Style Ratings For ETFs & Mutual Funds

Style Ratings For ETFs & Mutual Funds: 2Q18

At the beginning of the second quarter of 2018, the Large Cap Blend, All Cap Blend, and Large Cap Value styles earn an Attractive-or-better rating. Our style ratings are based on the normalized aggregation of our fund ratings for every ETF and mutual fund in each style. Our fund ratings are based on aggregations of the ratings of the stocks they hold. See last quarter’s Style Ratings here.

 

Interview With Keith Ashworth-Lord Author Of Invest In The Best [Pt. 2]

Q1 hedge fund letters, conference, scoops etc

The Large Cap Blend and Large Cap Value styles house the most Attractive-or-better rated funds. Figures 4 through 7 provide more details. The primary driver behind an Attractive fund rating is good portfolio management, or good stock picking, with low total annual costs.

Attractive-or-better ratings do not always correlate with Attractive-or-better total annual costs. This fact underscores that (1) cheap funds can dupe investors and (2) investors should invest only in funds with good stocks and low fees.

Our Robo-Analyst technology[1] empowers our unique ETF and mutual fund rating methodology, which leverages our rigorous analysis of each fund’s holdings.[2]

See Figures 4 through 13 for a detailed breakdown of ratings distributions by investment style. See our ETF & mutual fund screener for rankings, ratings and reports on 6800+ mutual funds and 400+ ETFs. Our fund rating methodology is detailed here.

All of our reports on the best & worst ETFs and mutual funds in every investment style are available here.

Figure 1: Ratings for All Investment Styles

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

To earn an Attractive-or-better Predictive Rating, an ETF or mutual fund must have high-quality holdings and low costs. Only the top 30% of all ETFs and mutual funds earn our Attractive or better rating.

Fidelity Dividend Growth Fund (FDGKX) is the top rated Large Cap Blend fund. It gets our Very Attractive rating by allocating over 38% of its value to Attractive-or-better-rated stocks.

Pacific Advisors Small Cap Value Fund (PASMX) is the worst rated Small Cap Value fund. It gets our Very Unattractive rating by allocating over 78% of its value to Unattractive-or-worse-rated stocks. Making matters worse, it charges investors total annual costs of 7.2%.

Figure 2 shows the distribution of our Predictive Ratings for all investment style ETFs and mutual funds.

Figure 2: Distribution of ETFs & Mutual Funds (Assets and Count) by Predictive Rating

Style Ratings For ETFs & Mutual Funds

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 3 offers additional details on the quality of the investment style funds. Note that the average total annual cost of Very Unattractive funds is nearly five times that of Very Attractive funds.

Figure 3: Predictive Rating Distribution Stats

* Avg TAC = Weighted Average Total Annual Costs

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

This table shows that only the best of the best funds get our Very Attractive Rating: they must hold good stocks AND have low costs. Investors deserve to have the best of both and we are here to give it to them.

Ratings by Investment Style

Figure 4 presents a mapping of Very Attractive funds by investment style. The chart shows the number of Very Attractive funds in each style and the percentage of assets in each style allocated to Very Attractive-rated funds.

Figure 4: Very Attractive ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 5 presents the data charted in Figure 4

Figure 5: Very Attractive ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 6 presents a mapping of Attractive funds by investment style. The chart shows the number of Attractive funds in each style and the percentage of assets in each style allocated to Attractive-rated funds.

Figure 6: Attractive ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 7 presents the data charted in Figure 6.

Figure 7: Attractive ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 8 presents a mapping of Neutral funds by investment style. The chart shows the number of Neutral funds in each style and the percentage of assets in each style allocated to Neutral-rated funds.

Figure 8: Neutral ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 9 presents the data charted in Figure 8.

Figure 9: Neutral ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 10 presents a mapping of Unattractive funds by investment style. The chart shows the number of Unattractive funds in each style and the percentage of assets in each style allocated to Unattractive-rated funds.

The landscape of style ETFs and mutual funds is littered with Unattractive funds. Investors in Small Cap Value have put over 62% of their assets in Unattractive-rated funds.

Figure 10: Unattractive ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 11 presents the data charted in Figure 10.

Figure 11: Unattractive ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 12 presents a mapping of Very Unattractive funds by investment style. The chart shows the number of Very Unattractive funds in each style and the percentage of assets in each style allocated to Very Unattractive-rated funds.

Figure 12: Very Unattractive ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 13 presents the data charted in Figure 12.

Figure 13: Very Unattractive ETFs & Mutual Funds by Investment Style

Source: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

This article originally published on April 18, 2018.

Disclosure: David Trainer, Kyle Guske II, and Sam McBride receive no compensation to write about any specific stock, sector or theme.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and StockTwits for real-time alerts on all our research.

[1] Harvard Business School features the powerful impact of our research automation technology in the case New Constructs: Disrupting Fundamental Analysis with Robo-Analysts.

[2] Ernst & Young’s recent white paper “Getting ROIC Right” proves the superiority of our holdings research and analytics.

Article by Kyle Guske II, New Constructs

LEAVE A COMMENT


Saved Articles
X
TextTExtLInkTextTExtLInk

The Life and Career of Charlie Munger

Charlie is more than just Warren Buffett’s friend and Berkshire Hathaway’s Vice Chairman – Buffett has actually credited him with redefining how he looks at investing. Now you can learn from Charlie firsthand via this incredible ebook and over a dozen other famous investor studies by signing up below:

  • Learn from the best and forever change your investing perspective
  • One incredible tidbit of knowledge after another in the page-turning masterpiece of a book
  • Discover the secrets to Charlie’s success and how to apply it to your investing
Never Miss A Story!
Subscribe to ValueWalk Newsletter. We respect your privacy.

Congrats! Are you a smart person?

We have an exclusive targeted for being a sophisticated and loyal reader.

Sign up for ValueWalkPremium today and get our exclusive content for 35% off.

Use coupon code vip19 or click on the button below

Limited time offer only ENDS 12/31/2019 or after next 25 subscribers take advantage whichever comes first – please do not share this discount with others

 

0