Jupiter Financial Opportunities Fund

cloud_dog

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Try me.

I'm only trying to find out what sort of "research" I should be doing to improve my stock/investment picking skills.

I've applied all the criteria you've used but my last 3 funds invested in were run by the well respected Dr Mott, David Mitchinson and Patrick Evershed. These were highly rated managers but unfortunately they have bombed with their last retail investment charges (well the one's that I'm aware of).

Unfortunately your starting point is not like-for-like. These are unprecedented (or certainly rare) times.

Any equity based investment has suffered without any consideration of value or fundamentals, with institutions selling out irrationally because they need(ed) cash.

No amount of research would have been able to foretell the moment. I know a lot people foresaw the possible future but, no one could know when the fallout would happen.

For example I cannot be sure that we have reached the bottom. Relatively prices had fallen a long way and offer an awful lot more value that they did 6 months ago but, that doesn’t mean they might get cheaper.

cloud_dog

purch

I'm only trying to find out what sort of "research" I should be doing

You are getting yourself hung up on one word (research), especially as the statement was referring to the OP, and completely missing the point.

The point is, to ensure that you have a clear, well thought out reason for buying an Investment rather than relying on recommendations, advice, gossip, paid for hype so that you can then have a clear, well thought out strategy.

It's all very well buying something on the recommendation of a Financial journalist or similar who has just been 'wined and dined' by a Fund Manager. What do you do 6-12 months later when that Investment has moved either up or down ?

A good example of someone having a clear and well thought out process was demonstrated in a Thread many months ago, where a guy was deciding on a Portfolio of Funds run by "Star Managers".

Personally I thought it was a loony idea, and if it was put in place it will probably be showing a large loss currently, but as the decision process was clear and well defined from the outset, as long as the OP followed it throughout the Investment by rebalancing, and moving Funds if the Manager changed or was downgraded from whatever criteria he was using to rate them, then over the long term he has a far better chance of being successful than if he had chosen a less well thought out route.

At least he knows why he bought the Fund so deciding what to do later is easier.

dunstonh

A good example of someone having a clear and well thought out process was demonstrated in a Thread many months ago, where a guy was deciding on a Portfolio of Funds run by "Star Managers".

Ratings and awards get on my nerves. Ratings are typically given to funds that have done well in a certain period and are often out of date (fund manager leaves but the rating stays in place for example).

Awards are worse. Especially from magazines. They go out to the sponsors and advertisers rather than the best. Or those whose turn it is to get the rosette this year because their 2005 one sounds a bit old now and need a nice new shiny 2008 one.

Old_Slaphead

purch wrote: »

You are getting yourself hung up on one word (research), especially as the statement was referring to the OP, and completely missing the point.

The point is, to ensure that you have a clear, well thought out reason for buying an Investment rather than relying on recommendations, advice, gossip, paid for hype so that you can then have a clear, well thought out strategy.

It's all very well buying something on the recommendation of a Financial journalist or similar who has just been 'wined and dined' by a Fund Manager. What do you do 6-12 months later when that Investment has moved either up or down ?

A good example of someone having a clear and well thought out process was demonstrated in a Thread many months ago, where a guy was deciding on a Portfolio of Funds run by "Star Managers".

Personally I thought it was a loony idea, and if it was put in place it will probably be showing a large loss currently, but as the decision process was clear and well defined from the outset, as long as the OP followed it throughout the Investment by rebalancing, and moving Funds if the Manager changed or was downgraded from whatever criteria he was using to rate them, then over the long term he has a far better chance of being successful than if he had chosen a less well thought out route.

At least he knows why he bought the Fund so deciding what to do later is easier.

I don't think I'm missing the point.

I try and do 'due diligence' on all the purchases I make using manager's standings, funds factsheets, my own views on sectors (gleaned from press, recommendations etc), where there's gaps in my portfolio etc etc.

My rates of return over the past 10 years have been singularly unimpressive and, given the amounts I've probably paid in managers fees etc - certainly not worth the effort.

I certainly don't follow recommendations. My view is that there's very little the interested private investor can do to improve his lot - research or no research. The whole system seems geared to cynically relieving the investor of his hard earned cash. Maybe a better method of stock/UT picking would be using a dartboard & keeping fingers tightly crossded.

zippeh_2

I concur with Mr Slaphead...

Anyone care to elaborate on their particular fund research methods?

1echidna

I must admit to deep suspicion about people, unless they are good professionals, who claim to have researched something, particularly if they claim to have 'thoroughly' researched something. More often than not it means they have spent a few hours on it and come to a conclusion based on some analysis somewhere which may have as many holes as a seive. This is a general comment, on financial matters it is even more difficult, as it is clear that even experienced people often get it spectacularly wrong. My personal method, after some decades of amateur interest in economics, politics and geography is to look at the pundits and tipsters to see where I can see what appears to be a valid analysis and to gradually build a balanced portfolio. I have to say I also have a healthy scepticism of most things I read particularly where the author has any sort of vested interest, even where this is just to appear clever.

paul5046

When it comes to shares three things come to mind.

1. Working Lunch a few years ago did a competition between the on show experts and a donkey to pick the best shares over the next 12 months. The donkey won by random choice.

2. Many years ago myself and a friend (an accountant with the Pru) researched three unit trusts. Two did very well, the third was ended up being the worst in the best buy after 5 years.

3. Warren Buffet, its well known, only invests in companies with a good management board.

All three point, in my opinion, to the fact that "research" is a waste of time.

purch

It continues to amaze me how people are so eager to display their total inability to read and comprehend simple text.

No doubt you will continue to get your Investment ideas from the pages of MoneyMail or similar, and then 12 months down the line when this great 'opportunity' is underwater by 50% or more, and the highly qualified "Financial" Journalist you all followed so eagerly, is busy writing articles for the gossip column of the Sun, you'll all be back on this forum bemoaning your luck and asking "what shall I do" .............

cloud_dog

Nice little rise in a general sea of red.

Obviously one pleasant evening doesn' a summer make (or something similar).

Old_Slaphead

Very impressed - about time one of my funds had a blueish tint.

One for the researchers; any specific reason?