Mike, Eps depends upon which set of stats you use. It was a lousy first half, even with the phoniest of the numbers.
Gabelli is a smart guy and I do own his convertible securities fund. But his value approach is too rigid to do well in all market environments and you rarely see any of his funds on the best or worst performers list for any period. I think that is a bad statistic. Fidelity, on the other hand, has some awful funds, but they have some that are always on the best and worst lists for almost any period you can name. They basically treat their customers as though they are the investment pros and then just shoot for the moon with whatever style these "pros" choose. And, since they cover the waterfront, they are always in the right and wrong parts of the market. I think the Gabelli approach is intellectually more honest, but guess which approach makes more money for the fund managers? <G>
Not surprisingly, I prefer the more flexible funds where the pros are the guys who have been managing money for awhile. There are almost no flexible, truly managed, funds left.
MB |
