Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : T/FIF Portfolio -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (978)	6/18/1999 2:00:00 PM
From: Pseudo Biologist	Respond to of 1073

Thanks for the clarification on 1-year vs. year-to-date; I missed that. These are the NAVs for FBDIX for some key dates: 31-Dec-98 25.27 28-May-98 26.02 (actually not that different) The minus -8 % figure (from May 98 or the similar of about -5% one for YTD) for now is irrelevant because there is no comparable figure available for "bounce". Within the uncertainty of when exactly "bounce" got started, I think the +30% versus +80% or so comparison is relevant, and the difference dramatic enough for me. David's comment re. taxes is not relevant, actually, and you can win. All performance numbers of mutual funds are reported before taxes. Funds do not pay taxes; they do distributions to shareholders, if they have net interest, dividend or capital gains. The fund shareholders then go on to pay taxes on those gains if they hold the fund in a taxable account. Usually for the purpose of these exercises (e.g. newsletter rec. records, mutual funds, VD portfolio, etc.) one can assume everything is held in an IRA, so taxes are not part of the equation. And yes, you can report fund performances after taking out the loads; that's fair too. And yes, von Emster's fruit is not polished, and I am not eating it -g- The performance of Global Health is dreadful for sure; I had been focusing on the other one (also bad, but has been around for a shorter while, so it hasn't had a chance to look as bad - yet),and did not notice that. And now let's wait for the year anniversary of "bounce" to get all these fruits sorted out. PB