maverick61. Yes, thanks for mentioning. I wasn't aware of it.
I'm still holding IIF from when it was mentioned here. I don't see much difference in performance between it and MINDX:
finance.yahoo.com
I suspect management fees might also be important for long-term holders too, although I haven't paid attention to this. I see MINDX fees are 2%. For IIF, I have 1.44% (seems low). I've no idea if what's thrown into or kept out of the "fees" category are the same for both funds.
Morgan Stanley (IIF manager and presumed - ha - fiduciary) has a nasty habit of occasionally offering new shares of its closed-end funds at under market value price. This is good for them because it gets them more monies to invest and charge fees on, but it drops the market price of fund shares held by current shareholders.
I assume MINDX and IIF portfolios are different because managers have different goals, perspectives, skills. If stock performance is comparable though, then paying a premium over NAV with IIF adds a layer of volatility because as noted, the premiums can and do fluctuate. Which means to me that MINDX would be the better investment.
I like MINDX's site, especially the monthly commentary section - which unfortunately was updated only through May.
I note that MINDX has underperformed the benchmark Bombay index. (I'm looking at performance since fund inception 10/31/05):
matthewsfunds.com
If IIF and MINDX are correlated, and if MINDX is or continues to be a laggard to the Bombay Stock Exchange 100 Index, then for my money, I believe I'd consider forgoing being in an actively managed fund that charges 1.4%, and just continue to bet on India through the 100 Index. My question to anybody: is there a way to just buy this Index, like we have here in USA with inexpensively managed index funds? |
