The fund manager also has an important role to play in the evaluation of the fund. But where recent history shows most of them, barring a few, always on the move to the next company, it would be prudent to look at the fund house.
Now, coming to past performance. The bane for many financial advisors, since often clients will quote the top 3, 5 or 10 funds touted by such and such magazine, paper, TV programmer or website and demand why none of them are present in their portfolio. Past performance is definitely an important criterion for evaluating mutual funds, but this needs to be put in perspective.
One-year, 2-year or even 3-year returns and performance is not sufficient. If we took the 3-year performance track record of most funds from 2005-2007, we would get excellent returns on all of them. But the same funds would give completely different picture if you saw their 3-year return over 2008-10.
Select funds that have done well across market cycles and investment cycles -- funds that have performed consistently -- in good market, bad market, quiet market and roaring market. Your choice should figure in the top 10-15 schemes that have performed consistently over a 5-year period.
An important point to note is the performance of the fund vis-a-vis the benchmark. Last but not the least, keep an eye on the expense ratio of the funds, if it is too high compared to its peers and not justifying the cost with its performance; it may be a good idea to mark it away.
Ultimately, the fund should match your risk profile and appetite and suit your objective.
this
Users
Comment
article