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

Comments

  • edited November 2013
    Sorry, but this is a lame article. He found just 7 funds in M* database with 5* and that automatically qualifies them and prepares owners for the worst?

    Does he understand anything about how any of the funds invest? The Putnam fund owns stocks with heavy debt.

    Finally article ends with this incomplete gem of a sentence.

    One caveat: The high cash positions of the seven funds could limit their gains if the stock market doesn’t suffer a correction or something worse. But that danger seems remote because there’s not a single problem for hundreds of mi —.

    Why O Why do I know people out of work and these guys earn a living. Why ?!?!?!?!
  • Reply to @VintageFreak: There's an old saying... "It's not who you know, it's who you censored".
  • LAUGH. You're both right. Cripes, I'm a rank amateur, and I could write that stuff. (oops, I mean, "shit.")
  • Reply to @MaxBialystock: I am sorry, but you couldn't. Writing s*** takes special talent only available in Bulls*** Artists.
  • I am not a fan of MarketWatch anyway, but this was so poorly done - both in research and in writing - that I am surprised it was even kept on the site. Really bad selections for the topic and very amateurish commentary.
  • edited November 2013
    "There are seven funds in Morningstar’s database that had at least 16.9% of their assets in cash as of their most recent update ... as well as the top rating, five stars, for long-term, risk-adjusted returns against other funds with the same investment objective."

    This slicing and dicing using computer technology really has gotten out of control. Reminds me of some of the sportscasters nowadays: "This fella about to hit has batted .575 against all 6' or taller left handed pitchers he's faced with two or more runners on base during the 7th inning of all games during the month of July when the temperature exceeded 80 degrees and the wind was blowing from the SE."

    (We want to be careful not to shoot the messenger. Ted posts some truly awesome stuff. He's batting way over 500 IMHO:-)
  • Reply to @hank: I've been shot before, and I'm sure I'll be shot again. Thanks for the plug, I'm actually batting over .850
    Regards,
    Ted
  • edited November 2013
    Reply to @Ted: Please keep swinging. (-:
  • Reply to @VintageFreak: (Grin.) THANKS, I think.....
  • Yes, DO! You can't screen everything you bump into.
    Hilarious case in point:

  • Somewhat brain-damaged article, yes, but at times when I've had $ to invest but thought the market was a bit frothy, I have looked for funds where (1) I respect management & their stock-picking process, and (2) they have a reasonable amount of cash on hand. Sequoia and Weitz Partners Opportunity both fit the bill for me.
Sign In or Register to comment.