Nayan, Anyone can call himself a value investor, but if he owns AOL and Dell, he is a momentum geek, with no concept of value. There is also a Growth and Income fund that has no income. So, look at what they do, not what they say they are.
Indices usually beat the average fund because the funds are the market, after fees and expenses. The average, by definition, cannot beat the average, and, then, if you throw in fees and expenses, even slightly above avg. cannot beat the avg.
In manic up markets, the indices usually beat managed funds fairly soundly. That is because the funds have fees, they have inflows that are cash for a minimum of a day or two, and even the craziest fund manager is not crazy enough to be fully invested at all times. By the same token, the indices usually lead the assault on the downside.
The general rep around Boston is that MFS is not a very bright fund manager. That was certainly true of the folks I knew who worked there, but it is all new guys now. And some of the funds show some fairly good results, better than the smart firms like Fidelity and Scudder, in many cases. I don't know John Ballen.
MB |
