From what is given by investopedia, the NAV can be changed if no of assets go up. I.e. amount of cash holdings increases. If cash goes up, say price of stock and liabilities remain constant, asset goes up. No of units remain constant. Hence the NAV will go up if there's a drastic increase in cash inflow.

No?

From what is given by investopedia, the NAV can be changed if no of assets go up. I.e. amount of cash holdings increases. If cash goes up, say price of stock and liabilities remain constant, asset goes up. No of units remain constant. Hence the NAV will go up if there's a drastic increase in cash inflow.

A very simple example
Cash = 1
Stock value = 2
Liabilities =1
Outstanding shares/units = 10

NAV = cash + stock value - liabilities / total units
NAV = 1 + 2 - 1 /10
NAV = 0.2

Now, let's increase the cash
Cash = 5
Stock value = 2
Liabilities =1
Outstanding shares/units = 10

NAV = cash + stock value - liabilities / total units
NAV = 5 + 2 - 1 /10
NAV = 0.6

No?

actually i would like to see it go on for a while. still trying to know if NAV will be effected if suddenly a large amount of money is injected. ramjade say number of units are fixed so is that confirmed with sources. from what i read and understand, his logic is not wrong so far.

just learning. don't shoot me if i misunderstood.

According to page 45 of latest annual report of Inter-pac, the largest investor is not FSM.

For Inter-pac Dana Safi, only 1 investor holds 83.33% of the fund on 31/03/2017. The unit held are 3,484,321, shown on page 7.

On page 45, section 10. Units held by the Manager and related parties , shows that it is Inter-Pacific Capital Sdn Bhd that holds 3,484,321 units. Therefore, the largest holder of this fund is Inter-pac itself.

Ramjade and puchogite bro,

Don't think these calculations will be very helpful for us leh. If you are confident in Interpac, go for it. If you are afraid of all these details, who holds what and how many holders, there are MANY other alternatives. And Ramjade don't repeat your mistakes in personal loan 100k thread

Being the reader of forum for so many years. But, some posts here force me to register an account to write something. 

http://www.morningstar.co.za/za/news/96498...sset-value.aspx

NAV = Total Assest / Units in Circulation

Stocks have a fixed number of shares available. To change its number of shares, a company can either issue new shares or buy back its own shares in the market. By contrast, unit trusts generally have an unlimited number of units, and the number changes on a daily basis, depending on how many units investors buy and sell that day.

The key is the units in circulation of an unit trust changes daily. When an investor buy, units increase and total asset increase; if other parameters unchanged (asset changes, expenses are 0), then NAV would be same. When an investor sell his units, unit in circulation reduce and total asset also decrease; if other parameters remain, NAV wont change.

As pointed by others, are you using NAV to refer to 'total asset value' or referring it to the fund price or NAV price which is NAV/unit? 

A huge injection of fresh money into a fund might not affect it as much as we think it would be.

1. At the end of the day, the daily fund price is calculated. And the new investor is sold the x amount of units based on the NAV price per unit.

2. The next day, the fund is having more cash than usual. And the equity portion of the fund may have reduced, and would maybe contribute less growth to the fund than yesterday. But if the overall market is down for the day, the fresh injection may also reduce a possible loss since the equity portion is lower.

3. How the fresh injection may affect the fund overall would depends on the action of the fund manager in the coming days, just like how we, individual investors, affect our own portfolio of funds by trimming and topping up our portfolio of mutual funds.

4. Not to forget that Bursa Malaysia is not a handful of listed companies (unlike the Laos stock market), and some investment houses defined small-cap stocks that they can invest into as stocks with market capitalization of not less than RM500 million.

Hence the huge injection of fresh money into the fund may be huge for the fund, but it is just a tiny fraction of less than 1% in its targeted stock(s) that the fund manager had set his/her eyes on.

Definition is not that far off from Investopedia.

Huge injection or withdrawal - they are similar situations; won't affect significantly the fund or rather its NAV price overall.

How big the whale are we talking? 

Big enough to cause the fund to reach its limits and closes it to further fresh investments? Or big enough to cause it to close as in 'gulung tikar' and close shop since the size of the fund will fail to give adequate management fees to keep it running?

One direct impact that is noticeable due to the fund's size is the management fee; which is usually based on a minimal threshold in value terms, and it is usually capped to a fixed percentage when it is above a certain level. When the fund size is too small, the fixed minimal amount of management fee trimmed would be too heavy to give adequate returns to the unit holders.

okay, we are talking about money enough to move the stock market... big whales like Soros or Buffett. And then the rest of the minions follow the news that they bought/sold... causing the stampede to enter or exit.

And me thinking that mutual funds are professionally managed with their funds very well diversified among many stocks...

I'm not well in touch with the local businesses... do tell the whole story.

which is quite bad for the retail investors, simply because they act as shell, basically do nothing apart from doing paperwork to SC compliance, because the FM of the fund they feed into does all the work, but the shell get free profit from it.

i remembered this topic had been brought up many many months ago..
some had been clearly written in the prospectus.....

Speaking of manulife AP reit, I realize that it hardly gives dividend.
Any reason why? Should I factor this when selecting my fund?  

i go no idea how they calculate....
to be honest...when i buy a fund...annual mgmt fees, MER or other fees except withdrawal fees is the last thing that i pay attention to.....
this practice of mine may be wrong to some....
to me, the fund's mandate fitting into my portfolio need and it's good records are some of the thing that i pay most attention to.

I saw some dividend given as additional units like every 4 unit gives another 1 unit.
What about those dividend eg RM 0.00014 per unit?

quite easy to compare.
Compare the feeder fund management fees and the main fund management fees. I'm pretty sure it is in the prospectus somewhere.
The difference is the feeder fund profit %.

Don't understand what it means by at fund level.

At the main fund level or at the feeder fund level?

maybe need other sifus to shed light on this.
take TA GTF for example.
we pay 1.88% to TA Investments & Maybank Trustee
then the master fund (Henderson Horizon Global Technology Fund) charges 1.88% management fee also.
If that assumption is true then the underlying assets must be doing extremely well for the retail investors to be able to profit.

It is mentioned that you are charged once, but doesn't mean it will be charged the same as the master fund.
It wasn't very clear in the prospectus.

eg:- master fund 1.5% expense, feeder fund 2%,
feeder fund profit 0.5%/annum.