..the firm's AUM has grown tremendously over the past few years.

The AUM for GQC funds is actually fairly modest. What skews the average is the GS fund (GSIHX) sub-advised by GQC. Interestingly, there is not a pure GQC fund which mirrors the intent of GSIHX. Reading Jain's commentary, he clearly values stocks which provide a dividend, as he sees this plus the reinvestment of the dividend to be an excellent way to build wealth. This view is confirmed by examining the funds available on the GQC website.
I own GSIHX in a taxable account as well as an IRA. I may transfer the taxable account into GQJPX. With a TTM distribution of 4.44%, that is competitive with other international funds with a divi focus such as IDVO or SCHY, but with an emphasis on stock selection.

I put 2.4% of PV into AMZN,MSFT,GOOG over 11 years ago.
Only sold a little AMZN. So ... about 30%..

Rajiv Jain has performed admirably as an investor.
I considered investing with GQG but "key person risk" in Mr. Jain is a real concern for me.
Also, the firm's AUM has grown tremendously over the past few years.

Remember, T+3 changed to T+2 only in 2017 (not that long ago). And before T+3 was T+5.
Anyway, we should welcome T+1 on 5/28/24. This change was announced a couple of years ago, but firms were given a window of time to get ready for it.
https://www.finra.org/investors/insights/understanding-settlement-cycles

About time,, when did computers come on the scene... 1970-80? Only took 40 years to get to T+1

No kidding. Progress, right? While T+3 was needed when things were paper-based, I suspect it's probably stuck around so long b/c brokerages liked having T+3 and T+2 days to collect interest on unsettled funds? I guess the SEC finally said, "no, this is bad for investors."

Rajiv JAIN was the new Barron's Roundtable member this year and was featured in the January 29, 2024 issue. Get a copy for full details. He founded his firm GQG Partners a few years ago, but he has been around and is well regarded. His thinking may be a bit unconventional sometimes. You should find lots of mentions of GQG at MFO.
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1330/thread

About time,, when did computers come on the scene... 1970-80? Only took 40 years to get to T+1

@BenWP, US-style capitalism has favored shareholders (not necessarily an equitable division of profits), but EM firms have funneled the dough into the hands of corrupt officials, founding families, and antidemocratic governments.

I couldn’t agree more. I have to hold my noise investing in 529 plan that have Total International market index fund that has 20% EM. There are limited choice available. These days investing in EM is much worse than 20 years ago.
Buffet said that “there are few better place to invest than America” and he is spot on.

If there is an EM fund to be in, GQGIX has been the one. India has been on a tear and Brazil morerecently is doing well after many years of not. Good job and good luck @PRESSmUP.

As long ago as 2021, J. Rekenthaler of M* wrote:
"Ten years ago, many pundits foresaw a rebound in emerging-markets stocks, on the theory that they were worthy investments that had temporarily lost popularity. This "fashion argument" has failed the test of time. Such stocks have languished for good reason. Emerging-markets countries have treated their insiders much better than they have their outsider shareholders. For their stocks to appeal to long-term U.S. investors, that habit must change."
US-style capitalism has favored shareholders (not necessarily an equitable division of profits), but EM firms have funneled the dough into the hands of corrupt officials, founding families, and antidemocratic governments.

My experience with emerging markets has been along the lines of submerging markets and sunk costs. :(

Yes. Right out of Disney Studios - “A tale as old as time ...”
EM as an investment has not lived up to expectations. My first experience owning one was in the mid-80s. A “no-go” even then. The fund folded a decade later. @sfnative is spot-on with the reasons. Maybe we fickle investors play a small part too by moving money in and out of these funds and handicapping the managers. And fees are high.
I was being just a bit “tongue-in-cheek” referencing “speculative” opportunities. Yes - get the timing right and you can make money. I’ve had some luck in the past with PRLAX (Latin America) and DODEX. But speculative ventures by their very nature tend to be relatively small. So you’re not going to move the needle very much. Global / international funds that include EM are fine. However, in recent years I’ve moved away from plain vanilla equity funds into L/S and other types that can better hedge downside.

Many brokerages post bullish forecast on EM for many years. Relationships between China and US have deteriorated in recent years and many firms are moving their supply chains to other countries.
Also foreign investment is drying up in China. There are ample evidences of splitting the global economy into two. So where are the opportunities for investors?
Like other posters said, many developed market funds already have some % of EM exposure. Even big tech companies have sizable revenue from China, Why increase the risk?

Before I was blocked from reading it further, I think I saw the OP linked article state EMs have the best growth opportunities over the next 5-10 years, and if it doesn't all start now, it will within the next 1-2 years. Say what? Not quite the ringing endorsement I'd need to jump off the EM plank!
Anyone considering EMs needs to study the Callan Chart (below), and unless they are the amongst the world's best market timers, think again, and Just Say No!
Click on the 2023 PDF Chart at
https://www.callan.com/periodic-table/

Hard pass, no thank you.
Said it on here a couple years ago, stated back then I wouldn't invest a dime in China and that was the right call.
Why would you risk moving monies and investing in places where most couldn't pick them out on a map, don't have the same governance related to capital markets and rule of law and what exactly are you investing in other than some of kind of view on currency rates that you cannot invest in an American company and get the exposure that you are looking for?
Maybe, just maybe I would invest in an overseas holding company like Jardine to get exposure to a large and growing population but even then, nah, probably not..

EM has been nothing but a black hole for me. Sold my two funds with relatively high EM holdings last year, and I’m sleeping better. My best performing EM fund (SFGIX) gained scarcely more than a mediocre bond fund in more than a decade of owning. Others fared even worse. (Eg, MAPIX) Mind you, various “experts” have been touting EM for many, many years — and they’ve been wrong. I don’t need to own any more investments that I might not live long enough to see gains.

As SAI (Statement of Additional Information) already had a meaning, the SEC shouldn't have allowed Fidelity to use SAI for another purpose (really, made up, because it doesn't even follow from Strategic Advisors LLC).
BTW, over the years, some info that used to be in prospectus is now relegated to SAI. And some firms like Price/TROW have a combined SAI for most of its funds and that SAI is several hundred pages (most firms SAIs are for multiple funds, but TROW over did that).

Thank you, @Hank, for the kind words. This month, in "Patriotic Millionaires and the Uncertainty of Taxes", I show that the rich borrow and invest the money in stocks much as you described in ”New Report: All Stock Portfolio Beats Stock and Bond Mix Over Time (Originally From Bloomberg)”. The tax system allows the rich to withdraw their money at the lower capital gains rate which are not incurred until the stock is sold, and the "Stepped Up" basis benefits heirs.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2024/02/patriotic-millionaires-and-the-uncertainty-of-taxes/
Those of us not in the "rich" category can still benefit. I have about 15% of my portfolio in after-tax accounts in a long-term investment bucket. In "No, The 60/40 Portfolio Is Not Dead", I show that stock valuations are high so now is a good time to be more conservative.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2024/02/no-the-60-40-portfolio-is-not-dead/
When valuations fall in the next one to three years, I plan on increasing the allocations to stocks in these after-tax accounts to maybe even 100% to take advantage of the lower capital gains that are not occurred until the stock is sold. I will use a variable withdrawal strategy to withdraw extra from Traditional IRAs (Bucket #2) when market conditions are favorable and put the funds in a short-term Bucket for living expenses for when market conditions are unfavorable.
My article last month did not include taxes in some of the analysis. Having pensions and Social Security allows me to be less dependent upon withdrawing from savings. I will be adjusting my strategy based in part on the thoughtful insights in the MFO Discussion Board, and the research behind these articles.

What are people's views on Emerging Markets for the next 5 years? Lazard and AQR are very bullish. Is it always a tough sell with the BATNA being the S&P500/magnificent 7?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-15/quant-fund-aqr-doubles-down-on-bullish-call-for-emerging-markets?utm_source=website&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=copy

MS should have been fired years ago because he has been wrong for years.
(link)

There are many strategists that have been wrong. Too bad they are rarely held accountable. Investor's memories are shorter than one would think!

There was an argument in M* that moat is better than quality. And indeed, MOAT beats FUQIX, QUAL since its inception, though FUQIX is better during last 5 years, and especially during the last year: MOAT does not contain any of Mag 7 companies.