Tag Archives: mutual funds

Articles 2 & 3 in my MoneySense mutual fund series: Best Mutual Fund Companies you never heard of; Fixed-Income Funds

Posted By |
MoneySense.ca: Photo created by freepik – www.freepik.com

MoneySense magazine has now published the entire package of three mutual fund articles they commissioned me to write. You can find the first article by clicking on the highlighted headline: DSC mutual funds and the future of investment advice. It ran on January 16th. The second ran last weekend, around Jan. 25th, while I was away in Cuba for a week.

You can find the second article here: The best Mutual Funds you’ve never heard of.

The first article looked specifically at the gradual decline of the once-ubiquitous DSC sales structure, or Deferred Sales Charge. It recaps recent regularatory developments surrounding DSC, and addresses the related issue of embedded compensation for financial advisors, or so-called Trailer Commissions. These are gradually being eliminated in various Western nations (notably the UK and Australia/NZ) and they are also being phased out in all Canadian provinces, with the conspicuous exception of Ontario.

The lesser-known “Direct-to-Consumer” mutual fund families

The second article looks at two particular “camps” of mutual fund providers: the big-name Embedded Compensation firms you may have heard from (because they can afford to advertise) and a lesser known camp of Direct-to-Consumer managers whose names may be less familiar because they don’t generally have embedded compensation and whose fees are lower and typically mean they don’t have as much money to throw around on big marketing and advertising budgets. The article focusses on four firms in particular you may not have heard of, except through family referrals and word of mouth: Beutel Goodman, Leith Wheeler, Mawer, Steadyhand.

Space precludes mentioning that in the good old days of mutual fund mania (the 90s) there were several other direct-to-consumer firms that either were acquired or are now a shadow of their former selves: the list includes Altamira, Saxon, Sceptre and a few others. We also look at two deep value firms that are still around but get so much publicity about their performance that they can hardly be dubbed as “firms you’ve never heard of.” They are Irwin Michael’s ABC Funds and Francis Chou’s Chou & Associates.

Actively managed mutual funds may also work for Fixed Income space

MoneySense.ca: Photo created by pressfoto – www.freepik.com

The third article, which ran January 30th, looks at the related topic of whether mutual funds can make sense in the fixed-income space, given today’s minuscule interest rates and the relatively higher impact investment management costs can have on active management of fixed-income investments. You can find it by clicking on the highlighted headline: Can Active Management pay for itself in Fixed Income Funds?

Arguably, GICs, direct investments in government and corporate bonds (or strip bonds) is more cost-effective, and if you prefer the “basket” approach that mutual funds provide, fixed-income ETFs. But the article links to some surprising research that even in fixed income, actively managed mutual funds may be able to recoup their fees and “add value” to investment returns.

VBAL vs. Mawer Balanced Fund for One-stop investing

Posted By |

Investors could have done a lot worse over the past 30 years than investing in the Mawer Balanced Fund. Mawer, which epitomizes the art of boring investing, has been nothing short of consistently brilliant: with annual returns of 8.5 per cent since the fund’s inception in 1988.

Investment giant Vanguard doesn’t have the same longevity or track record here in Canada, but its launch of the Vanguard Balanced ETF portfolio (VBAL) gives investors another one-stop investing option.

This post will go under the hood and compare VBAL to the Mawer Balanced Fund for investors looking for a one-stop investing solution for the next two to three decades.

About Vanguard

Vanguard is legendary in the United States and is largely credited for pioneering low-cost index investing. It came to Canada in December, 2011 and now offers nearly 40 ETFs and four mutual funds to Canadian investors with a total of $17 billion in assets under management (Dec 2018).

VBAL was introduced by Vanguard Canada in January, 2018 as part of a new suite of asset allocation ETFs (including VGRO and later VEQT). These funds have proven popular among Canadian investors and have collectively gathered more than $1 billion in assets.

Before their introduction, investors did not have access to a one-stop ETF solution. Instead, they’d have to build multi-ETF portfolios to get exposure to Canadian, U.S., and International equities, plus another ETF or two for fixed income.

Vanguard turned that around with what I’ve called a game-changing investing solution. VBAL represents the classic 60/40 portfolio.

Vanguard Balanced ETF (VBAL)

VBAL is a fund of funds. That means its underlying holdings are made up of other Vanguard funds. So rather than seeing a bunch of individual stocks and bonds in VBAL’s holdings, you’ll instead see these seven products:

  • Vanguard US Total Market Index ETF
  • Vanguard Canadian Aggregate Bond Index ETF
  • Vanguard FTSE Canada All Cap Index ETF
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed All Cap ex North America Index ETF
  • Vanguard Global ex-US Aggregate Bond Index ETF CAD-hedged
  • Vanguard US Aggregate Bond Index ETF CAD-hedged
  • Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap Index ETF

The fund’s mandate is to maintain a long-term strategic asset allocation of equity (approximately 60%) and fixed income (approximately 40%) securities. It’s as diversified, globally, as you can get: with a whopping 12,318 stocks and 15,412 bonds wrapped up inside this one-stop balanced ETF.

VBAL Holdings

VBAL has net assets of $675 million (June 30, 2019). Its distribution or dividend yield is 2.58 per cent (dividends paid quarterly). Its management expense ratio or MER is 0.25 per cent.

Investors can purchase VBAL through a discount brokerage account and it is an eligible investment inside an RRSP, RRIF, RESP, TFSA, DPSP, RDSP, or non-registered account.

VBAL’s performance data only goes back to its inception date of January 24, 2018. It has returned 4.05 per cent annualized since that time, and 10.44 per cent year-to-date (July 30, 2019).

Justin Bender, a portfolio manager at PWL Capital, has simulated the returns as if the fund did exist for the past 20 years and found the following annualized returns (as of June 30, 2019):

  • 1-year return – 5.09%
  • 3-year return – 7.22%
  • 5-year return – 6.62%
  • 10-year return – 7.95%
  • 20-year return – 5.34%

You can read more about VBAL and its fact sheet and prospectus here.

About Mawer

If Vanguard is legendary for pioneering low cost investing, Mawer has achieved cult-like status among active investors for an incredible track record of outperforming its benchmarks. Mawer was founded in 1974. It’s a privately owned, independent investment firm, managing over $55 billion in assets. Mawer has locations in Toronto, Calgary, and Singapore.

While its philosophy is ‘be boring,’ Mawer’s performance is anything but. Of its 13 mutual funds, eight have beaten their benchmark index since inception: including the Mawer Balanced Fund, which trounced its benchmark over the last decade (9.9 per cent to 7.8 per cent). Continue Reading…

Q&A: Understanding Liquid Alternatives

Posted By |

By Brooks Ritchey

(Sponsor Content)

Alternative investment funds are an exciting new strategy class that were previously unavailable to retail investors in Canada. Since they are new to the scene, many advisors and investors are interested, but don’t quite know where to begin. Since I have worked in the alternative investment space for years, I thought I could help explain how investors could benefit from these hedging strategies.

Demystifying Liquid Alternatives for investors

Some advisors feel that these strategies are too volatile or complicated to explain to their clients. We spend a lot of our time trying to explain that these are not complicated mysterious investments. The irony is that many alternative investments, liquid alternatives, especially with regulatory oversight, are about the same risk level as fixed-income products.

Others also worry about the fees on hedge funds, but they have come down a lot. Since I’ve been involved in the hedge fund industry, fees have come down from 2% management and 20% performance fees to 75 basis points management fees and no performance fees for some products.

How would you explain Liquid Alternatives to investors?

It’s an investment that has different characteristics than traditional equity and fixed income. Equity markets depend on the trend in economic growth and bonds depend on a different set of macroeconomic factors, but they’re both dependent on a trend. If you’re trying to find a strategy that’s looking for winners in the equity or in the bond market when the trends aren’t positive, you want to consider liquid alternatives. Continue Reading…

Retired Money: Time for retail investors to STANDUP to the financial services industry?

Posted By |

My latest MoneySense Retired Money column is a review of advisor John De Goey’s new book: STANDUP to the Financial Services Industry. Click on the highlighted headline for the full column: Fight for your right to low fees.

Obviously a retrofitted acronym, STANDUP stands for Scientific Testing and Necessary Disintermediation Underpin Professionalism. STANDUP was an undercurrent in the four editions of De Goey’s previous book, The Professional Financial Advisor. There he argued that while most advisors hold themselves out to be professionals like doctors, lawyers or accountants, the primary function of most advisors is “to sell products.” STANDUP Advisors are the good guys and gals: the “self-aware and knowledgeable advisors” his new book aims to help readers find. His personal website is www.STANDUP.today.

Bad advice they believe is good

Right from the get-go, De Goey is pretty harsh on many members of his profession. Much of what advisors believe is “demonstrably wrong” he declares right on page 2 of his introduction: “People who give advice for a living routinely give bad advice while honestly believing that the advice they are giving is, in fact, good. That’s a huge problem.”

He puts much of the blame on the managers of retail advisors, chiefly the senior members of Canadian mutual fund companies. He hauls out the old Upton Sinclair quote to illustrate the gap between doing what’s good for investors and what’s profitable for the financial industry itself: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” Continue Reading…

ETFs or mutual funds: Making the best choice for your financial future

Posted By |

By Clayton Brown

(Sponsor Content)

You’re probably familiar with mutual funds. Most people have encountered them at some point: either through their banks and financial advisors, or their friends complaining about the fees.

ETFs are a newer investment, which people tend to associate with lower fees and broad diversification.

“So, what is the difference between a mutual fund and an ETF?”

Mutual funds are bundles of stocks and bonds that are managed for you by a bank or investment firm. Traditionally, they’re taking a hands-on approach to try to beat the market.

With actively managed mutual funds, you have managers who are trading a lot to take advantage of opportunities. However, this active trading comes at a cost, which usually translates into higher fees.

Most ETFs, or Exchange-Traded Funds, tend to take a different approach. They were primarily set up to track an index of investments (eg. The S&P 500 is an index of 500 publicly-listed US stocks and an ETF could track it. But you could have track indexes of tech stocks, energy investments, real estate investments, etc).

With most ETFs, portfolio managers are trying to reproduce the holdings and performance of an index. They give investors diversified exposure to an index at a low cost.

With those kinds of funds, managers don’t need to rebalance as often. That could mean lower costs for them. In turn, they can charge lower fees for the client.

“Which one is a better financial fit for me?”

Based on the above description, you might be wondering, “Why should I take a hands-off approach and match indexes, when I can take a hands-on approach and try to beat them?” Continue Reading…