Marlin

[mfd]

There fees are not hefty and they are outperforming the relative index even after paying them and paying these so called expensive FIF taxes.
Adjusted NAV Return, (after fees and taxes) for the last 3 years = 13.4% per annum
Benchmark Index 11.3% per annum

This is a 2.1% average beat per annum after fees taxes and performance fees if any paid over the last 3 years.

Coutts and I accessed this management expertise and significant market outperformance at a whopping 13% discount to NTA and will enjoy a 14% gross dividend going forward.

Some people will see opportunity and others will just see the fees. "There is none so blind as those that will not see"

The literature I have read suggests that virtually no active managers are able to outperform over the long run, and that it is impossible to predict which will outperform in the future based on their past performance. The fees are guaranteed, the performance is not.

[couta1]

The literature I have read suggests that virtually no active managers are able to outperform over the long run, and that it is impossible to predict which will outperform in the future based on their past performance. The fees are guaranteed, the performance is not.

Like any shareholding if it starts underperforming you can easily sell your shares if you so desire.

[Beagle]

The literature I have read suggests that virtually no active managers are able to outperform over the long run, and that it is impossible to predict which will outperform in the future based on their past performance. The fees are guaranteed, the performance is not.

The fees are in fact not guaranteed. Base fee of 1.25% per annum reduces by 0.1% per annum for each 1% market underperformance.
As Couta1 quite rightly suggests if the manager starts to underperform its easy enough to sell a share that's listed on the NZX.
Their track record in recent years suggests to me the manager and his team know their overseas stuff better than you or I.

[mfd]

The fees are in fact not guaranteed. Base fee of 1.25% per annum reduces by 0.1% per annum for each 1% market underperformance.
As Couta1 quite rightly suggests if the manager starts to underperform its easy enough to sell a share that's listed on the NZX.
Their track record in recent years suggests to me the manager and his team know their overseas stuff better than you or I.

Fantastic, we only need a 10% underperformance for the fees to be competitive. I always prefer to think of the fees in terms of a proportion of my returns which are lost, so the 1.25% fee is likely to take about 12.5% of my returns while other similar funds take more like 3 or 4%, and don't automatically sell my shares whether I think the timing is good or not. Too high a price for me to gamble on future returns, but each to their own.

[Beagle]

We get it you don't like Marlin, that the warrants and DRP are too hard for you to understand as is their proven outperformance.
Good luck with your own strategy.

[mfd]

We get it you don't like Marlin, that the warrants and DRP are too hard for you to understand as is their proven outperformance.
Good luck with your own strategy.

It's not that I don't understand them in isolation, I just don't understand why one fund would have so much going on - it's a merry-go-round of capital with unfunded dividends (based on asset value rather than income or performance), DRPs, warrants and share buy backs. A simpler structure would make any outperformance far easier to see.

I think we may have reached the end of the discussion without going round in circles, so all the best with your fisher funds.

[voltage]

why not just hold the ETF SP500, fees .05%

[couta1]

why not just hold the ETF SP500, fees .05%

When you go to a restaurant you have a choice of meals same applies here different tastes for different folks.

[Beagle]

why not just hold the ETF SP500, fees .05%

That question has been answered already at quite some length. If you don't get it, that's fine and I am not here to "sell it" to anyone. I have simply pointed out the opportunity, the PIE structure, the discount to NTA, the gross effective dividend yield, the funds completion of all necessary tax and FIF matters, the advantages of the warrants and the dividend reinvestment scheme and the funds material outperformance of the index in recent years as well as provided links to the company website for further details.

If it doesn't suit some people or they can't or won't see it or think some other alternative is better that's perfectly fine.

[couta1]

That question has been answered already at quite some length. If you don't get it, that's fine and I am not here to "sell it" to anyone. I have simply pointed out the opportunity, the PIE structure, the discount to NTA, the gross effective dividend yield, the funds completion of all necessary tax and FIF matters, the advantages of the warrants and the dividend reinvestment scheme and the funds material outperformance of the index in recent years as well as provided links to the company website for further details.

If it doesn't suit some people or they can't or won't see it or think some other alternative is better that's perfectly fine.

Well SUMmed up Beagje, I'm not sure what the obsession with ETFs is they as boring as you know what and I dont do that boring.