Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
An older article (2006) but its points are interesting and still pertinent. "Which is the better choice for client money, sub-advised mutual funds or funds managed in-house by the investment company?" Sub-advised mutual funds allow small investors access to firms that may require initial investments of several million dollars.
Fidelity offers Strategic Advisers Funds which manage your portfolio using subadvisors, other mutual funds and etfs to create an asset allocation that is personalized to the investor. The funds are FSCAX, FSGFX, FSCFX, FVSAX, FSMAX, FILFX, FOCIX, FUSOX and FAUDX.
Barron's claims there are a thousand such funds, a number which I'm skeptical of since journalists rarely distinguish between portfolios and share classes. That's why you forever hear folks prattle on about the 25,000 mutual funds being greater than the number of publicly-traded stocks; there are closer to 7000 funds with an average of 3.5 share classes each.
In our coverage universe, all of the Aston and Harbor funds are sub-advised, as are several of the RiverPark funds. Some of the RiverNorth funds are in-house/subadvised hybrids.
Might be interesting to compare the long term performance of Sub-Advisor's "brand name" funds such as Primecap's Aggressive Growth, POGRX, to their "sub-advised" funds such as Vanguard Primecap, VPCCX, or "brand name" POAGX vs "sub advised" VHCOX.
Bee...good note, thanks...the sub-advisers tend to fly under the radar. In the case of Primecap, and as I am a long-term holder of two of funds you mentioned, I am a huge fan. I also held Vanguard Primecap many years ago in a 401K. The Primecap team has done more for my retirement account than ANY other firm...bar none. Not even close.
Comments
In our coverage universe, all of the Aston and Harbor funds are sub-advised, as are several of the RiverPark funds. Some of the RiverNorth funds are in-house/subadvised hybrids.
David
Might be interesting to compare the long term performance of Sub-Advisor's "brand name" funds such as Primecap's Aggressive Growth, POGRX, to their "sub-advised" funds such as Vanguard Primecap, VPCCX, or "brand name" POAGX vs "sub advised" VHCOX.
I'm sure there are many others...
Mona