Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

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.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

A replacement for OAKGX?

edited May 2012 in Fund Discussions
I have started looking for a potential replacement to OAKGX (Oakmark Global) which I have held for
a long time. Recent performance is middle of the road (Percent rank in category according
to M*: 3Y (51), 5Y (39). I was also not quite happy with its decline in 2008 and 2011, as I think value
funds should have lower downside. Are there better alternatives out there? The ones I have been
looking at are ARTGX and ARTHX, or potentially a combination of a good US value fund like YAFFX
and a good international fund. For international funds I have looked at SSIFX (kind of surprised
that this fund is not that well-known) and DODFX. First Eagle funds look good, but they either have
load or too high minimum requirements. Any comments on these? Any other suggestions?

Other pure stock funds I own are WAGOX, WAEMX, FAIRX and RYSEX. Majority of my portfolio
is in balanced funds OAKBX, FPACX and PRPFX.


  • beebee
    edited May 2012
    Hi Kaspa,
    A few that I came across:
    CIGEX, Calamos Global Equity
    WGRNX, Wintergreen Investor Fund
    SGENX,First Eagle Global A Fund
    and actually,
    OAKWX, Oakmark Global Select I

    Here's a 5 year chart with your fund and the suggestions above:
  • Using Smartmoney's 3 year lookback rearview mirror (tough to drive this way...)

    What about VHGEX - Vanguard Global (see scatter chart in link)
  • Perhaps just keeping equity and fixed separate. I do own SGENX but started using more MWEFX and WASYX with PIMIX and PAUIX and my core bond fund MWTRX.
  • Reply to @ibartman:

    Nice risk tool I haven't used in a I know what to do on this rainy day. Thanks
  • I'd highly recommend Artisan's Samra and O'Keefe. Since their ARTKX is closed, ARTGX is the only option for new investors. Just be aware it's almost 100% developed markets and mostly large cap, and typically owns more in North America than many global funds. But as I recall, OAKGX has some of those same characteristics, so it might be a wash as far as portfolio composition goes.

    The Saturna/Amana funds are mostly top-notch, imho. SSIFX generally holds a lot of cash, so the outperformance is pretty dependent on the occasional down-market, when it really excels.

    As far as judging past performance, 3-year returns mostly reflect a one-direction market. Balancing the 3-year view with 5-year is a good idea, since the latter takes in more of the diversity of market conditions.
  • I'm also a fan and investor of ARTGX which is also one of David Snowball's "Stars in the Shadow." But note that ARTGX isn't a broad global fund so don't think that it's the type of global fund that will give you diversified exposure across developed and emerging markets around the world.

    ARTGX is somewhat concentrated with 40-50 stocks and will invest in the best companies from an investment perspective wherever they may be. So think of it has similar to say a Yacktman fund with without the country/border restrictions. Another fund that reminds me of ARTGX is the one from FMI --- which focuses on quality value. RSEMX - Royce Special Multi-cap Fund can also be somewhat in that similar ballpark type of quality-value fund.

    Here's an example - a top 5 holding of ARTGX is Mastercard. This is also a stock held at Berkshire Hathaway as Mastercard was a pick from Todd Combs. Again, that's an example of that quality-value and wide-moat stock that both are invested in.

    Like David Snowball, I'm surprised ARTGX has so little assets even after debuting for 3+ years now. Oh well, fine by me.

    Having said that --- personally, I would avoid the fund rotation scheme. Funds go up and down and a lot of it can come down to investing style. In 2005 and 2006, a lot of investors pumped money into these deep-value type of funds, especially Dodge & Cox, which saw its assets balloon. Lo and behold the 5-year returns today has growth-oriented, GARP-oriented and quality-oriented stocks performing better!

    Again-I would caution against the musical chairs rotation......I've recommended that a lot of investors balance between value and growth/garp investing styles because they will rotate and take turns in terms of outperformance. What's happening now with many value funds that don't sport very good 5-year returns was something that's not surprising. Too many investors thought that because these funds showed wonderful down-side protection during the 2000-2005 time frame that they would continue doing so. But the downturn of 2000-2003 was way different from what we saw in 2008 ---- the value funds that did really well in 2000-2005 could offer no protection in 2008 and many actually did worse and have been slow to recover.

    I'm afraid that investors will go thru this chase the tail excercise every 5 years. It has happened from 1995 to today. Thus I recommend a balance of styles. So many investors banked on Dodge & Cox funds just several years ago. I don't think I have heard of more overwhelming praise for a fund shop than D&C the past 10 years. But they follow a particular style! They had held crummy value stocks like Motorola and Sprint-Nextel and others for many many years. They do have a deep value style and now many investors are finding they can't handle it or have lost some faith in their style.

    You have to understand that deeply-valued stocks did great and could do no wrong from 2000 - 2005 but that is completely different from what we saw the past 5 years where the deeply-valued stocks were very volatile, risky and haven't performed as well.

    Personally, I combine different styles because of this - different types of value investing styles and I also use GARP (Growth At A Reasonable Price) styles as well. For example - the ARTGX value style of investing is different from say Dodge & Cox's value style of investing. But the problem is that most investors are more enamored with what's done best the past 3 - 5 years and so let's pile up on that.

  • Reply to @Kenster1_GlobalValue and others: Thanks Ken. I do realize that I may be chasing returns and switching unnecessarily. That was one of the factors why I was not completely sure about switching to ARTGX, as it does not have a longer history. Are there any structural advantages vs OAKGX?

    SGENX was definitely attractive. Unfortunately, Schwab makes it available only to institutional investors. Elsewhere, it has a 5% load. Let me know if I there is a cheaper way to get into this fund.

    I plan to further research Calamos and Wintergreen funds bee suggested.
  • edited May 2012
    manning and napier dividend focus is another global(ish) large value fund

  • Reply to @perpetual_Bull:
    Last year I had invited some input from the board about dividend funds and finally zeroed in on the iShares ETF HDV. It is based on Morningstar Dividend Yield Focus Index, So far I have been quite happy with the performance. This is not a global value fund, but these days the large multinationals tend to be global in nature by definition. Essentially, the companies should know best how to allocate their resources globally to get the best benefit for the shareholders (at least in theory). I still would like to have some money in a global mutual fund, as another global play.
  • edited May 2012
    Reply to Kaspa:
    I've been looking at PQIDX as the topping on my global portfolio cake. The only issue down the road might come from asset bloat because PIMCO just doesn't close funds. If you'll look over its holdings you can see the global diversification.

    "That was one of the factors why I was not completely sure about switching to ARTGX, as it does not have a longer history. Are there any structural advantages vs OAKGX?"

    Personally, I think you could flip a coin on that one. OAKGX is more "flexible" because its "all cap". ARTGX's managers are more likely to be on the job longer because they're younger than McGregor. I think I'd just split the money between the two.

  • Speaking about the role of age, and example form another Oakmark Fund, today: Oakmark Select Fund Co-Manager to Retire 5/8/2012

    Henry R. Berghoef, CFA, will step down as co-manager of the Oakmark Select Fund (OAKLX) and will retire
  • Reply to @andrei: Yup and Edward Studzinski retired as well making Clyde McGregor the solo manager of OAKBX. Clyde's turn to retire may be just around the corner --- I dunno if he'll stay another year or 10 years.

  • I have owned OAKBX close to ten years now and hope they find a good replacement for him.
  • FYI, SSIFX is low min and No Load and NTF at Scottrade.
    LG Intl HLMNX ; also UMBWX are 2 that I switched to after losing faith in Oakmark.
  • Hi Kaspa,

    Among global funds (WA and WS) with an equity bias and an equal allocation to domestic and foreign equities, my choice would be LSWWX over OAKGX, as LSWWX has: much lower AUM; a lower ER; lower standard deviations and higher sharpe ratios over the past 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year periods; higher returns over these periods; and the benefit of Dan Fuss and his FI team. LSWWX continues to be available for a reasonable minimum at Scottrade.

  • Hi kevindow,

    Not that we don't know, but I look at this area, too; only from a point of interest, as to the number of similar (at least per M*) funds increases over the years. As is shown here, the number of comparative funds has grown from 72 to 417.

    M* Rank/# of Funds
    --- 1 Year 39/417
    --- 3 Year 5/230
    --- 5 Year 8/148
    --- 10 Year 11/72

Sign In or Register to comment.