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.
Good Lord. Look at these over their since-inception lifetime. Yes, I know managers have changed. But with Fido, sometimes it's the thought that counts.
The chief takeaway however is the absence of FLVCX. You want solid Fido performance with a solid manager and thrills and high outcomes, forget these, go with Soviero and FLVCX, period.
Ah, yes, the Fidelity New Millenium Fund, another good example (and, apparently, getting better) of how a fund, given enough time, can "reconstruct itself" by erasing history and memories.
I remember giving this fund some consideration in the mid-00s. At the time, if I'm recalling correctly, the fund was characterized variously as a multi-cap growth fund, or as a mid-cap growth fund (in Fidelity's own quarterly reports), that would push the envelope wherever the manager felt the best growth opportunities could be found, even if that meant a higher turnover (which were, in fact, invariably high). I don't recall the specific word "aggressive" ever applied to it. Top 20-30 hldgs were always an eclectic bunch, so it held some interest for me; however, I could not determine with any comfort level from where its returns actually came, and I suspected quite a bit came from momentum-chasing and IPO pops, not so much from stock picking acumen. There also had been a recent manager change, and then the financial crisis swoon occurred, and so it fell off my consideration list.
Now curious that it is characterized as an aggressive LC growth fund, without any indication that it has ever been anything else. Looking at Fidelity's fund snapshot and FMILX equity style map: https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/316200302 Voila! Historically, according to the map, it has never existed as a fund whose hldgs have ever been predominantly midcap-anything.
It looks like it has done very well, since 2009 (?), as a LC fund with an aggressive bent. And that may be where it remains, for----evah. But its 10 yr and since-inception stats are irrelevant to peer comparison, because back then it was not LC. It would be only the most diligent new investor, willing to get into the way-back machine, who would ever be able discover this fact about FMILX's long-term record.
Huh? You saw that it changed managers in summer 06, right?
Since then it has outperformed, with notably less 08-09 dip, FAIRX, FLVCX, CGMFX, WVALX, FLPSX (speaking of MC space), DODGX, matched PRBLX, but outdone by YAFFX, to name a few.
Wish I had owned it.
Without gloating I would suggest: you shoulda bought. New manager!
This factual analysis is from hardly the most diligent investor.
Funny I vacated positions in FDCAX FEMKX and FSPTX in the last 30 days. Looking for less risk and similar returns. Made a small purchase in New Millenium Fund.
Comments
The chief takeaway however is the absence of FLVCX. You want solid Fido performance with a solid manager and thrills and high outcomes, forget these, go with Soviero and FLVCX, period.
I remember giving this fund some consideration in the mid-00s. At the time, if I'm recalling correctly, the fund was characterized variously as a multi-cap growth fund, or as a mid-cap growth fund (in Fidelity's own quarterly reports), that would push the envelope wherever the manager felt the best growth opportunities could be found, even if that meant a higher turnover (which were, in fact, invariably high). I don't recall the specific word "aggressive" ever applied to it. Top 20-30 hldgs were always an eclectic bunch, so it held some interest for me; however, I could not determine with any comfort level from where its returns actually came, and I suspected quite a bit came from momentum-chasing and IPO pops, not so much from stock picking acumen. There also had been a recent manager change, and then the financial crisis swoon occurred, and so it fell off my consideration list.
Now curious that it is characterized as an aggressive LC growth fund, without any indication that it has ever been anything else. Looking at Fidelity's fund snapshot and FMILX equity style map:
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/316200302
Voila! Historically, according to the map, it has never existed as a fund whose hldgs have ever been predominantly midcap-anything.
It looks like it has done very well, since 2009 (?), as a LC fund with an aggressive bent. And that may be where it remains, for----evah. But its 10 yr and since-inception stats are irrelevant to peer comparison, because back then it was not LC. It would be only the most diligent new investor, willing to get into the way-back machine, who would ever be able discover this fact about FMILX's long-term record.
Since then it has outperformed, with notably less 08-09 dip, FAIRX, FLVCX, CGMFX, WVALX, FLPSX (speaking of MC space), DODGX, matched PRBLX, but outdone by YAFFX, to name a few.
Wish I had owned it.
Without gloating I would suggest: you shoulda bought. New manager!
This factual analysis is from hardly the most diligent investor.
BWDIK