|
|
How did Our Funds Do?
Barron's, that weekly investment paper the guy at 7-11 keeps trying to give to me free of charge because it resembles a free newspaper published locally, caught my eye several weeks back. This paper, steeped in greatness, is one of the most difficult to read, writing in a language that takes some time to learn. But recently they published a feature that ranked the top 100 mutual fund managers. I was curious to see if any of the BCD 31's managers had made the grade.
Along with Value Line, the newspaper determined their managers ratings like this: Eliminating funds (they scanned around 6000 funds) that were managed by committees of three or more managers, they determined a score for the remaining group. Managers that have added value during their stay with the fund were given a score against their peer group. Points were subtracted for volatility, and added for stability. Do better than you peers, score higher, average scored zero, while poor performers lost points. This narrowed the filed to 630 managers, and was further narrowed to the top 100.
Overall, we didn't do too bad. Four BCD31 funds made it to their top 100 list: Coming in at number three, was the Strong growth 20, at number 36, the Strong Growth and Income, at 51, the Columbia Small Cap, and ranked 79, the Strong Growth fund. If you eliminate the 21 international or global funds on the list (because the BCD31 doesn't invest in any fund whose purpose is overseas investment), we did even better. In the upcoming months we will take a look at this leader board of fund managers, perhaps even replacing some of the laggards on our list.
The other top funds: Artisan Mid Cap, RS Emerging Growth, the Strong Growth 20, Standish Small Cap, and the Quaker Aggressive Growth
Debt
Is there such a thing as good debt? What do you suppose bad debt is? And what kind do you have?
All content is © copyright (1999-2000)
BonPaulProductions (all rights reserved)
|
|
|
