Morningstar
RecommendedSign Up to Our Newsletters Open Window IconMorningstar's Guide to Investing in Stocks Arrow Right
Fund Research & Insights

Whither North America?

The first part of our review of the IMA North America sector.

Christopher J. Traulsen, CFA 7 May, 2008 | 7:17AM
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn
Font-Size
The U.S. is the epicentre of the credit crisis roiling world markets, but markets there have actually held up reasonably well. In dollar terms, the S&P 500 rose 5.5 % in 2007, slightly better than the FTSE All Share ex IT performed in Sterling terms (with the dollar's depreciation factored in, the FTSE beat the S&P 500 by a wide margin). In other words, it's not as if the US has become screamingly cheap on a relative valuation basis. This is borne out by both forward and trailing P/E ratios, with the S&P trading at a premium to the All Share on both measures.

Funds in the IMA North America sector largely reflect these trends, but there are significant

differentiating factors. First, market leadership shifted dramatically from small and mid-caps to large-caps amid 2007's market turbulence. Even though the shift has reversed in 2008, the impact is still visible over the trailing 12 months: In that period, the top quartile of funds held an average of 78.7% in large caps and 21.3% in small- and mid-caps. Financials, of course have been among the worst performing issues for the obvious reason, and fund performance reflects this--the bottom quartile funds over the past year held 18.7% of equities in financials on average, compared to 14.5% for the top-quartile offerings.

We continue to think highly of several funds in this sector. Tom Walker's Martin Currie North American is near the top of our list. In Walker, it has an experienced manager, and one who's not afraid to focus the fund on his best ideas. The fund typically holds just 40 stocks, and frequently features sector weights that diverge from sector norms. As of 31 March, the fund featured a nearly 18% weight in technology hardware shares--nearly double the sector average of 10%--and just a 12% weight in financials, along with overweights in energy and resources (all as per cent of equities). However, it's well worth noting that Walker's style comes with an elevated degree of risk. Although the fund performed well in a turbulent 2007, it emphasises some pricier growth shares and cyclical areas. These happened to work well in the very specific conditions that resulted in 2007's turbulent market, but such won't always be the case. Still, we think Walker has shown the skill and ability to serve investors well over time.

We also think Smith & Williamson North American is well worth a look. Lady Tana Focke is one of the most experienced managers in the sector and has put together one of the better 10-year records in the group, delivering outperformance in up and own markets alike. Whilst she isn't afraid to shown higher risk shares--as demonstrated by purchases of technology stocks such as Apple Computer and graphics card maker Nvidia in late 2007--the portfolio is reasonably conservatively constructed to help control risk, and it's also fairly priced with a TER of 1.32% at last count.

For those of a more contrarian bent, we'll offer up several top-flight funds in our next column on the topic.

A version of this article previously appeared in Investment Adviser, Financial Times Ltd.

The information contained within is for educational and informational purposes ONLY. It is not intended nor should it be considered an invitation or inducement to buy or sell a security or securities noted within nor should it be viewed as a communication intended to persuade or incite you to buy or sell security or securities noted within. Any commentary provided is the opinion of the author and should not be considered a personalised recommendation. The information contained within should not be a person's sole basis for making an investment decision. Please contact your financial professional before making an investment decision.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn
Font-Size

About Author

Christopher J. Traulsen, CFA  is director of fund research, Europe and Asia, Morningstar.

© Copyright 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Terms of Use        Privacy Policy        Modern Slavery Statement        Cookie Settings        Disclosures

The Morningstar Star Rating for Stocks is assigned based on an analyst's estimate of a stocks fair value. It is projection/opinion and not a statement of fact. Morningstar assigns star ratings based on an analyst’s estimate of a stock's fair value. Four components drive the Star Rating: (1) our assessment of the firm’s economic moat, (2) our estimate of the stock’s fair value, (3) our uncertainty around that fair value estimate and (4) the current market price. This process culminates in a single-point star rating that is updated daily. A 5-star represents a belief that the stock is a good value at its current price; a 1-star stock isn't. If our base-case assumptions are true the market price will converge on our fair value estimate over time, generally within three years. Investments in securities are subject to market and other risks. Past performance of a security may or may not be sustained in future and is no indication of future performance. For detail information about the Morningstar Star Rating for Stocks, please visit here

Quantitative Fair Value Estimate represents Morningstar’s estimate of the per share dollar amount that a company’s equity is worth today. The Quantitative Fair Value Estimate is based on a statistical model derived from the Fair Value Estimate Morningstar’s equity analysts assign to companies which includes a financial forecast of the company. The Quantitative Fair Value Estimate is calculated daily. It is a projection/opinion and not a statement of fact. Investments in securities are subject to market and other risks. Past performance of a security may or may not be sustained in future and is no indication of future performance. For detail information about the Quantiative Fair Value Estimate, please visit here

The Morningstar Medalist Rating is the summary expression of Morningstar’s forward-looking analysis of investment strategies as offered via specific vehicles using a rating scale of Gold, Silver, Bronze, Neutral, and Negative. The Medalist Ratings indicate which investments Morningstar believes are likely to outperform a relevant index or peer group average on a risk-adjusted basis over time. Investment products are evaluated on three key pillars (People, Parent, and Process) which, when coupled with a fee assessment, forms the basis for Morningstar’s conviction in those products’ investment merits and determines the Medalist Rating they’re assigned. Pillar ratings take the form of Low, Below Average, Average, Above Average, and High. Pillars may be evaluated via an analyst’s qualitative assessment (either directly to a vehicle the analyst covers or indirectly when the pillar ratings of a covered vehicle are mapped to a related uncovered vehicle) or using algorithmic techniques. Vehicles are sorted by their expected performance into rating groups defined by their Morningstar Category and their active or passive status. When analysts directly cover a vehicle, they assign the three pillar ratings based on their qualitative assessment, subject to the oversight of the Analyst Rating Committee, and monitor and reevaluate them at least every 14 months. When the vehicles are covered either indirectly by analysts or by algorithm, the ratings are assigned monthly. For more detailed information about these ratings, including their methodology, please go to here

The Morningstar Medalist Ratings are not statements of fact, nor are they credit or risk ratings. The Morningstar Medalist Rating (i) should not be used as the sole basis in evaluating an investment product, (ii) involves unknown risks and uncertainties which may cause expectations not to occur or to differ significantly from what was expected, (iii) are not guaranteed to be based on complete or accurate assumptions or models when determined algorithmically, (iv) involve the risk that the return target will not be met due to such things as unforeseen changes in changes in management, technology, economic development, interest rate development, operating and/or material costs, competitive pressure, supervisory law, exchange rate, tax rates, exchange rate changes, and/or changes in political and social conditions, and (v) should not be considered an offer or solicitation to buy or sell the investment product. A change in the fundamental factors underlying the Morningstar Medalist Rating can mean that the rating is subsequently no longer accurate.

For information on the historical Morningstar Medalist Rating for any managed investment Morningstar covers, please contact your local Morningstar office.

For more detailed information about conflicts of interest, including EU MAR disclosures, please see the “Morningstar Medalist Rating Analyst Conflict of Interest & Other Disclosures for EMEA”here

Select Your Site Edition To make sure the site is relevant to you, we need to know if you’re an individual investor or a financial professional.