I am looking for a no-load fund that is really no load. I have been
looking at the Oppenheimer Emerging Growth Fund, but the prospectus is
hard for me to read. They seem to have 5 classes of shares, some of
which have fees, others that don't.
I would be grateful if anyone could help in deciphering prospectuses to
find a real no-load fund of this category.
sarpesius
Emerging growth - sounds foreign. Everybody is going make money off
your fund investments, some less than others, which lessors qualify by
a no-load distinction. Half a point is about as good as it gets, and
you're going to chance skirting indexes or straigt ETFs and ADRs
without water. Mine are average for the category, which couldn'I t care
less about, ERs, than a subjective return by balance over object sector
comparisons.
wrote:
> I am looking for a no-load fund that is really no load. I have been
> looking at the Oppenheimer Emerging Growth Fund, but the prospectus is
> hard for me to read. They seem to have 5 classes of shares, some of
> which have fees, others that don't.
>
> I would be grateful if anyone could help in deciphering prospectuses to
> find a real no-load fund of this category.
Not sure of the category for the Oppenheimer fund, but at least one
good US mid-cap growth fund is T. Rowe Price Mid-cap growth Fund
RPMGX. For small-caps
consider Wasatch Core WGROX, but it is closed right
now. Wasatch also has a heritage growth fund, which
is mid-cap. It is rather new, but Wasatch has excellent
funds. I prefer value funds for B&H. The only growth fund I have is
WGROX.
Kaspa
"kaspakhine" <> wrote in message
news:
> Not sure of the category for the Oppenheimer fund, but at least one
> good US mid-cap growth fund is T. Rowe Price Mid-cap growth Fund
> RPMGX.
It's closed.
For small-caps
> consider Wasatch Core WGROX, but it is closed right
> now. Wasatch also has a heritage growth fund, which
> is mid-cap. It is rather new, but Wasatch has excellent
> funds. I prefer value funds for B&H. The only growth fund I have is
> WGROX.
You're a brave man. If only that fund had a manager.
For mid caps, the S&P400 has been doing just fine. I'm not an index fan but
many of the better no-loads in the category are closed.
PowerShares has both a growth and value version.
I'm watching these. They also offer small caps, PWT & PWY.
A new fund this week is PowerShares Zacks Small Cap Portfolio, PZJ.
<> wrote in message
news:
> I am looking for a no-load fund that is really no load. I have been
> looking at the Oppenheimer Emerging Growth Fund, but the prospectus is
> hard for me to read. They seem to have 5 classes of shares, some of
> which have fees, others that don't.
>
> I would be grateful if anyone could help in deciphering prospectuses to
> find a real no-load fund of this category.
I've noticed that while people are suggesting favorite funds, your question
remains unanswered.
The SEC has some fine, plain English information on many investment topics.
Here's their essay on reading a prospectus:
In that, you'll find a link to their essay on fund fees and expenses:
And here's their basic overview of mutual funds in general:
It discusses different share classes (the object of your confusion) a bit.
For help on Oppenheimer share classes specifically, you can read:
(the prospectus itself is at:
)
Short version: Class A, B, and C are "retail" shares, meaning that you can
purchase them directly.
Class A shares have front end loads (Oppenheimer takes 5.75% from the amount
you send in, and invests the rest).
Class B shares don't take money up front, but skim a little bit at a time
(about 1%/year - if you look at the fees table in the prospectus, you'll see
that the total fees for class B are about 1% higher than for class A). Over
time, Oppenheimer gets roughly the same percentage as if you'd bought the
class A shares and paid up front. If you try to sell in under 6 years (to
save the amount they are skimming), Oppenheimer will charge you a back end
load.
Class C shares charge you a 1% load up front (like A shares, just a lower
amount), and skim about 1%/year (like B shares). But unlike B shares (where
the skimming stops after six years), C shares skim 1%/year forever. But
they won't charge you a fee to get out.
Forget about class N and Y shares - N shares are special shares for 401k
plans and the like, Y shares are only offered to institutional investors
(not individuals like you).
Most fund screeners will help you find no load funds. For example, Lipper's
fund screener, at
will
let you find no load funds in a variety of categories. The Oppenheimer fund
is classified as small cap growth by Lipper.
To find similar no load funds, in box 1 (fund type), you would select
"Equity Funds", and "Small Cap Growth" as the Lipper classification. In box
3, you would click on "No Load" (under Load Type). That currently returns
97 funds.
--
Mark Freeland
thanks much Mr. Freeland.
sarpesius
Of all these class options, which would make the most money for a
relatively small sum invested if left in for 10 years? Classes A,B,and
C seem about the same.
the sarp
<> wrote in message
news:
> Of all these class options, which would make the most money for a
> relatively small sum invested if left in for 10 years? Classes A,B,and
> C seem about the same.
>
> the sarp
I tried the calculator that I linked for you.
I used American Funds AMCAP, invested $10,000 for 10 years at 10%.
Here's how the shares did:
A:$22,821.50
B:$22,746.17
C:$22,261.40
Fees & charges:
A:$1,616.82
B:$1,937.89
C:$2,341.95
<> wrote in message
news:
> Of all these class options, which would make the most money for a
> relatively small sum invested if left in for 10 years? Classes A,B,and
> C seem about the same.
>
> the sarp
>
wrote:
>
> Of all these class options, which would make the most money for a
> relatively small sum invested if left in for 10 years? Classes A,B,and
> C seem about the same.
Class B and class C shares usually have about the same expense ratio, so
their returns will be the same for a few years. However, after some
number of years (which depends upon the particular fund), class B shares
usually convert automatically to class A shares, with lower expenses
(and thus higher returns).
Using your Oppenheimer Emerging Growth as an example, again, these class
B shares convert after six years:
That means that if you hold the shares longer than six years, the class
B shares (now class A shares) will earn more than the class C shares
that continue with the higher expenses.
The difference between classes A and B returns is usually fairly small,
and depends upon (among other things) how well the market performs, and
how many years it takes before the class B shares convert to the class A
shares.
C shares are of course worth less over long investment periods (like 10
years), since they are effectively B shares that never convert to
cheaper A shares.
You are still better off (in the sense of keeping more money in the
fund) by investing in a no load fund.
--
Mark Freeland