Tag Archives: mutual funds

Vanguard Canada advisor event focuses on its actively managed mutual funds

While indexing giant Vanguard Group and its Canadian unit are best known for their pioneering work in passive investing, both through index mutual funds and ETFs, they are also significant players in active fund management.

On Monday, it educated Canadian financial advisors at its 2019 Investment Symposium in Toronto, with the focus on two of the four actively managed mutual funds it first announced last summer.

Vanguard Investments Canada Inc. head Kathy Bock, who took over the position on January 1st, reminded the (mostly fee-based) financial advisors in attendance that Vanguard actually started life as an active manager over 40 years ago, and the firm now actively manages more than US$1.6 trillion globally, which is about a quarter of the firm’s total assets under management of more than US$5.3 trillion. That makes Vanguard the third largest active fund manager in the world. See also this Hub blog on this from last September: Vanguard, the Hidden $1.3 Trillion player in active management. (As you can see, the figure has risen with the markets since then).

Vanguard Canada head Kathy Bock

These mutual funds do not pay advisors trailer commissions: they are F series funds, which means fee-based advisors are free to set whatever additional fee they negotiate with their clients, just as they do with ETFs. They can also be purchased at some, but not yet all, discount brokerages

The management fees on these actively managed mutual funds are a maximum 0.5%; but in the first year, the fee ranged from 0.34% to 0.4%, which makes them only marginally more costly than Vanguard’s popular asset allocation ETFs that were unveiled just over a year ago (and which spawned several imitators). This is partly achieved through a management fee waiver that can apply, depending on manager performance, as explained at the bottom of this blog.

These mutual funds are managed for Canadians, although the actively managed subadvisors are global active giants, as outlined below. Because they are new funds, they have not disclosed the Management Expense Ratios (MERs).

True, at least one advisor in the question period seemed ambivalent about how fee-based advisors can reconcile such an approach to the indexing gospel that Vanguard has so thoroughly dispensed over the years. The answer, according to one of the sub advisors featured, is that the two approaches can complement each other, potentially reducing overall volatility. Buying exclusively ETFs means that over the coming ten years you’re “dooming yourself to a lot of failing businesses,” said Nick Thomas, partner with Baillie Gifford, one of two sub advisors to the Vanguard International Growth Fund, together with Schroder Investment Management North America Inc.

The advisor who posed the question was understandably perplexed by the many studies indexing proponents often cite about how most actively managed funds fail to beat the indexes net of their own additional costs. But the Vanguard managers replied that there are cases where active management can outperform, at least outside the highly liquid U.S. market. Portfolios will be more concentrated than the broad indexes and if an investing thesis pans out, there is an opportunity to “pick” winners at the outset of major trends like A.I. and the cloud, and avoid losers.  Presumably managers with  skills in combination with good financial advisors can add the kind of “Advisor’s Alpha” to client returns that Vanguard has pioneered.

And if active management makes a good complement to equity portfolios, that should also go for balanced mandates. Indeed, the other highlighted fund was Vanguard Global Balanced Fund, with a 65%/35% equity/fixed-income split  managed by Wellington Management Canada ULC, headquartered in Boston. The proportion can move to 60/40 or 70/30, depending on market view.   It was launched with the other three mutual funds on June 20, 2018.

China tech big focus of Vanguard International Growth Fund

Baillie Gifford’s Nick Thomas

Most of the discussion centered on the Chinese holdings of Vanguard International Growth Fund: China accounts for 20% of the fund’s geographic allocation. The top ten holdings include three Chinese web giants: Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., Tencent Holdings Ltd and Baidu Inc. It also holds Amazon.com Inc. and MercadoLibre Inc. among its top holdings.

Schroders manager John Chisholm is slightly underweight Emerging Markets and market weight China. Baillie Gifford’s Thomas is slightly more enthusiastic, being overweight both Emerging Markets and China.  But both see promising long-term growth prospects for  the major Chinese web giants. Asked about the current Trump trade war and accusations of theft of American intellectual property, the managers downplayed this as a U.S. interpretation of the facts. Thomas said he views both Tencent and Alibaba as “superior to Facebook or Amazon.”

Continue Reading…

Should investors buy individual stocks?

By Steve Lowrie, CFA

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

In most walks of life, rugged individualism is a virtue.  No wonder so many investors still seem so determined to beat the odds by trying to pick the very best individual stocks (and avoid the stinkers). Unfortunately, the odds are stacked so high against these sorts of financial heroics, you might as well be buying lottery tickets versus trying to consistently outperform the long-term returns everyone can expect by embracing an evidence-based investment strategy.

I’ve posted on this subject before, in “How understanding statistics can make you a better investor.”  Today, I want to take a closer look at why individuals should still avoid picking individual stocks – and, briefly, what you can do instead to come out ahead.

A Grumpy Advisor 

There are numerous real-life illustrations that have crossed my path over the years … generally on opposite ends of the spectrum.   On one extreme, there is using some mad money to buy shares (usually penny stocks) in an emerging technology or fad.  The other extreme is cashing out a well-diversified portfolio and putting everything into one illiquid investment, promising high yields, but with significant hidden risks (mostly private real estate recently).

Often, these individuals would like me to help them with the transaction. I won’t do that.  While I can’t stop them from proceeding without me, I can vehemently advise against it. If they’re a client and they still insist on getting in on the deal, they can do so directly, through a discount brokerage account.

Why am I so grumpy about it?

It’s my job

I couldn’t claim to be offering anything remotely akin to best-interest financial advice if I weren’t highly skeptical of investment “opportunities” that conflict with everything I know about how capital markets work.  I can assure you, every bit of evidence I’m aware of (based on more than six decades of peer-reviewed, academically grounded research) informs me that dumping your entire nest egg into a single, risk-laden venture flies in the face of good advice.

It’s not even investing

Alright, so maybe you’re already with me on not staking your entire life’s savings on a single bet. But what about that modest stake in a penny stock? Is there any harm done in throwing a bit of fun money at a venture that, at worst, won’t ruin you; and, at best, just may pay off?

The problem is, most investors don’t realize that stock-picking isn’t actually investing.  It’s speculating.  In practice and expected outcome, it’s no different than gambling in a casino or buying a lottery ticket. As I covered in that past post of mine, the odds are stacked anywhere from mildly to steeply against you, making it far more a matter of luck than skill whether you “win” or “lose.”

This is where I see people running aground, even with seemingly “harmless” penny stock ventures. In my experience, if they happen to lose their stake, they tend to justify it as a “nothing ventured, nothing gained” adventure, especially if they weren’t hurt too badly.

Worse, if someone happens to come out ahead now and then by picking individual stocks, a bevy of behavioral biases (including, but not limited to: confirmation, framing, outcome, overconfidence and pattern recognition biases) tricks them into believing it was NOT random luck. For better or worse, we humans love to conclude we’re somehow smarter than the rest of the crowd. It’s so common, there’s even a name for it: “The Lake Wobegon Effect.”

It’s usually not only incorrect, it’s dangerous to mistakenly assume a successful stock pick happened because you or your stock-picking guru outwitted the entire market. Why is it dangerous? Because it increases the likelihood you’ll try your luck again, potentially with bigger bets. Eventually, you may convince yourself that stock-picking is a great way to invest in general, not realizing how much it’s probably costing you over time. This is especially so if you have no financial advisor to turn to: one who is committed to serving your best interests by showing you how your actual, long-term portfolio performance numbers stack up to a more sensible investment strategy. Which leads me to my final point today …

This rarely ends well

Based on my 25 years of experience, the vast majority of individual stock-pickers not only underperform the general market, they typically lose capital in the long-run. Recalling the casino analogy, even if you win a “hand” or two, the system (capitalism) is essentially set up so the house (the market) comes out ahead in the end, regardless of which players (investors) win or lose along the way. Continue Reading…

Canadians embracing low-cost ETFs: Is a tipping point on the horizon?

By Dale Roberts, CutTheCrap Investing

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Data shows that Canadians continue to embrace low-cost ETFs. That said, more monies continue to flow into high-fee mutual funds. As you likely know, Canadians pay the highest mutual fund fees in the developed world. Of course, those high fees are wealth destroyers and can eat up 50% of your investment returns over the decades.

But here’s the good news: more Canadians are moving more monies to low-cost ETF portfolios by the way of self-directing or through Canadian Robo Advisors or by way of those One Ticket Asset Allocation Portfolios.

Here’s a look at the flow comparisons for Mutual Funds and ETFs courtesy of the IFIC site:

Here’s the sales figures for mutual funds in what we would typically call the usually robust RRSP season, January and February:

Mutual Fund Sales 2019 Jan FebAnd here’s the sales figures for the ETF industry for RRSP season:ETF Assets 2019 Jan Feb

If we want to be optimists, that is more than promising. While 2019 was a soft RRSP season for money flows into mutual funds and ETFs (compared to 2018 figures) there was an acceleration of flows to ETFs compared to mutual funds, year over year.

  • In 2019 35% of new monies went to ETFs.
  • In 2018 27% of new monies went to ETFs

That is certainly something to celebrate. While the total mutual fund industry is almost 10 times the size of the ETF industry, they did not even double the size of inflows for January and February of 2019. That aligns with the findings of Nest Wealth, which conducted a poll in RRSP season. Respondents suggested one third of all new account openings would be by way of one of the Canadian Robo Advisors: also known as digital wealth managers. For more on that please have a read of There will be a tipping point for ‘Robo Advisors’ suggests Randy Cass of Nest Wealth. Keep in mind the poll was reading account openings, not the move of assets or amounts of assets.

Here’s another way to frame that more than ‘good news’. Continue Reading…

Alternative assets in ETFs and mutual funds, including a new one from Franklin Templeton

 

Alternative asset classes like private equity and real estate have long been in vogue with pension funds, institutional investors and some high-net-worth individual investors but the pickings have been slim for retail mutual fund investors. Now, Franklin Templeton Investments Canada has introduced the Franklin K2 Alternatives Fund.

The company says its new mutual fund, announced on Monday, March 11, uses “a multi-strategy approach in seeking to dampen volatility and offer downside protection, while providing added diversification and low-correlation to asset classes typically held in a traditional portfolio.

Franklin Templeton Canada Duane Green pointed to the unpredictable market environment of the past year and said “investors are looking to reduce volatility and protect capital … Our alternatives fund addresses these investor needs and combines the benefits of a sophisticated solution with the liquidity, convenience and fee transparency of a mutual fund.”

In a piece this weekend in the Financial Post, which mentioned the new Templeton fund among others, investing reporter Victor Ferreira said Canadian retail investors looking for exposure to hedge-fund like strategies that can involve leverage and short-selling are being inundated with new options, following a rule change in January. At least six firms have brought so-called “liquid alternative” products (some of them ETFs and some of them mutual funds from firms like Mackenzie and C.I. Funds) to market since regulations barring them from doing so were lifted at the beginning of 2019. Prior to the regulations being altered, he said, only a few firms were able to offer such products after applying for exclusions.

As the Post pointed out, some alternative assets — notably real estate and private equity — are seldom easily liquidated if you need some cash. It cited a 2018 Scotiabank report that projects the Canadian market for these kind of products could grow to be worth $20 billion.

According to Franklin Templeton marketing documents, alternative asset classes or hedging products can improve return potential without significantly increasing risk. It describes three possible “buckets” investors can choose from: traditional Equity Beta or “Risk On,” traditional Bond Beta or “Risk Off” and Alpha Alternatives, or “Risk Uncertain.” It said Alternative Assets can also protect client assets during declining equity markets. In addition, Alternatives have “held up well in weak bond markets.”

Green told the Post that the new Franklin Templeton fund gives investors access to three different strategies: the fund will index 50 hedge funds and aim to replicate their returns. On the long/short side, the fund will also identify the most popular stocks that alternative asset managers are buying and take long positions in them while shorting S&P 500 or futures contracts and any individual names it deems unattractive. Thirdly, the fund will target risk premia.

Or, in the language used in the Franklin Templeton press release: Continue Reading…

Franklin Templeton unveils multi-asset ETF portfolios for mutual fund advisors

Franklin Templeton Canada president and CEO Duane Green

Since Vanguard Canada introduced three (now five) asset allocation ETFs a year ago, rivals have been scrambling to catch up. Little wonder, as those first three products — bearing TSX tickers VBAL, VGRO and VCNS — quickly scooped up a billion dollars in assets. Next out the gate was BlackRock Canada’s iShares, which launched two All-in-One ETF portfolios in December 2018 with similar-sounding tickers: XBAL and XGRO. Then a few weeks ago, as Dale Roberts nicely summarized here at the Hub, BMO ETFs jumped aboard with a similar suite as Vanguard’s original suite: ZBAL, ZGRO and ZCON, driving costs down as they did. See BMO keeps it simple.

Up until now, mutual fund salespeople operating in the MFDA channel (Mutual Fund Dealers Association) have been clamouring for ETF portfolios because if they aren’t also securities licensed, they couldn’t buy ETFs for their clients directly. That’s why Thursday’s announcement by Franklin Templeton is of interest: it announced the launch of three multi-asset ETF portfolios to provide advisors and investors with a simple solution for investing in ETFs. Managed by Franklin Templeton Multi-Asset Solutions, each portfolio is a mutual fund that provides access to active asset allocation utilizing a combination of active, smart beta and passive ETFs across multiple asset classes and geographies.

These portfolios let mutual fund investors access Franklin Templeton’s new passive ETFs (see this Hub post a few weeks ago), in addition to its active and smart beta ETFs while not having to worry about asset allocation, rebalancing and currency management.

Franklin Templeton Investments Canada president and CEO Duane Green said in a press release that “Many investors are overwhelmed by the choice of ETFs available in the Canadian market.” That’s  a fair statement, which is why I am working with Dale Roberts and eight other ETF experts to select the 2019 edition of the MoneySense ETF All-Stars, which will be published later this month. A year ago we were quick to spot the trend and made all three of the Vanguard portfolios All-Stars, albeit in a new category. The question for us this year is which of the newer offerings should be added? Stay tuned!

How these differ from Balanced Mutual Funds

We’ll outline the names of the new Templeton funds shortly but I did want to add the fact that mutual fund companies have long offered balanced mutual funds and asset allocation funds, both Canadian and global. These are usually actively managed and of course generally bear the high MERs that have caused Canada’s fund industry to be so criticized. Once upon a time, I often wrote about the Rip Van Winkle two-fund portfolios, which was simply a Trimark Balanced Fund and Templeton Growth Fund. And I have written in the past that “in theory, the only fund an investor needs is a global balanced fund.” That’s because they would cover all asset classes and geographies, with rebalancing and asset allocation all taken care of by active managers. That’s pretty much what’s going on with these ETF portfolios, with the difference being that the fees are much much lower: 20 basis points plus or minus 2, or a tenth the price of a typical balanced mutual fund.

So back to Franklin’s new entry. Continue Reading…

Powered by the Financial Independence Hub.
© 2013-2025 All Rights Reserved.
Financial Independence Hub Logo

Sign up for our Daily Digest E-Mail!

Get daily updates from the FindependenceHub.com straight to your inbox.