dumbstruck
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:18 am Post subject:
fund of funds? |
|
|
Any favorite fund of funds? I liked those in the fundx family, but
someone here mentioned another that had a better record, which I can't
now find.
I don't care for the ones that just allocate among funds within their
own family, rather ones that can buy or sell any fund... such as
energy or whatever. Also not referring to hedge fund of funds.
Some don't like the double expenses these incur, but it can make sense
due to it taking totally different expertise to pick stocks within a
specialty sector vs doing allocation decisions among sectors.
|
|
Marlowe
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:35 am Post subject:
Re: fund of funds? |
|
|
Try this as a start and then do the research.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=DVXA,DVXA:2005-17,DVXA:en&q=%22fund+of+funds%22
Several of the sources are hedge funds which doesn't meet the classical
definition of a mutual fund "fund of funds"
When you complete this assignment please report back to this NG with your
findings.
"dumbstruck" <dumbstruc@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126052305.465380.94970@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Any favorite fund of funds? I liked those in the fundx family, but
someone here mentioned another that had a better record, which I can't
now find.
I don't care for the ones that just allocate among funds within their
own family, rather ones that can buy or sell any fund... such as
energy or whatever. Also not referring to hedge fund of funds.
Some don't like the double expenses these incur, but it can make sense
due to it taking totally different expertise to pick stocks within a
specialty sector vs doing allocation decisions among sectors.
|
|
|
Flasherly
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Sep 10, 2005 6:48 am Post subject:
Re: fund of funds? |
|
|
Something along Roman gladitorial games - takes no sooner for a unique
style to gain favorable response, than for a contestant to rise to the
occasion with the challenge of improvement over any any such infamis
style subsequent returns have to acknowledge. As in the circus, such
a challenger has a discernable handle for affiliation - the color and
unique style of its pedigree, prior training and accomplishments
management profess. But, the sacramentum gladiatorium, though be it a
perfectly within decorum, is a bond of discretion proprietary issue
uniquely portend. Its credo: [that] "I will endure to be burned, to be
bound, to be beaten, and to be killed by the market" is not one
undertaken lightly by top management fund CEOs, rest assured. As for
your question, to widely ply the retiarus' trident of rampant energy
concerns along with heavier armour of secutor's ensconsed DOW
industrials, might not only encumber what, to an end a better wages,
but, as well, would tend blur an editorial emphisis and focus
sponsorship has to account. Not that I should think any more of
contestant apt to switch strategms during the heat of a bet, as less
deserving an ire aroused from the crowds reserved for brunches, whilst
executions of the condemned are performed.
dumbstruck wrote:
| Quote: | Any favorite fund of funds? I liked those in the fundx family, but
someone here mentioned another that had a better record, which I can't
now find.
I don't care for the ones that just allocate among funds within their
own family, rather ones that can buy or sell any fund... such as
energy or whatever. Also not referring to hedge fund of funds.
Some don't like the double expenses these incur, but it can make sense
due to it taking totally different expertise to pick stocks within a
specialty sector vs doing allocation decisions among sectors. |
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in