dunno, because I only know of some many month old report that tremx has
> for holdings which is a pain to download anyway. Seem to be heavy in
> Russia and Turkey, but not suffering much from the risk.

Politographics - given a social infux demographics has economically to
deploy within some traditional resilience of Marist influence, there's
bound to be quasi-categorical stands between western and eastern
Europe, as a whole, or industrialized nations along the Pacific rim and
China proper. Apart from Greenspan, I haven't found entirely
reasonable an immanent meld of utilitarianism over third-world economic
exploitation.

-Visualize whirled peas.