Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Public Mutual v3, Public/PB series funds

views
     
empirekhoo
post Jan 25 2012, 09:37 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
218 posts

Joined: Jun 2006
From: 1001010100010011101
I had invested into Public Mutual Fund since 2008 (an initial of ~2k and 200 more per mth, DCA). And friggiting frat - I only got 5% in total due date (notice it's not per year. counting by per year it should be like... 1% PA?)

I understand that this fund is pretty risky (80% equity), but still I think this fund is much under performed. Any input on my situation? Is it worthy for me to switch to something less risky like saving funds or something?
empirekhoo
post Jan 26 2012, 11:11 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
218 posts

Joined: Jun 2006
From: 1001010100010011101
QUOTE(wongmunkeong @ Jan 26 2012, 12:02 PM)
EmpireKhoo - if U really invested into Public Mutual itself, U should be laughing all the way to the bank

However, if U invested in one of Public Mutual's funds AND don't know which, you should be thanking your lucky stars it's not a negative return/loss - know the saying about "xxxxs and $ are soon parted"?
From your blog - you're working as an engineer and yet U do not state the specifics.
How are fellow forumers to digest the needed data/info and advise? doh.gif

Specifics are:
a. What fund did you get into?
b. What's your definition of "less risky"?
c. What's your aim for this chunk of $ by when?
etc.

Engineers these days... (sorry old man's ramblings notworthy.gif)
*
a. I'm posting while doing other stuff. it should be public GROWTH fund.. smile.gif

let me go into slight deeper before i get flamed again. the way I've calculated '1.66%' PA is pretty vague. First noted that I'm investing in monthly basis. So a calculation including those in is very complex. I've simplified it by summing all i've invested, calculated to the current value.

the performance chart in Public Mutual concur with my finding - it's about 2.91% PA (2 Jan 2008 - 25 Jan 2012 = 12.17%), not including 5.5% sales commission (I've always hated this). So my question is: is this fund underperforming?


b. less risky: less % of portfolio in equity. I think PSF is ~70%. It gives 15.86% (2 Jan 2008 - 25 Jan 2012). Or PBond 27% in the timeframe.

c. aim: to keep until i can afford a house. Timeframe 4-5 yr from now.

Anyway, do you guys happen to know any 'no loading' fund here? US does have some but.. ah well.

This post has been edited by empirekhoo: Jan 26 2012, 11:45 PM
empirekhoo
post Jan 29 2012, 12:06 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
218 posts

Joined: Jun 2006
From: 1001010100010011101
QUOTE(wongmunkeong @ Jan 27 2012, 08:21 AM)
Sorry bro, not flaming per se  notworthy.gif I've just got high expectations of engineers / specific science people  laugh.gif

Ok ok - my 2 cents point of view here. Please note - NOT gospel truths yar, just my own POV.
[attachmentid=2655639]
Based on the stats above (and the same blah blah past what not does not mean future what not) pressed out of PM's FPAdvisor:
1. PSF is a better defensive fund VS PGF & PBOND (see 5yrs ending 2008)
2. PGF is a better returns fund VS PSF & PBOND (see 5 yrs ending 2012 yesterday)
3. PSF VS PGF - Sharpe Ratio (risk vs returns measurement - google "Sharpe Ratio")
    a. Big enough a difference when market falls (PSF has higher Sharpe Ratio)
    b. Too small a difference when market climbs
4. Both PGF & PSF did lower than their benchmark for 5 yrs ending 2012 yesterday. PBOND beat benchmark
5. All 3 beat benchmarks for 5yrs ending 2008
6. Pls dont compare PGF & PSF to PBOND - PBOND is a bond fund and its underlying assets are bonds and fixed income. IF U factor in service charges, PBOND (0.25% service charges only) may come up tops for bad ending years.

Bottom line:
a. Have a plan - Asset Allocation and entry/exit plans based on your own requirements (4 to 5 years for a home?)
b. It's good that U track the returns. It's even better if U know how it stands VS others AND what role that particular fund/investment plays in your overall plans (rather than "i want to make as much as possible, as fast as possible" - itu main lottery better tongue.gif)
*
Cool. Interesting analysis there. So generally from the Sharpe Ratio we can see PSF is a better choice from historical data... and thanks for your bottom line suggestions..

(btw, main lottery is worse than gambling in terms of statistic.. heeh)
« Next Oldest · Finance, Business and Investment House · Next Newest »
 

Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
 0.0488sec    1.02    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 18th December 2025 - 06:43 AM
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Removal Request
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025  IPS, Inc.