@MikeRIMIX is a concentrated mid cap Asian EM fund whose objective is capital appreciation. It has a market cap of 3.2B invested in only six countries. Accordingly, its benchmark is the MSCI EM Asian Index.
On the other hand, MAPIX is a large cap growth and income fund seeking total return. It has a market cap of 32B invested in
12 Asian countries. Its benchmark is the MSCi AC (All Country) Asia Pacific Index. While it is an Asian EM product like RIMIX, it is not a broadly diversified EM fund either, only a more diversified Asian one. RIMIX has no geographical allocations outside of Asia, MAPIX only piecemeal ones.
The 30% allocation to Japan in MAPIX suits its objective of investing in both developed and emerging economies in an effort to capture that country's returns. RIMIX does not invest in Japan because it is a developed economy, not emerging, and lacks the macro characteristics the manager is seeking. MAPIX also invests in Taiwan and S. Korea, both of which MSCI identifies as emerging, but some argue -- including some at Matthews -- that if one examines their economies that they too are developed. (FTSE upgraded S. Korea to developed several years ago.) RIMIX does not invest in either country because the manager also sees them as developed but more specifically as lacking investable attributes, thereby showing a distinct investment bias right or wrong.
As for someone not needing more than one EM fund, I suppose that appears to make sense prima facie; however, I'm skeptical and feel that investors can profit from the differences in EM funds because of how they vary in objective, market cap, geographical allocation, and so on. Each of us has to decide.
You can see what performance differences exist by entering RIMIX in the quote box at M* and then MAPIX in the chart box that will show how the funds compare since the inception of
RIMIX. Comparing the two funds Total Trailing Return under the Performance Tab gives a slightly different look. But perhaps you already know this and have reached your own conclusion. I'm not arguing for one vs. the other, in being wrong or right, but only in citing the data.
I am interested in the webinar because the manager's other calls have been informative. Perhaps others will find it useful too in evaluating how they invest in EM.
Where our EM returns come from is an individual preference, but it's worth pointing out the specific differences in how those returns are produced and then choose accordingly.
