Do we go back to find out what is the reason why a fund manager is soft closing his or her fund ?

My guess is this :- the fund manager is finding himself in a situation where he has too much cash but the market under the mandate of the fund is becoming 'fully harvested'. Whatever he finds it worth investing he has already invested. What's leftover are less worth investing. That's why he will have too much cash.

So when the fund is soft closed, if we put further cash into other funds playing in the same market, isn't it mean that the fund manager will be using your money to push into the over invested market ?

Assuming there is a valid reason why a fund is soft closing, and now investors are finding all means to put money into the replacement funds playing in the same market, is it a wise move ? Die die must invest into that market ?

All funds would naturally welcome more investors. More people buying their funds, more money the fund manager and the company will make. Now the fund manager is against the principle of making more money and yet want to soft close the fund. He has a message to tell.

Let assume that he has a valid and positive reason for his investors.

Now the fund is finally soft closed. And so we channel the money into replacement funds ? Isn't that ignoring the message of the soft closed fund manager ?

This post has been edited by puchongite: Apr 8 2017, 03:24 PM

The article mentioned that the interpac fund manager Lim Tze Cheng was from RHB. Anyone knows what funds were under his care when he was with RHB ?

KGF is position 23th in YTD return.

Interpac is position 2 and 3 in YTD return.

Haha I treated that as error and so Interpac funds ended in 2 and 3 positions.

So how many people from RHB left the company ? And where have they gone to ? Any has the chronology ?

Yes there is certain amount of similarity here, fund manager vs specialist doctors.

At least I know there are people who go to a hospital because of the named specialist. If the specialist move to other hospitals, they follow him.

Yeah less than three year data is risky.

I think people who buy the Interpac funds are taking a gambling bet, because the outstanding performance of the funds happen to coincident with the time when the fund manager joined the company end of last year.

But ...... aren't you using old and outdated data to speculate about the performance of the funds ?

He might be waiting for the big drops and then go for the kill and win big time. LOL.

Please perform leadership by example ?

Wow respect respect.

You switched directly from equity to equity or you go through intermediary bond funds ?

Again, did you practice leadership by example ?

That's the only way to find out if he really means it, or just as a bait post.

5 units become 7 units, so new nav = 5/7 old nav = 5/7 * .9329 = .6663

Updated nav on web site is .6657.

So the actual nav drop was 0.09%.

You know the profit drop of -25% isn't real drop. The units will be credited back later.

As for top up, that's a totally independent question. The world is now in geopolitical tension. It might last for sometime. In the meantime stock prices are on the dropping. Now everybody is just cautiously watching ....

I am totally confused but to make sure I look a bit smart, so I have been keeping quiet.

This post has been edited by puchongite: Apr 14 2017, 10:54 AM

And the further difference is one is able to gain ( or loss) due to price changes, and one is flat ?

But if the prices of whatever funds and bonds are already ringgit based, what's the point of holding the currency in SGD in static value ?

I think Bank Negara will probably also make noise about doing purchases in foreign currencies.