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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Z Best Place to Talk Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron McKinnon who wrote (38978)	3/27/2002 8:27:09 AM
From: Larry S.	Respond to of 53068

the article in question: MUTUAL FUNDS Cautious Janus Keeps Edging Away From Highly Volatile Tech Stocks If you're counting on a sharp rebound in technology shares, bear in mind that one-time tech stock fanatics at Janus aren't. The Denver fund shop surged to prominence in the late 1990s by betting big on tech stocks. But some of the firm's most aggressive managers have moved sharply away from the sector, according to the latest portfolio data from the company. Instead of technology, Janus, a unit of Stilwell Financial, loaded up on less-racy stocks like Safeway, Berkshire Hathaway and Philip Morris in the fourth quarter. More recent data indicate they haven't changed their mind. For shareholders of the funds, less tech-heavy portfolios should lead to less mercurial returns. But there will also be less upside if the growth style or tech sector starts to rally. The firm points out that the broadening of its portfolios reflects a change in market conditions, not investment style. "If our research was telling us that technology was the place to be, we'd be there," says company spokeswoman Shelley Peterson. "The same research methodology that led us to aggressive names in 1998 and 1999 is leading us to the more defensive names we're in today." The about-face is all the more stark considering Janus' recent past. Its stock funds rode aggressive bets on sizzling technology, media and telecommunications stocks to a 74% average gain in 1999 and record sales the next year. But many of those prescient picks have since turned poisonous. Over the past year some of the firm's most aggressive managers have struck a more diversified stance, taking money out of tech shares and spreading it among less racy fare like financial and pharmaceutical stocks, or simply leaving it on the sidelines. "The mellowing trend is happening," says Brian Portnoy, an analyst who covers Janus funds at Chicago research house Morningstar. "Over the last year it's clear they've backed off their aggressive stances, especially in some of the larger funds like Janus Twenty." The Janus Twenty fund, managed by Scott Schoelzel and closed to new investors, had 62% of its money in tech stocks at the start of 2000 and slashed that stake to 18% by the end of that year. At the end of January Schoelzel had just 9% of his fund's money in tech stocks, well below the 20% weighting for tech in the S&P 500. He also had some 30% of the fund in cash at the start of this month, according to the latest data from Janus. Portfolio manager Jim Goff dropped the Janus Enterprise fund's tech position from 66% at the end of 1999 to 12% by Jan. 31 when he left the fund to oversee Janus' research efforts. Jonathan Coleman took the reins and the fund had 23% of its money in cash at the start of this month. Warren Lammert, manager of the Janus Mercury fund, had a 47% tech position at the end of 1999, but it was just 10% on Jan. 31. The migration toward a more valuation-conscious approach isn't shocking in light of deep losses over the past two years. Since the Nasdaq's peak in March 2000, the Janus Enterprise, Mercury, and Olympus funds are all down more than 60%, compared to a 64% fall for the Nasdaq and an 18% tumble for the S&P 500. The funds' results in last year's fourth quarter illustrate the shift away from the tech sector. The average tech fund rocketed up 36% the quarter, according to Morningstar. Rather than soar in a tech-led burst as they did in 1999, however, three-quarters of Janus' domestic stock funds trailed their average peer. "They're never going to achieve that kind of 1999 performance again because they're trying to take a more tepid and sensible approach," says Philadelphia-based consultant Burt Greenwald. That said, of the dozen direct-sold Janus stock funds that have a five year record, only Enterprise trails its average peer over that stretch. And some traditionally tamer Janus funds have fared well with the less risky style. The Janus Growth & Income and Janus Core Equity funds have consistently stayed ahead of their average competitor over the past five years. Still, a look at shifts among the firm's top overall holdings illustrates a drastic change in taste. While longtime favorites, like AOL Time Warner, still top the list of firmwide holdings, Janus has scaled back other one-time obsessions. Janus trimmed its firm-wide position in Cisco Systems to 38 million shares at the start of 2002 from 182.8 million shares at the end of 2000. Janus stock funds sold more than 100 million shares in Nokia during 2001, though it still owns about 165 million shares in the Finnish handset maker. EMC vanished from Janus' holdings altogether in the fourth quarter. Along with Safeway and Philip Morris, Janus found itself snapping up stocks in the classically defensive pharmaceutical group, the biggest target being Eli Lilly. Some recent investors in Janus funds might see the fund's diversification as a salve, but it could also make it harder for managers to stand out from the crowd. And those stalwart tech-hungry types who have stuck with Janus might be disappointed. "A lot of folks own a different fund than what they thought they bought," says Mr. Greenwald.

To: Ron McKinnon who wrote (38978)	3/27/2002 8:32:59 AM
From: Larry S.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 53068

had an interesting chat yesterday - friend pointed out that 2 years ago, almost to the day, "value" funds were despised because of their horrid performance versus the go-go mo-mo of the techs in 98 and 99. In the intervening period, value stocks have shone while most of the growth/tech sector has crashed. the sentiment today towards the growth sector is extremely similiar to that evinced toward the value sector 2 years ago. hmm, is there a message here? been around too long?? speak for yourself, bub. I'm still grasshopper. gggg larry