CHAPTER 4: MUTUAL FUNDS AND OTHER INVESTMENT COMPANIES

1. The unit investment trust should have lower operating expenses. Because its portfolio is fixed once the trust is established, it does not have to pay portfolio managers to constantly monitor and rebalance the portfolio as perceived needs or opportunities change. Because its portfolio is fixed, the unit investment trust also incurs virtually no trading costs. The offering price includes a 6% front-end load, or sales commission, meaning that every dollar paid results in only $.94 going toward purchase of shares. Therefore, Offering price = = = $11.38 NAV = offering price (1 load) = $12.30 .95 = $11.69 Stock A B C D Total Value 7,000,000 12,000,000 8,000,000 15,000,000 42,000,000

2.

3.

4.

Net asset value = = $10.49

5.

Value of stocks sold and replaced = $15,000,000 Turnover rate = = .357 = 35.7%

6.

a. b.

NAV = = $39.40 Premium or discount = = = .086 The fund sells at an 8.6% discount from NAV

7.

Rate of return = = = .088 = 8.8%

4-1

8.

a.

Start of year price, P0 = $12.00 1.02 = $12.24 End of year price, P1 = $12.10 0.93 = $11.25 Although NAV increased by $.10, the price of the fund fell by $0.99. Rate of return = = = .042 = 4.2%

b.

An investor holding the same portfolio as the manager would have earned a rate of return based on the increase in the NAV of the portfolio: Rate of return = = = .133 = 13.3%

9.

a.

Unit investment trusts: diversification resulting from large-scale investing, lower transaction costs associated with large-scale trading, low management fees, predictable portfolio composition, guaranteed low (or zero) portfolio turnover rate. Open-end funds: diversification resulting from large-scale investing, lower transaction costs associated with large-scale trading, professional management that may be able to take advantage of buy or sell opportunities as they arise, record keeping services. Individual stocks and bonds: No management fee, realization of capital gains or losses can be coordinated with your personal tax situation, portfolio can be designed to your own specific risk profile.

b.

c.

10.

Open-end funds are obligated to redeem investor's shares for net asset value, and thus must keep cash or cash-equivalent securities on hand in order to meet potential redemptions. Closed-end funds do not need the cash reserves because they do not have to worry about redemptions. Their investors instead sell their shares to other investors when they wish to cash out. Balanced funds keep relatively stable proportions of funds invested in each asset class. They are meant as convenient instruments to provide participation in a range of asset classes. Asset allocation funds, in contrast, may vary the proportions invested in each asset class by large amounts as predictions of relative performance across classes vary. They therefore engage in more aggressive market timing. a. Empirical research indicates that past performance is not highly predictive of future performance, especially for better-performing funds. While there may

11.

12.

4-2

be some tendency for the fund to be a better-than-average performer next year, it is unlikely to once again be a top 10% performer. b. On the other hand, the evidence is more suggestive of a tendency for bad performance to persist. This is probably related to fund costs and turnover rates. Thus if the fund is among the poorest performers, I would be concerned that its performance will persist.

13.

NAV0 = $20 Dividends per share = $.20 NAV1 is based on the 8% price gain, less the one percent 12b-1 fee: NAV1 = $20 (1.08) (1 .01) = $21.384 Rate of return = = .0792 = 7.92%

14.

The excess of purchases over sales must be due to new inflows into the fund. $400 million of previously-held stock was replaced by new holdings. So turnover is: 400/2,200 = .182 = 18.2%. Fees paid to investment managers were .007 $2.2 billion = $15.4 million. Since total expense ratio was 1.1% and management fee was .7%, we conclude that .4% must be for other administrative expenses, which therefore come to .004 $2.2 billion = $8.8 million. As a rough cut, your approximate return will equal the return on the shares minus the expense ratio and purchase costs: 12% 1.2% 4% = 6.8%. But the precise return will be less than this because the 4% load is paid up front, not at the end of the year. To purchase the shares, you would have had to lay out: $20,000/(1 .04) = $20,833. The shares would rise in value from $20,000 to $20,000 (1 + .12 .012) = $22,160. The rate of return is (22,160 20,833)/20,833 = 6.37%.

15.

16.

17.

Suppose you have $1000 to invest. Class A funds will leave you with an initial investment of $940 net of the front-end load. After 4 years, your portfolio will be worth: $940 (1.10)4 = $1,376.25

4-3

Class B shares allow you to invest the full $1,000, but your investment performance net of 12b-1 fees will be only 9.5%, and you will pay a 1% exit fee if you sell after 4 years. Your portfolio value after 4 years will be: $1000 (1.095)4 = $1,437.66, which after paying the exit fee will leave you with: $1,437.66 .99 = $1,423.28. Class B is better if your horizon is 4 years. With a 15-year horizon, the Class A portfolio will be worth: $940 (1.10)15 = $3,926.61 The Class B portfolio will be worth (there is no exit fee in this case since the horizon is greater than 5 years): $1000 (1.095)15 = $3,901.32 At this longer horizon, Class B is no longer the better choice. The effect of Class B's .5% 12b-1 fees accumulates over time and finally overwhelms the 6% load charged to Class A investors.

18.

Suppose that finishing in the top half of all managers is purely luck and that the probability of doing so in any year is exactly 1/2. Then the probability that a particular manager would finish in the top half of the sample 5 years in a row is (1/2)5 = 1/32. We would then expect to find that 350 (1/32) = 11 managers finish in the top half for five consecutive years. This is precisely what we found. Thus, we should not conclude that the consistent performance after 5 years is proof of skill: we would expect to find 11 managers exhibiting precisely this level of "consistency" even if performance is due solely to luck.

19.

a.

After 2 years, each dollar invested in a fund with a 4% load and a portfolio return equal to r will grow to: $.96 (1 + r .005)2. Each dollar invested in the CD will grow to $1 (1.06)2. If the mutual fund is to be the better investment, then the portfolio return, r, must satisfy: .96 (1 + r .005)2 > (1.06)2 .96 (1 + r .005)2 > 1.1236 (1 + r .005)2 > 1.1704 1 + r .005 > 1.0819

4-4

1 + r > 1.0869 or r > .0869 = 8.69%. b. If you invest for 6 years, then the portfolio return must satisfy: .96 (1 + r .005)6 > (1.06)6 = 1.4185 (1 + r .005)6 > 1.4776 1 + r .005 > 1.0672 1 + r > 1.0722 r > 7.22% The cutoff return is lower because the "fixed cost," i.e., the one-time front-end load is spread out over a greater number of years. c. With a 12b-1 fee instead of a front-end load, the portfolio must earn a rate of return, r, that satisfies: 1 + r .005 .0075 > 1.06 In this case, r must exceed 7.25% regardless of the investment horizon.

20.

The turnover rate is 50%. This means that on average, 50% of the portfolio is sold and replaced with other securities. Trading costs on the sell orders are .4%; then the buy orders to replace those securities entail another .4% in trading costs. Total trading costs will reduce portfolio returns by 2 0.4% .50 = .4%.

4-5

21.

For the bond fund, the fraction of investment earnings given up to fees is = .15 = 15%. For the equity fund, the fraction of investment earnings given up to fees is = .05 = 5%. Fees are a much higher fraction of expected earnings for the bond fund, and therefore may be a more important factor in selecting the bond fund. This may help to explain why unmanaged unit investment trusts are concentrated in the fixed income market. The advantages of unit investment trusts are low turnover and low trading costs and management fees. This will be a more important concern to bond-market investors.

4-6