CAMPAIGN PERIOD:8 August – 28 August 2018

Receive one lucky draw entry for every RM3,000 invested in Public Lifestyle & Technology Fund (PLTF) per account
during the campaign period and stand a chance to win a MacBook Pro and other fabulous prizes!

Grand Prize MacBook Pro 13" with Retina display x 2 Winners

1st Prize Latest Samsung Note Series x 3 Winners

2nd Prize Nintendo Switch x 5 Winners

(For more details, please refer to their website.)

The returns in the main page tracked back all the previous transactions on the same fund, and totaled up all the values bought/switched-in and sold/switched-out. The returns is the difference between this total value and the current value.

The total value previously bought and sold is inclusive of any fees and service charges and taxes incurred.

(The same fund but under different account numbers, due to using multiple UTCs, will also be combined together.)

===========

I usually ignore the main page showing the value of the funds and only use it to counter check the total current value of the entire portfolio against my own Excel spreadsheet. My calculations treated the values differently.

PMO:
Total Bought: RM10,000
Total Sold: RM5000
Current value: RM5500
Total Returns of the fund = 10,000 - 5000 + 5500 = 500

My own calculations showing the current returns:
Total Units Bought: RM10,000 @ 0.2500 per unit = 40,000 units
Total Units Sold: 20,000 units
Remaining Units = 40,000 - 20,000 = 20,000
Current value: 0.2650 per unit
Total Returns of the fund = (0.2650 - 0.2500) x 20,000 = 300

Actually, the workings in the spreadsheet is a bit more complex than the simplified example shown above. The main page in my excel file would show the current active funds, their current returns and their CAGR (Compounded Annual Growth Rate).


This post has been edited by j.passing.by: Aug 14 2018, 04:13 PM

1) Yes, it is the total returns since the fund was started.

The difference is that when the fund is partially sold or switched out, in my excel calculations, I deduct not only the portion sold, but also any profit/loss associated with it.

Whereas PMO leaves the associated profit/loss in the fund.

I have to do that in my excel, otherwise I can't work out the annualised returns.

2) You can check back all the previous transactions... up to the past 3 years.

- Go to 'My Accounts'.
- Select the account you want to see, by clicking the account number on the left most column.
- It will show the Accounts page with several tabs... Account Details, Transactions, Distributions, Summary of Returns.
- Click the Transactions tab.
- Choose one of the transaction buttons on what to show... past month, 3 months, 1 year, etc.

This post has been edited by j.passing.by: Aug 15 2018, 02:58 PM

I started when internet was in still in its infancy. If the investor was living in a small town and has to travel far to a Public Bank or branch office, one way to get things done was leaving undated cheques and forms already filled in with a UTC/agent.

=========

BTW as mentioned in a previous post, gold members now have unlimited free switches when using PMO.

So far this year, in taking advantage of the new policy, I have changed the amount to switch to smaller amounts.

For example, if the plan was to make 1 or 2 switches per month previously, it can be changed to making a switch each week.

No need to think too much whether the timing is good or not to switch this week or next week. Just break the monthly switch to smaller amounts into weekly switches.

1) The minimal number of units acceptable in a switch is 1000.
2) After a fund is held more than 90 days, there is no lock-in penalty when switching out.
3) Gold members, unlimited free switches using PMO.

Is the Service Charge too excessive?

I think, a layman's opinion out of thin air, a fairer service charge would be 1.5% for equity funds. 0.5% or lesser for bond funds. And nil charges for money-market funds.

(Whether EPF or not, same charges.)

After all, this service charges are marketing cost and commission to the UTCs. Doing the marketing and transactions online has removed the involvement of any UTCs.

As for the operational cost of running the fund, there are the annual management fee and trustee fee.

If the industry cannot lower the service charge on their own, maybe it is time for the higher authority (is it BNM?) to initiate a review.

No, it is making a monthly switch into smaller weekly switches. If making the weekly switches any smaller, it will be daily switches!

What is achieved by making smaller switches? Maybe nothing at all. But if undecided to do the switch and time it this month or next month, or this week or next week.... the option is now open to 'not timing it' and do it this week/month and again next week/month, since the switching fee is removed out of the equation.

Note: In the long run, switching fees can slowly adds up...

In short, compound interest is "interest on interest".

If you don't take out the interest on a fixed deposit upon maturiy, and renew the fixed deposti on both the principal and the interest gained, then the interest on the FD is compounded. "Interest on interest". If you take out the interest and renew FD on only the principal, then it is simple interest.

While the returns on the FD is called 'interest', most investments such as mutual fund is simply called 'returns', What you have after many years of staying in the investment is the 'total returns'.

The returns on a mutual fund can be positive as well as negative in any given year, so the total returns after several years can be negative or positive.

The yearly returns are measured in percentages, and can be checked from the mutual fund's fact sheet, annual reports or past performance charts.

In the years of positive returns, if the returns are not taken out or trim, then we say that the returns are compounded if the fund make another postive gain in the following year.

Please also refer back to previous posts (in this thread) on 'income distribution' and understand what it is.

Below is EPF’s dividend in the past 10 years.
2008 4.50%
2009 5.65%
2010 5.80%
2011 6.00%
2012 6.15%
2013 6.35%
2014 6.75%
2015 6.40%
2016 5.70%
2017 6.90%

3-years, 5-years and 10-years annualised:
2008 5.15%, 5.04%, 5.18%
2009 5.32%, 5.22%, 5.06%
2010 5.32%, 5.38%, 5.04%
2011 5.82%, 5.55%, 5.14%
2012 5.98%, 5.62%, 5.33%
2013 6.17%, 5.99%, 5.51%
2014 6.42%, 6.21%, 5.71%
2015 6.50%, 6.33%, 5.85%
2016 6.28%, 6.27%, 5.91%
2017 6.33%, 6.42%, 6.02%

The total returns, respectively:
2008 16.25%, 27.87%, 65.64%
2009 16.81%, 28.96%, 63.80%
2010 16.81%, 29.95%, 63.49%
2011 18.48%, 31.00%, 65.05%
2012 19.05%, 31.43%, 68.06%
2013 19.66%, 33.76%, 71.03%
2014 20.51%, 35.15%, 74.30%
2015 20.79%, 35.92%, 76.62%
2016 20.06%, 35.53%, 77.54%
2017 20.22%, 36.49%, 79.39%


2017 was a good year for mutual funds.

Counting only the funds available in Public Mutual, in 2017, the lowest return for equity funds was 5.13% (Public Australia Equity Fund) and the highest was 30.53% (PB China Pacific Equity Fund).

Most of the Greater China and Asia Pacific funds were in the region of 20% and above. Malaysia and Asean equity funds were about 15% and Global funds, with about 40-50% in USA, were about 10% return for the year.

Out of 74 equity funds, only 2 funds have less than 8% returns in year 2017.

Even most of the mixed assets and balanced funds were getting better than 8%, and some even touching 20%. 2017 was indeed a very good year for mutual funds

Counting only the equity funds (and not including the mixed assets and balanced funds), funds that have data for the following period, as at 29 Dec 2017:

10-years: 34 equity funds. Out of these 34 funds, 7 have a total returns of 80% and above.
5-Years: 58 equity funds, 32 have total returns better than 36.49%.
3-Years: 61 equity funds, 31 have total returns better than 20.22%.

In conclusion: Mutual funds can beat EPF. Fund selection is important. Also important is which time and year was selected to form the base of the statistics.

Hence, equally important is timing, when the fund was bought can make a great difference in the total returns.

============

Btw. if the annualised return is 8%, the total return in 10 years is 115.9%.

By logic, it should be the former, but why don't you give them a call or message them within PMO just to make sure that they or rather the PMO is programmed to act logically on customer's behalf?

(I don't have any personal experience in this issue, as I had forsee it and was lazy to seek clarification and choose not to switch loaded units into the same fund as the low-load and unloaded units.)

You could also try switching 1 or 2k to a money-market fund first. (And pay a $25 fee as switching fee if you are not a gold member.) Since mm funds has no service charge... so it does not matter whether the units are loaded or low-loaded, there is only the switching fee to be paid.

If I'm not mistaken, Public Bond Fund has been closed a very long time to fresh investments, so you must be holding it since years ago. If there is intention to quit for good, then maybe it does not really matters which type of units gets offloaded first.

=======

For the uninformed... switching from a low-load bond fund to an equity fund will incur a difference in the service charge between the bond fund and the equity fund.

The loaded units in an equity fund has been paid the full service charge, and when it is switch to a bond fund, the units remain loaded.

So when the loaded units are switch again to a equity fund, there is no further service charge, only a switching fee incurred.

How to Beat EPF?

In the previous post, the 10-year annualized rate of EPF in the past 10 years from 2008 to 2017 was shown. It range from 4.50% to 6.90%, and a simple average of 6.02%.

While it was shown that some funds can have better returns than EPF, we should also note that EPF is the biggest mutual fund with 7-8 hundred billion in assets, and have huge revenue flowing in every month, was established more than 50 years ago, and have both in-house and external 3rd party investment teams running the show.

Needless to say, EPF can compete and outperform against many conservative mutual funds. To beat EPF, we will have to try a different field where EPF is not playing and not going head to head against it.

What fields to play? Aggressive small-cap funds, and non-local funds. And this is supported by the funds that beat EPF:

Public SmallCap Fund. 10-year total return: 136.96%
Public Islamic Opportunities Fund . 132.8%.
PB Asean Dividend Fund. 94.4%.

(If not mistaken, all the above 3 funds are oversubscribed and closed to fresh investments.)

Funds that were launched less than 10 years ago:
Public Far-East Alpha-30 Fund. 5-year total return: 101.5%
PB China Asean Equity Fund. 102.2%

When to play? EPF is in the market 24/7. To beat them, the ordinary investor has to stay in the game too.

Dropping in and out of the game (at random or following market noise or can’t handle the ‘paper loses’) means losing the game, unless of course the investor can perfectly time all his entries and exits.

So, what is the likeliest method to beat EPF? Long term buy-and-hold method. No short term timing – that is buys and sells frequently.

When to buy/invest? All the time. As and when you have spare money to invest.

What about those 10-year economic cycles? What about them?!!!

Buy all the time – whether the market is up or down – without timing… since your “long-term” is 20 to 30 years… even a 40 years buying cycle is possible if started at age 20.

What if you don’t have 10, 20 or 30 years to buy/invest continuously? Well, if you can’t beat them, you can join them.

Put the money into EPF. Or you can try your luck and put some into an equity fund too.

=========

If you are a short term player or planning to time the market, you may be interested to know that there are several funds with satisfactory YTD returns. Just to let you know what is possible... good luck!

PB Islamic Dynamic Allocation Fund
Public Islamic Global Equity Fund
Public Strategic Growth Fund

(Check their YTD returns since 29 Dec 2017.)

You have to understand why investors need to do portfolio rebalancing. If the investor has 40 years to slowly accumulate his mutual funds and is still in the initial accumulation stage, he may not need to rebalance his portfolio, especially if his portfolio is an all equity portfolio.

In the immediate stage of transitioning to the 3rd and final stage of mutual fund investing, he may choose to adjust the portfolio to have a balanced mixture of bond, money-market and equity funds, and may choose to rebalance it periodically.

Buying the same fund that focus on a specific region for decades, why not? If you believed that Asean or Asia Pacific region will have economic growth in the next several decades, then you invest in it until you believe another region has better returns for your investment.

===========

“What fields to play? Aggressive small-cap funds, and non-local funds. And this is supported by the funds that beat EPF:...”

The gist of the post was that mutual funds can give better returns than EPF. The funds mentioned were selected examples and nothing to do with funds within the EPF scheme.

As in a previous post, most of the funds approved in the EPF scheme were focus on the local stock market. It is only recently that more non-local funds were approved this year.

Anyway, any funds that were specifically mentioned are not recommendations. I am not qualified to make recommendations, just highlighting them as examples to lend support to the presentation.

It is more convenient for me to select and show their annualized returns as I received the monthly magazine from Public Mutual.

You may want to refer to Morningstar Malaysia where all the funds from every mutual fund companies are available for comparison.

"Since the comparison is made against beating EPF's compounded dividend (if you have not withdraw out)…"

There seems to be a misunderstanding here. The ‘compounded dividend’ in the 1st post on EPF rates were to have the ‘total returns’ in 10 years. The figures given in Public Mutual funds were in total returns, thus the annual dividends were calculated to total returns for easy comparison.

I repeat, the posts were not restricted to only funds available in the EPF withdrawal scheme. The 1st post shows that a small percentage of all available funds can give better returns.

The second post was on what types of funds are more likely to give better returns.

==============

Moving on…

Rebalancing.

On the subject of rebalancing, how periodically should it be done?

The most common advise by financial ‘experts’ is once a year.

(I would personally prefer doing in at year-end, thus setting up the portfolio for the coming new-year.)

Now, since the Asia Pacific markets face sharp drop in the recent week, the percentage drop in an investor’s portfolio might be lesser or might be greater, depending on the funds the port is holding.

Let’s put some numbers into the equity/bond ratio, so that we can see how the ratio is affected by a sharp drop in the equities.

Assuming that the bond side is mainly money-market funds, and giving a conservative annual return of 4% or about 0.07% in a week.

Initial portfolio amount: $1000.
Equity/Bond ratio: 90/10
Percentage drop in Equity side: 5%
Percentage gain in Bond side (in a week): 0.07%
Total amount in the Equity side becomes: $855
Total amount in the Bond side becomes: $100.07.
Portfolio total amount becomes: $955.07

Equity/Bond ratio becomes: 89.5/10.5
(Difference: 0.5%)

So, the ratio differs by a mere 0.5% when the equity side faced a sharp 5% drop. Whether the investor would do any rebalancing to adjust the ratio back to its initial ratio is up to him. To me, it is small difference and would not readjust solely to track market movements.

Below are various ratios, before and after a drop of 5% in the equity side.
Initial Equity/Bond ratio: 75/25
New Equity/Bond ratio: 74/26
(Difference: 1.0%)

Initial Equity/Bond ratio: 50/50
New Equity/Bond ratio: 48.7/51.3
(Difference: 1.3%)

Initial Equity/Bond ratio: 25/75
New Equity/Bond ratio: 24/76
(Difference: 1.0%)

Initial Equity/Bond ratio: 10/90
New Equity/Bond ratio: 9.5/90.5
(Difference: 0.5%)

The differences would peak at the 50/50 ratio at 1.3%. If equities or major stock markets drops 10%, the difference at 50/50 ratio would be about 2.65%

In conclusion: Having an investment strategy using the Equity/Bond ratio ensures that the investor sticks to his initial investment plan since the changes and adjustments done should be subtle and not drastic big moves.

In other words, don’t panic when the going gets tough!

Edit: typo "shape" corrected to "sharp".

This post has been edited by j.passing.by: Oct 31 2018, 05:39 PM

Continuing from previous post on Rebalancing…

What is the proper Asset Allocation for a Unit Trust Investor?

In other words, what is the best Equity/Bond ratio that will be most suitable to the investor?

Explained in details in this blog by Financial Samurai, there are various models and all are based on the age of the investor.

https://www.financialsamurai.com/the-proper...d-bonds-by-age/

The classic model is using age 100 and subtracting your age to get the equity ratio. If you are 30 years-old, the appropriate ratio would then be 70/30; if age 60, then the ratio is 40/60.

There are 5 different models in the article. Do read the reasons why the models differ slightly from each other. Maybe you would be able to vary and adjust the ratio slightly and make it your own.

I find the Survival Model interesting. It is 50/50 from age 35 onwards. Perhaps it would be more appropriate if the age is set to 45 instead of 35, and taking into account that we (or rather most of us) have EPF too.

For those who are age 60 and in retirement and depending solely on passive income from their nest eggs, the 4-box method could also help to find the best ratio to have.

The 4-box method (as mentioned in an earlier post) is 2 boxes on expenditures (basic necessities and other things you can do or spent if there is the money for it) and 2 boxes on incomes (stable income and not-so-sure-and-risky income.)

In each of the 2 expenditure boxes, write down all the appropriate needs/expenditures and their cost. Then put as much assets into the stable-income to match the basic-necessities box.

For example, if the basic monthly expenditure is $3,000 a month or $36,000 a year, then there should be a principal of $600,000 in an investment vehicle giving an annual return of 6%. This ensures that you will never run out of money before you die since you are withdrawing only the annual returns.

Then put the remaining assets into the not-so-sure-and-risky income box. This is the asset that you can take some risk. If the annual returns are good, you spent more; if not so good, spent less.

Hopefully, the last box can conservatively, without too much risky expectations from it, match the other-needs box; else your nest egg is not as big as you had initially thought.

Edit: last sentence corrected to "not as big as..."



This post has been edited by j.passing.by: Oct 31 2018, 05:37 PM

Public China Access Equity Fund

If not mistaken, this fund was established in 2013, and it was an in-house fund that was only open to other funds.

Public Mutual managed to get a license to trade the A-shares in China's stock market. Fund houses and foreign retail investors usually trade in Hong Kong's stock exchange in the H-shares.

The fund is now open to the public. There is a launching promotion till 30 November, so for those who want to switch some units into this fund will have to wait after the promotion ends.

In the above spoiler is the previous post on EPF rates.
The yearly dividends updated as follows:
2008 4.50%
2009 5.65%
2010 5.80%
2011 6.00%
2012 6.15%
2013 6.35%
2014 6.75%
2015 6.40%
2016 5.70%
2017 6.90%
2018 6.15%

Annualised returns: 3-years, 5-years and 10-years.
2008 5.15%, 5.04%, 5.18%
2009 5.32%, 5.22%, 5.06%
2010 5.32%, 5.38%, 5.04%
2011 5.82%, 5.55%, 5.14%
2012 5.98%, 5.62%, 5.33%
2013 6.17%, 5.99%, 5.51%
2014 6.42%, 6.21%, 5.71%
2015 6.50%, 6.33%, 5.85%
2016 6.28%, 6.27%, 5.91%
2017 6.33%, 6.42%, 6.02%
2018 6.25%, 6.38%, 6.18%

Total returns: 3-years, 5-years and 10-years.
2008 16.25%, 27.87%, 65.64%
2009 16.81%, 28.96%, 63.80%
2010 16.81%, 29.95%, 63.49%
2011 18.48%, 31.00%, 65.05%
2012 19.05%, 31.43%, 68.06%
2013 19.66%, 33.76%, 71.03%
2014 20.51%, 35.15%, 74.30%
2015 20.79%, 35.92%, 76.62%
2016 20.06%, 35.53%, 77.54%
2017 20.22%, 36.49%, 79.39%
2018 19.94%, 36.23%, 82.22%

2018 was a bad year for UT funds… the funds in Public Mutual got walloped left, right and centre as well.

Equity funds was from -7.11% (Public Islamic Dividend) to -22.34% (PIOF – a local small cup fund). The Greater China funds was from -11.45% to -17.0%.

Mixed Assets//Balanced funds got hit too, from -0.51% (PB Balanced fund) to -14.38% (PB Dynamic Allocation fund).

So, all round negative growth in the past 1-year in comparison to EPF’s 6.15%.

As for 3-years, 5-years and 10-years returns in comparison to EPF’s 19.94%, 36.23% and 82.22%...

3-years: equity funds were from -12.57% (PIOF) to 21.41% (Far-East Alpha-30 fund), with only 2 funds out of 67 funds higher than 20%.

5-years: they ranged from -11.5% (Islamic Treasures Growth fund) to 62.05% (PB China Pacific Equity fund), with only 7 out of 59 funds higher than 37%.

10-years: they ranged from 86.9% (China Ittikal fund) to 213.86% (PB Asean Dividend fund). with all 41 funds (that has 10-years data) higher than EPF’s 82.22%.

(Which is not surprising since the truly bad financial year was 2008 and it got dropped from the rolling 10-years statistic.)

As for the mixed assets/balanced funds, EPF outperformed all of them except for PB Asia Real Estate Income fund in the 10-years category. It gives a return of 158.9%.

Summary: As mentioned in a previous post, to beat and outperform EPF, think long term and take the risk in equity funds.

This post has been edited by j.passing.by: Feb 25 2019, 06:48 PM

… continue from previous post on comparing Public Mutual funds returns against EPF.

Bond Funds
There are 17 bond funds… and 8 of them are with 10-years data.

1-year: 4.13% (Institutional Bond fund) to 6.47% (PB Aiman Sukuk fund)
3-year: 12.43% (Select Bond fund) to 18.17% (PB Aiman Sukuk fund)
5-year: 20.24% (Select Bond fund) to 27.27% (PB Aiman Sukuk fund)
10-year: 45.69% (Institutional Bond fund) to 82.18% (PB Islamic Bond fund)

PRS Funds
There are 6 core PRS funds and 3 non-core PRS funds. Only the core PRS funds were launched more than 5 years ago and with 5-years data.
1-year: -10.93% (PRS Islamic Strategic Equity fund) to 2.34% (PRS Conservative fund)
3-year: -1.74% (PRS Growth fund) to 14.37% (PRS Strategic Equity fund)
5-year: -0.12% (PRS Growth fund) to 17.76% (PRS Conservative fund)

Summary: Needless to say, EPF outperformed both bond and PRS funds in the short and mid terms of 1, 3 and 5-years, and also in the longer 10-year.

========

Putting Everything Together.

The above were on Public Mutual funds. There are other funds from other fund houses. To check them and their returns, please refer to MorningStar Malaysia.

The point of using EPF as a benchmark to gauge UT funds’ performances is that EPF is among the biggest fund managers in the world with more than 800 billion ringgit in assets. Its investment is moderately conservative and all of us salary workers in the country are members of EPF.

In a retirement portfolio, EPF would play a central part and would occupy a major portion of the port. While EPF is not entirely risk free, it is pretty close to risk-free.

If risk-free is giving a return of about 6%, then investing and purchasing UT funds has to give a possible return several percentages above 6% to make it worthwhile to take on the added risk.

Another thing to take note is that there is a service charge in purchasing UT funds. If the service charge is 5.5%, to outperform EPF’s 10-year return of 82.22% (6.18% p.a.), the fund’s return has to be above 92.24% (6.75% p.a.)

========

EPF as part of retirement portfolio.

- Dividend is paid till age 100.
- Full withdrawal can be done any time after age 55.
- Contributions made after age 55 can be withdrawn at age 60.
- No limits on withdrawal in a month/year, on both the amount and frequency
- Nomination(s) can be easily and conveniently changed upon your request.
- Withdrawal transaction is quick and easy, transferred into your bank account within 3/4 working days.
- You can place a standing instruction to withdraw the yearly dividend automatically every year.

Further to above posts, the master prospectus are in PDF format... there are 4 of them... Public and PB, syariah and non-syariah... easier to download them and keep for future reference.

There is an additional tab, Fund Analytics, only available to 'gold members'. If you have it, explore it...

The montlhly magazine (for 'gold members') has updates of the monthly performance of all funds. The 'As at date' is 2 months ago, so not really up-to-date but okay for info.

To shortlist any equity funds in a hurry, shortlist those with nav price of 0.3000 cents and above. PSEASF is currently just below 0.3000 and should be in the shortlist too.

Due to same launching price of 0.2500 and the same distribution policy across the funds, those funds with higher nav prices are the better performing funds.

My 2 cents…

Are the past years performance any helpful in comparing the funds?

The past years performance of the fund is the track record of the fund… and rightly it is a general guide to its future performance, as like a new employee is hired based on his previous experience and his employment history.

Using recruiting a new employee as an analogy, the candidates could be ranked by HR based on their level of knowledge, their aptitude and other criteria from their past employment history.

The candidates would be shortlisted by HR for interviews. You are the boss who does the hiring and firing. You do the interviews yourself.

So far, so good… hope you are still with me so far…

So you picked the best among the best, and hired the best candidate.

Then you discovered a problem… or rather smelling something fishy and not right.

The HR doing the ranking of the candidates was a new recruit fresh out of school, and had pool and rank all the candidates from various lines of work and profession!

LOL.

End of story.

Above is what I posted in the FindSuperMart thread in the last week of July.

Since mid of March, I have been slowly switching out of equites into sukuks and bonds. The best month this year was January, port increased by about 5% - since the port was above 90% in equities. April was also a good month, with another jump of nearly 4%.

May was bad... by then the equities portion was lowered, and it bounce back in June recovering the lost in May.

Last month, the port is pretty flat, since the sukuk/bond section has increased tremendously to nearly 90%. This week, the remaining equites will be switched.

YTD, the port is at 12%...

Sukuks & some of the bonds funds are doing well so far this year, the IRR of these switches is about 12%.

Just for the record...

The daily increment for some bonds funds yesterday was extraodinary high. While mm funds are about 0.01% daily (which would be about 3.65% annualised), the bond funds were about 3 times higher in the past 12 months, around 0.03% to 0.04% daily.

Yesterday's daily increments were akin to equity funds...

PB AIMAN SUKUK FUND 0.53%
PB SUKUK FUND 0.26%
PB INFRASTRUCTURE BOND FUND 0.39%

PUBLIC ISLAMIC BOND FUND 0.38%
PUBLIC ISLAMIC INFRASTRUCTURE BOND FUND 0.43%
PUBLIC SUKUK FUND 0.37%

(Note: PB Aiman Sukuk is closed to new investments.)