Public Mutual declares distribution for 11 funds

Fund | Gross Distribution / Unit
Public Far-East Consumer Themes Fund | 3.50 sen per unit
PB Growth Fund | 8.00 sen per unit
PB Asia Equity Fund | 2.00 sen per unit
PB China ASEAN Equity Fund | 3.50 sen per unit
PB Islamic Asia Equity Fund | 1.50 sen per unit
PB Balanced Fund | 7.00 sen per unit
PB Fixed Income Fund | 5.00 sen per unit
PB Islamic Bond Fund | 5.00 sen per unit
Public Islamic Money Market Fund | 2.00 sen per unit
PB Cash Management Fund | 2.00 sen per unit
PB Islamic Cash Management Fund | 1.90 sen per unit

URL: http://www.publicmutual.com.my/page.aspx?n...rls_010710_1430

Guys,if i were to switch fund, Will the 5.5% charge apply?

If switch from load to load funds - RM 25
If switch from load to low-load funds - RM 25
If switch from low-load to load funds - RM 25 + 5.5%

Please see the full details in the prospectus. If you tell us your current fund and then the target fund, we can help you analyze if the switch is good.

This post has been edited by gark: Jul 1 2010, 08:28 PM

IIRC my dad have a fund that is public islamic dividend fund. Return is absolutely rubbish with 5.1k in at 2007 and now only 5.2k

Was thinking to put them into highly aggressive fund such as Small Cap

IINM, only the 5.5% is payable, and not the RM25.

---

Added on July 1, 2010, 10:36 pmMost funds bought in the later half of 2007 would have suffered a similar fate. Quite a few in fact would still be in the red.


This post has been edited by howszat: Jul 1 2010, 10:36 PM

noob question.i don understand when people said that dividen is juz one of the lie of pm.so where we gain our profit?juz by buying at low price n selling at high price?

Emm Public Islamic Dividend Fund is a defensive fund, the performance is actually not too bad. Are you sure taking even more risk is a right step? Since you are so worried about short term performance and all?

Anyway my bad, thanks howzat for pointing it out that the RM 25 is not payable if 5.5% is charged.

---

Added on July 1, 2010, 11:04 pmYou look at the fund performance (dividend reinvested) vs. benchmark. PM still do give out dividends although their fund have lost money for the year.

This post has been edited by gark: Jul 1 2010, 11:04 PM

Well,I for one would prefer the current value to be red instead of making some paltry sum. Anyway he still have around 5 more years to go so might as well put them into highly aggressive fund. 5k isnt a lot of money anyway nowadays

No offence to all the agents here. But I think i really need to rant a bit to vent my frustration on PM. Well, isn't the very idea of buying unit trust to let the 'professionals' handle our(noobs') investment? Isn't the service charge and annual fee fees for their 'wise and wonderful' decision making? But what do we get at our end? Not only couldn't they perform better than the index benchmarks, nor at the same par as the benchmarks (which i think even my illiterate grandpa is capable of. Yea, i'm being sarcastic) they actually underperformed!! Is this kind of rip off the Ponzi scheme of the 21st century?? Selling something(investment skills) which is nonexistent? This is really like the case of AIG's CEOs getting those fat cheques for their failures! So, am i the only fool led to believe that I'm a noob who needs all the help from these so called 'professional' fund managers to lose....i mean 'invest' my hard-earned moolah (while at the same time getting a chunk of it) or is there anyone of you out there who feels the way i do?
Once again, no offence to all the agents out there. I know you are just making a honest living....but all these underperforming managers should really be shot!!

PS: I'm only referring to PCSF and PBCPEF

This post has been edited by dannyme: Jul 2 2010, 02:43 AM

so if i use epf acc1 to invest , which fund is best to invest ? thanks.

You can only select from the polls of EPF approved funds.

ooo ok ok thanks fyi. so i heard from my friend every quaters i need sign a documents ? if i want continue to invest . Is that true ? so i stop invest may i withdraw it anytime ? Thanks.

By definition, the average return of all different funds will approximate the average return of the market, since all these funds make up the market.
In other words, in the long run, it is very hard for any particular fund to beat the market.

As far as i know, Public Mutual has performed better than the other mutual funds here. So you would need to point out which funds have performed badly and compare them to other funds and see if they really have underperformed. I guess it is not fair to say PM sucks without comparing to other funds, and one bad fund doesn't equal to all funds bad.

Personally 5.5% is too much for me to swallow, so i'd rather invest in index ETF, which isn't all that common here and doesn't have much liquidity, so i guess i'll resort to picking my own stocks.

But to buy bonds i think it's good to invest in PM bond funds since there is no easy way for retail investors to purchase bonds and it's only 0.25% service charge.

This post has been edited by heliora: Jul 2 2010, 01:35 PM

Really? So like PB select bond fund, There is only 0.25 service charge?

My data shows that the annualized 3 year rtn is at 6.69% vs benchmark 2.03% (KLSE EMAS SHARIAH). Having performed 3 times better than benchmark is not too bad. It is not the best performing PM fund, but it beat its benchmark.


To Dannyme,

If the fund underperform the benchmark, I too will be pissed off. Just switch to a fund. The charge is RM 25.00 per switch irrespective of amt.

Xuzen

Dear xuzen. Can you show how you get the 6% return as as the simple profit now is only a 1.9% increase and an online calculator show an annualized return of 0.649 % only

This post has been edited by idunnolol: Jul 2 2010, 06:35 PM

Dear Unitholder,

We are pleased to attach the market wrap for the week ended 25 June 2010 for your information.

Regards

Customer Service

To be fair, this is not just PM - it applies to every other fund manager out there.

Letting the professionals handle our investments may be what many people believe, but the reality is quite different. Many funds have quite well defined objectives, like investing in particular sectors or in particular regions, and maintaining a certain % in equities. The fund managers are tied to these rules regardless of market conditions. Which means that if you buy into these funds, the decision making is not completely the responsibilities of the fund managers - you have to decide what to buy, when to buy, and when is a good time to get out, as the fund managers have to stay in, regardless. And once in a while, it is the investors causing the problem when they redeem in panic situations, and the fund managers have no choice but to sell the equities at rock bottom prices.

There are certain types of funds where the objective allows the manager wide variations in asset allocation, depending on the market condition. In theory, this sounds attractive as the manager can make decisions according to market conditions, but the funds I am aware of don't appear to do very well.

Then there are the balanced funds, where the fund managers would sell off some equities as market rises causing them to exceed the % for equities stated in the objectives and buying some back as market falls, for the same reason. This would provide a level of capital preservation that would not be seen in aggressive equities funds, in theory.

As for under-performing the benchmarks, the answer probably lies in the fact there are good managers (individuals) and not so good ones, like most things While they are responsible for day-to-day management of the funds, investors would still need to review their funds from time to time and not simply leave everything to the "professionals".

Guys, I think you got the idea all wrong...

It does not matter if it's a mutual fund, a trust fund, or you actually buy stocks on your own. It's an investment, period.

Whether you like it or not, investment involves the possibility of losses.

Take another example, what you are talking about is similar to what a business owner hire people for. For example, if you hire a cashier to work in your restaurant, are you expecting that the cashier will always be 100% accurate in his/her work? If you hire a cook for your restaurant, does it mean that he/she will cook 100% perfectly tasty dishes at all times? Come on, people...

You are comparing apples with durians and orangutans.

If I don't know how to cook, and I'm paying someone to cook, I have every right to expect that cook to cook better dishes than me. Otherwise, what's the point of paying the cook?

If you are paid to do something, you may not be expected to deliver 100%, but at least you are expected to deliver value for money.

This post has been edited by howszat: Jul 3 2010, 01:25 AM