On a Roll
Hola
Pego parte de un artículo sobre una manera de evaluar los resultados de un fondo, aplicando el modelo a 2 de los fondos que tengo en mente para incorporar a mi cartera.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a Roll by Michael Herbst. Taken from Morningstar's FundInvestor Newsletter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We use rolling returns to get a clearer understanding
of a fund’s performance. To assess rolling returns, we
start with the trailing decade or a manager’s tenure
on the fund. Then we look at performance over rolling
periods during that stretch. For instance, if we want to
look at rolling three-year periods over the trailing
decade through May 2013, we start with performance
over the three-year period from June 2003 through
May 2006, then July 2003 through June 2006, and so
on through May 2013.
Rolling returns can show how consistently a fund has
performed relative to its benchmark or category rivals.
They also help investors understand a fund’s risk/
reward profile. Has a fund’s performance zigzagged
between its category’s top and bottom quartiles,
and if so, why? If its rolling returns land near the category
average, is that pattern due to its strategy or
a sign of merely average execution? When used with
risk-adjusted performance measures such as the
Morningstar Rating for funds, rolling returns help inform
what investors could reasonably expect from
a fund’s performance pattern going forward.
It’s helpful to look at other rolling periods, too. A
fund with 20% annual turnover indicates an average
holding period of five years, so looking at five-year
rolling periods might be more appropriate. Looking at
10-year periods can give a better sense of what to
expect from deeply contrarian managers. In this article,
we walk through several world-stock fund examples.
We’ve graphed the fund’s rolling returns and put
them next to their long-term trailing returns so you
can get the whole story.
Let’s Get Rolling
The rolling three-year returns for Oakmark Global
OAKGX reflect the fund’s fairly consistent relative
performance over the trailing decade. Over that
stretch, its rolling returns landed in the category’s
top quartile 45% of the time and in the second quartile
48% of the time. Skippers Clyde McGregor
and Rob Taylor favor stocks trading at deep discounts
to their estimates of intrinsic value. They’re no
dumpster-divers, however, and they generally opt for
companies with promising growth prospects. That
double-barreled approach helps avoid value traps and
builds a margin of safety into the portfolio.
The duo’s solid execution has kept the fund’s rolling
returns mostly out of the category’s bottom two quartiles.
However, periodic bumps are part of the
package, given a fairly concentrated portfolio and top
position sizes of 3.5%–5.0% of assets. In 2011,
several of the fund’s then-top holdings such as Oracle
ORCL, Julius Baer BAER, and Daiwa Securities
DSEEY sold off, fueling the fund’s 11.6% loss that year
and causing its three-year rolling returns to fall in
the category’s bottom quartile for several periods ending
in mid- to late 2012. Rolling returns don’t capture
the fund’s above-average Morningstar Risk over
the trailing three-year and five-year periods or
the fact that investors have been compensated for
that risk—those traits are reflected in the fund’s
4-star Morningstar Rating.
Rolling Steady
The rolling three-year returns for MFS Global Equity
MWEFX land in the category’s middle two quartiles
60% of the time, yet it’d be a mistake to dismiss the
fund as average. The fund has appealing defensive
characteristics. Managers David Mannheim and Roger
Morley stock up on higher-quality blue chips domiciled
in developed markets. As of March 31, 2013, only
8% of assets were parked in no-moat stocks (those
without any sustainable competitive advantage)
versus the MSCI World Index’s 13%. That stabilityoriented
approach means the fund’s short-term
performance will likely lag when racier fare is rallying,
as in 2003, 2005, and 2009–10, but it held up nicely
in 2008 and late 2011.
The duo’s style has translated into less volatility over
the long haul. The fund’s Morningstar Risk-Adjusted
Returns over the trailing decade through May 15,
2013, land just inside the group’s top quartile, and its
three- and five-year rolling returns over that stretch
didn’t once land in the category’s bottom quartile.