OIL HITS CANADIAN ECONOMY By Dave
Transcription
OIL HITS CANADIAN ECONOMY By Dave
Reproduction without permission is illegal Volume 21, Number 4 WHAT’S NEW ♦ ETFs Celebrate a Quarter Century – It was March 9, 1990 when the Toronto 35 Index Participation Fund began trading on the exchange. Who knew that 25 years later, this ETF would still be going strong? Now known as the iShares S&P/TSX 60 Index ETF, it is the largest and most heavily traded ETF in the country, with AUM of nearly $12 billion and an average daily trading volume of 3.5 million shares. That ETF paved the way for the global ETF industry that continues to show solid growth month after month and is fast becoming the preferred investment for do it yourself investors and a growing number of advisors. And why not? ETFs provide cheap access to a wide range of investment products, covering nearly all the investment universe. At the end of February, it was estimated that there were more than 5,600 ETFs available worldwide, from nearly 250 providers in 52 countries. Global assets under management stood at $2.9 trillion. Happy belated birthday ETFs!! ETFs see strong inflows in February – According to data reported by the Canadian ETF Association, February saw net creations of more than $1.6 billion, up more than 250% from a year ago and four times January’s level. BlackRock’s iShares and BMO were in a very tight race for the lead, followed by Vanguard. Total assets in the 353 Canadian traded ETFs sat at $81 billion, up more than 4% from January. 1 April, 2015 Single Issue: $15 OIL HITS CANADIAN ECONOMY By Dave Paterson, CFA GDP growth turns nega0ve in January. Believed to be a precursor to dismal Q1 numbers. With the price of oil continuing to struggle, the impact is starting to be felt across the entire Canadian economy. Last Tuesday, Statistics Canada reported that GDP shrank by 0.1% in January, a stunning reversal of December’s impressive 0.3% rise. If there is a bright spot in all of this, it is that it could have been worse. Many economists had been predicting a drop in GDP of 0.2%. Digging deeper, it was wholesale trade and retail sales that were the biggest drags on growth. While some of this is no doubt attributed to the lower oil price, a large component can arguably be blamed on the weather. January saw massive snow storms across many parts of the country and the Northeastern United States. A bright spot in the report was the goods sector, which saw a modest 0.3% gain. Given the harsh weather and frigid temperatures, utilities were strong, gaining 1.4% in January. Perhaps the biggest surprise was that oil production rose by more than 2.6%, despite the depressed oil prices. Unfortunately this was a one-time event resulting from many oil sands plants coming back on stream after being closed for maintenance in the fourth quarter. While positive for January, it doesn’t paint a particularly rosy picture for February as neither event was repeated in February. These numbers certainly support the comments made by Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz, who expects the growth numbers for the first quarter of the year to be “atrocious”. Atrocious may be a bit harsh, but there is little doubt they will be disappointing, as many oil companies have shuttered production, cutting spending and jobs. Some analysts fear that this trend will spill over into other parts of the economy, including construction, real estate, and the banks. I’m not quite so negative. I certainly don’t expect we’ll escape this unscathed, but the Continued on page 2... Mutual Funds / ETFs Update is published monthly by BuildingWealth.ca. All Rights Reserved April 2015 Reproduction without permission is illegal Oil - continued from page 1... lower dollar, combined with an increase in economic growth south of the border will help to shore up other areas of our economy including the industrial and retail focused sectors. Unfortunately, with the oil shock happening as quickly as it did, we may see a few months or even a quarter or two that look to be quite dismal before things start to turn around. Looking at the investment implications, the biggest is that interest rates in Canada are likely to remain lower for longer than many had originally anticipated. Whether Mr. Poloz steps in and makes another rate cut will be largely dependent on how the economy responds. If he sees any signs of further weakness, I expect him to make another cut. However, should we see a rebound, he will maintain the current rate levels until a meaningful recovery takes place. While I am not expecting any major downward pressure on bond yields, I certainly would not taking an overweight position in bonds. Sure, we may see a rally if the numbers point to a further rate cut, but I still see more risks to the downside. In this environment, I am a little more comfortable taking on more duration risk in the fixed income portion of a portfolio, however, I would still keep it in line with the FTSE / TMX Universe Bond Index or preferably shorter. At the end of February, the benchmark duration was listed at 7.6 years. I continue to prefer high quality corporate and provincial bonds over Government of Canada bonds. They allow for a slight yield pickup without taking on substantial default risk. For those investors comfortable taking on a higher level of overall risk, high yield can be a nice addition to your portfolio. It can provide higher returns than traditional bonds, but you accept more default risk and you also have the added worry of a liquidity crisis should we see a rush to the exits. Considering the total risk profile of high yield, I would suggest they make up only a portion of your bond allocation. On the equity side, I remain concerned with Canada. Even with the recent selloff, energy makes up more than 20% of the S&P/TSX Composite Index. There is no doubt that 2 energy will rebound, but the question is when. Until then, I expect to see higher than normal levels of volatility in the Canadian market. For those investors looking for Canadian equity exposure, I suggest you look for a fund that is much different from the index. U.S. equities have been my top pick for a while now, and remain so, but just barely. Valuation levels are high when compared to Canadian or EAFE stocks. Yet, given the potential growth picture in the U.S. compared to other regions around the world, these valuations may be somewhat warranted. According to estimates on Morningstar, the forward one year earnings growth of the S&P 500 is more than double the S&P/TSX Composite and significantly higher than the MSCI EAFE Index. European equities appear to be in the midst of a rally thanks to a stabilizing economy and the liquidity provided by the European Central Bank’s (ECB) latest bond buying program. With the ECB buying more 60 billion euros a month of bonds, yields on the region’s bonds continue to fall, and in some cases are negative, while equity markets have moved largely higher. I still think there is some upside potential, but until I see further signs that the moribund economies in the region turn around, I will view Europe as a shorter term opportunistic trade, rather than a longer term investment. My current investment outlook is: Under-‐ weight Cash Bonds Government Corporate High Yield Global Bonds Real Return Bonds EquiIes Canada U.S. Interna_onal Emerging Markets Mutual Funds / ETFs Update is published monthly by BuildingWealth.ca. All Rights Reserved Neutral X X X X X X Over-‐ weight X X X X X X April 2015 Reproduction without permission is illegal 3 TOP FUND PICKS FOR THE CURRENT ENVIRONMENT By Dave Paterson, CFA Highligh0ng some of my favourites for right now… With the continued uncertainty surrounding the investing environment, I thought it might be a good time to provide a quick update of some of my top picks for the near term. deep value process, and has done an excellent job protecting capital in down markets. This is a great core equity funds for most investors. Fixed Income U.S. Equity PH&N Short Term Bond & Mortgage Fund (RBF 1250) – This has been my go-to fund in the short-term space for a while. It invests in a well-diversified portfolio of short term bonds and mortgages. The quality of the underlying portfolio is top shelf and the management team is excellent. If you can buy the Series D units, you can get them for a very reasonable 0.60%. This remains the best short term pick around. iShares Core S&P 500 (CAD Hedged) (TSX: XSP) – With the S&P 500 being such a tough index to beat, you might as well not even try. With a management fee of 0.10%, this is one of the cheapest ways to access U.S. equities. The currency exposure is fully hedged, which should help if we see the Canadian dollar gain any ground on the greenback. If you think the Canadian dollar has further to fall, check out XUS which is the same investment exposure without the hedged currency. PH&N Total Return Bond Fund (RBF 1340) – When I thought higher rates were on the horizon, I favoured the conservatively positioned Dynamic Advantage Bond Fund over this fund. However, with rates likely on hold for the next few quarters, this high quality bond fund is now my top pick thanks to its top shelf management team and more index like duration. It invests in a mix of government and corporate bonds, and allows the managers the flexibility to invest in high yield and some other nontraditional strategies. In a flat or falling rate environment, this is a great pick that should do well relative to its competition. Manulife Strategic Income (MMF 559) – This tactically managed global bond fund makes a great compliment to the PH&N offering. It invests in a mix of government, corporate and high yield bonds from issuers located around the world. The management team will also dynamically manage currency in an effort to manage risk and boost return. Not a core holding, but definitely a nice piece of the fixed income portion of your portfolio. Canadian Equity Fidelity Canadian Large Cap Fund (FID 231) – This fund is a bit of a rarity for a Canadian focused equity fund in that it has a significantly underweight position in energy, no golds, and no exposure to Canadian banks. It is managed using a bottom up, Global Equity Mackenzie Ivy Foreign Equity Fund (MFC 081) – If you are looking for a global equity fund to hold in volatile markets, this fund belongs on your short list. It is a concentrated portfolio of high quality companies that is an excellent core offering for most investors. Mawer Global Equity Fund (MAW 120) – While the Mackenzie offering above is a great pick in volatile markets, this fund is a great pick in all markets. It doesn’t offer the same downside protection, but this portfolio of attractively valued, wealth creating companies offers much better upside participation. Factor in a low cost and a rock solid investment process and you get a rock solid core holding for most investors. Specialty / Sector Manulife Global Infrastructure Fund (MMF 8584) – Infrastructure investments generally offer long term stable cash flows that are often adjusted to inflation, low risk of loss of capital, and potentially attractive risk adjusted returns. This makes them excellent diversifiers when included as a part of a well-diversified portfolio. This Brookfield managed offering is, in my opinion, the best of the category, and a great way to access infrastructure investments. Mutual Funds / ETFs Update is published monthly by BuildingWealth.ca. All Rights Reserved April 2015 Reproduction without permission is illegal 4 UNDERSTANDING RBC’S GLOBAL BOND OFFERINGS By Dave Paterson, CFA Which of these RBC offerings will make a great addi0on to a tradi0onal bond porGolio? Recently, a reader emailed asking my opinion on the relative merits of four RBC Global Bond Funds; RBC High Yield Bond (RBF 496), RBC Global High Yield Bond (RBF 579), RBC Emerging Markets Bond (RBF 497), and BlueBay Global Convertible Bond (RBF 490). RBC High Yield Bond Fund – This fund invests in a diversified portfolio of U.S. and Canadian based high yield bonds. At the end of the year, it was heavily weighted towards the U.S., with just a modest 10% weighting in Canada. Nearly all the holdings carry a credit rating lower than investment grade. The yield is significantly higher than the broader Canadian bond market, and it carries a duration of 5.0, significantly lower than the 7.6 years of the FTSE/TMX Universe Bond Index. The managers use a value focused approach and look to find what they believe are high quality companies with stable or improving credit profiles. RBC Global High Yield Bond Fund – This fund has a much broader mandate than the RBC High Yield Bond Fund, and looks for opportunities around the world. It will invest in a mix of high yielding corporate and government bonds. It has a neutral asset mix of 50% U.S. high yield and 50% in emerging market bonds. As a result, it carries a higher level of risk than the other high yield offering. Volatility has been significantly higher over the most recent three year period, and I would expect it to remain higher. RBC Emerging Markets Bond Fund – This invests in a mix of government and corporate bonds of issues located in emerging market countries. Unlike the other two funds discussed, the credit quality of this offering will be more diversified, ranging from investment grade to high yield. This has been a very volatile bond fund, with a level of volatility that is more than double the broad Canadian bond market. BlueBay Global Convertible Bond Fund – This is a rather interesting offering that invests in convertible bonds from issuers around the world. A convertible bond is a bond that can be converted into a specified number of equities at a set price. Like a traditional bond, it pays a coupon rate of interest. When the company’s stock is trading below the conversion price, the convertible tends to trade more like a bond. However, when the stock is above the conversion price, it tends to trade more like equities. It is usually companies with poor credit ratings, but high growth potential who are most likely to issue convertible bonds. The fund itself has done okay, gaining 5.8% in the past year. Unfortunately, the fund was only launched in late 2012, so there isn’t a lot of track record on which to do a full analysis. Because the issuers are generally unrated, you are taking on a higher level of risk of default than with more traditional bonds, but you do have the growth potential of equities. So which of these is best? None. These are not core bond funds, and should not be used to make up your bond allocation. Instead, you’ll likely want to use the PH&N Total Return Bond Fund as your core, combined with a mix of the RBC High Yield Bond, RBC Emerging Markets Bond and the BlueBay Global Convertible Bond. This will be a nice, welldiversified portfolio. Alternatively you could just use the Global High Yield Bond instead of the High Yield and EM Bond funds to get a similar allocation. If you are willing to look outside of the RBC family, I would strongly suggest you consider the Manulife Strategic Income Fund. It is a tactically managed global bond fund that provides exposure to a mix of government, corporate, and high yield bonds from around the world. It invests in both developed and emerging markets. Another interesting feature is the managers actively manage currency as a way to not only lower risk, but also increase return. Yes, it is more expensive, but in my opinion, it is worth the extra cost for the high quality management and process used. This, combined with the PH&N Total Return Bond would be my pick for a fixed income sleeve of a portfolio. Mutual Funds / ETFs Update is published monthly by BuildingWealth.ca. All Rights Reserved April 2015 Reproduction without permission is illegal 5 USING T-SERIES FUNDS TO REDUCE OAS CLAWBACK By Dave Paterson, CFA Return of capital distribu0ons reduce likelihood of triggering OAS clawback With the baby boom generation fast approaching retirement age, many Canadians will begin drawing from the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and the Old Age Security Program (OAS). Everyone who is 65 or older, and has contributed to the plan is eligible for the CPP. OAS is a supplement to this plan that pays those eligible an income of up to $563.74 per month in 2015. Unlike the CPP, the OAS has an income means test, where those with incomes over $72,809 will see their benefits reduced based on what they earn. Currently, for every dollar of income above this limit, your OAS will be reduced by $0.15. This means that once you have an income in retirement of more than $76,567, you will receive no OAS, and will only receive CPP payments. For those who need to generate cash flow from their investments, but are very close to the income threshold, you may want to take a look at T-Series mutual funds. As a refresher, a T-Series Fund will pay out a monthly distribution that is largely treated as return of capital for tax purposes. Any return of capital is not included as “income” for tax purposes. Instead, they reduce the adjusted cost base (ACB) of your investment. This effectively delays your tax liability until you sell your units, at which point you will have a higher capital gain than you would have had otherwise. Whether this strategy is right for you depends on your particular situation, and I would strongly encourage you to speak with a financial advisor or a tax professional to make sure it is suitable for you. Another thing to note is that once you have reduced your ACB to $0, all future distributions are treated as capital gains for tax purposes. These capital gains distributions will be considered income, and can potentially result in a clawback of the OAS. I should also point out that in a T-Series fund, it is possible that you may still receive a capital gain, dividend or regular income distribution, however most of the fund companies work to try to reduce this likelihood. But you should be aware that it is possible. They are generally available in a few different payout options, with an annualized 5% and 8% being the most prevalent. If you want to generate your own return amount, you can invest in a mix of T5 and T8 units to create your custom payout depending on your needs. For example, 50% T5 and 50% T8 would create an annualized payout of 6.5%. Changing the mix can result in any amount between 5% and 8% per year. These types of funds are readily available, and are offered by most of the bigger fund companies and some of the banks. Many of the smaller companies do NOT offer these types of funds. For example, Mawer, Beutel Goodman, Leith Wheeler or Steadyhand do not have these types of funds. Continued on page 6... B U I L D I N G W E A L T H M u t u a l F u n d s / E T F s U p d a t e Editor and Publisher: David Paterson Circulation Director: Kim Pape-Green Customer Service: Katya Schmied, Terri Hooper © 2015 by Gordon Pape Enterprises Ltd. and D.A. Paterson & Associates Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without written permission is prohibited. All recommendations are based on information that is believed to be reliable. However, results are not guaranteed and the publishers and distributors of Mutual Funds / ETFs Update assume no liability whatsoever for any material losses that may occur. Readers are advised to consult a professional financial advisor before making any investment decisions. Contributors to the MFU and/or their companies or members of their families may hold and trade positions in securities mentioned in this newsletter. No compensation for recommending particular securities or financial advisors is solicited or accepted. Mutual Funds / ETFs Update is published monthly by BuildingWealth.ca. All Rights Reserved April 2015 Reproduction without permission is illegal T-Series Funds - continued from page 5... While the tax deferred cash flow is an interesting feature, you still need to evaluate these funds the same way you would invest any investment product. You need to insure that you are investing in a high quality fund that is suitable for your specific needs and risk tolerance. I always want to make sure I understand who the manager is, their investment process, buy and sell criteria, risk management, costs, and of course risk adjusted performance. Once you find the fund or funds that meet your needs, you can combine them to build the most appropriate portfolio for your needs. Another thing you’ll want to look at is how effective the fund has been at reducing taxable distributions. To do this, I would look at how much of previous years distributions contained other types of income. Obviously this is only an indication as we have no way of knowing what may happen in the future, but generally, if there are consistently many different income types in the T-Series distribution breakdown, then there may be problems with the structure. If not, you’re likely okay. Fortunately, many of the funds on my Recommended List are available in one or more T-Series options. The funds on the list that are offered in a T-Series are: 6 RECOMMENDED FUNDS WITH T-‐SERIES OPTIONS Bond Funds None Balanced Funds Manulife Monthly High Income Mac Cundill Cdn Balanced AGF Monthly High Income Fidelity Canadian Balanced Income Funds PH&N Monthly Income CI Signature High Income RBC Canadian Equity Income Canadian Equity Funds CI Cambridge Canadian Equity Class Fidelity Canadian Large Cap IA Clarington Cdn Conserva_ve Equity RBC North American Value Fidelity Dividend Canadian Small Cap Funds None U.S. Equity Funds Fidelity Small Cap America Mackenzie U.S. Large Cap Class Franklin U.S. Rising Dividends InternaDonal/Global/North American Funds IA Clarington Global Equity Fund Mackenzie Ivy Foreign Equity Trimark Global Endeavour Dynamic Power Global Growth Sector Funds None PORTFOLIO STRATEGY - UNDERSTANDING ACTIVE SHARE By Dave Paterson, CFA Understanding how this measure can help build be5er por6olios For years, study after study has concluded that most mutual fund managers cannot outperform their benchmarks with any degree of consistency. When looking into the reasons, there are a couple that standout. The first, obviously is cost. According to Morningstar, the average Canadian focused equity mutual fund carries a management expense ratio (MER) of 2.0%. It is a similar story for U.S. and foreign equity funds, which also carry MERs north of 2%. Sector and specialty funds are even higher. This dovetails nicely into the second reason that most managers underperform, which is many of their portfolios tend to look a lot like the index they are trying to beat. The more a portfolio resembles its benchmark, the tougher it will be for the manager to outperform, particularly when you are already facing a fee hurdle of 2% or more. To put it simply, if you want to outperform a benchmark, you can’t build a portfolio that looks like the index. One of the latest buzzwords in the industry is “Active Share”. It seems every time I’m talking to an advisor, they want funds Continued on page 7... Mutual Funds / ETFs Update is published monthly by BuildingWealth.ca. All Rights Reserved April 2015 Reproduction without permission is illegal Portfolio strategy - continued from page 6... with a high Active Share. It doesn’t really matter what the fund is or does, but it needs to have active share and a lot of it. Active Share is a measure that was devised by Martijn Cremars and Antti Petajisto, a couple of professors at the Yale School of Management, way back in 2006. In very simple terms, it measures the percentage of a fund’s holdings that differ from its benchmark. The higher the active share, the less it looks like its benchmark. In their research, they noted that funds with higher scores, generally 80% or more, on average outperformed their benchmark by between 2% and 2.7%. Except it’s not quite that simple. Don’t get me wrong, I firmly believe in the concept of active share. There is little doubt in my mind that if you want to outperform your benchmark, you need to have a portfolio that is different from your benchmark. But there is more to it. There is not one single factor that can be used to consistently pick outperformance in funds. For example, there are dozens of studies that show cost is the biggest single predictor of outperformance, but I wouldn’t pick a fund based solely on cost either. 7 does a lot of trading in their funds. Further, this is not a measure that is widely available. To my knowledge, the only place it is published is on Morningstar Direct, which is prohibitively expensive, costing thousands of dollars per month. Bottom Line The more I research this concept, the more it is starting to look like a high active share is not so much a predictor of outperformance, but more a byproduct of a manager who is following a process that can lead to outperformance. In general, good managers tend to follow a disciplined stock selection process that results in a portfolio that is much different than the index. These portfolios often times tend to be fairly concentrated, holding a handful of names. Managers who are truly active have the potential to outperform more than those who are following a “closet index” approach. But that is the key - having a good manager following a disciplined, repeatable process. Managers must place an emphasis not only on generating return, but also on managing risk. And finally, costs must be reasonable. It should also be pointed out that while a fund that has a high active share has the potential to outperform its benchmark, it is also likely that it could dramatically underperform its index. For example, take a Canadian equity fund that is underweight in energy and financials. It will outperforming while those two sectors are hurting, but will likely lag when they are rallying. This is not uncommon with high active share funds. When I screen a fund, I am looking for managers that have a demonstrated history of delivering a strong level of risk adjusted performance, and doing so with a return stream that is different from its index. Once I have identified these funds, the next step is to understand how the manager builds and maintains the portfolio. Only once these factors are understood and put into context can we make a real judgement on likelihood of a manager’s ability to outperform on a consistent basis. Another issue I have with active share is that while it is easy to calculate, it is difficult to track in practice. We do not have current portfolio holdings of all the mutual funds in Canada, so often times, the data on which the calculation is based can be out of date. This is especially true in cases where a manager There is not one factor, be it active share, cost, factor tilt or what have you that can unequivocally predict outperformance. Instead, it is a mix of quantitative and qualitative factors that help paint that picture. HIGH ACTIVE SHARE FUNDS By Dave Paterson, CFA Highligh0ng a few quality funds that have high ac0ve share numbers… While active share can be a great measure in helping to identify funds that are much different than their benchmark, it does very little to highlight quality. There are still many factors that need to be evaluated before making an investment. To help you narrow this process down, I thought it might be interesting to highlight some high quality funds that offer a very high level of active share. Continued on page 8... Mutual Funds / ETFs Update is published monthly by BuildingWealth.ca. All Rights Reserved April 2015 Reproduction without permission is illegal 8 Active Share Funds - continued from page 7... Name RaDng Brandes Canadian Equity A NaAonal Bank US Equity F Mackenzie Ivy Foreign Equity B AcDve Share Category 91.20 Cdn Focused Equity 90.03 US Equity 94.39 Global Equity 3 Mth 1 Yr 3 Yr 5 Yr 9.4% 19.2% 26.2% 18.6% 12.1% 30.2% 26.5% 17.2% 10.5% 17.9% 17.9% 12.5% 10 Yr MER 4.5% 2.72% 2.49% 7.0% 2.56% Total Assets ($Mil) $46.2 $98.7 $4,133.8 Returns at February 28, 2015. Return data provided by Morningstar. Active Share data courtesy of National Bank Financial. Brandes Canadian Equity (BIP 121) - Managed by a team at Brandes using a bottom up, deep value approach, this portfolio looks nothing like its benchmark. It is very concentrated, holding 22 names, with the top ten equity holdings making up around 38% of the fund. It also has a very healthy exposure to global stocks through it’s nearly 40%% holding of the Brandes Global Equity Fund. It has an all cap mandate and can invest in companies of any size. At the end of February, it was significantly underweight in materials, energy, and financials, which helps explain a lot of its recent outperformance. It is overweight consumer names and cyclicals. The managers are very disciplined and do not stray from their process. That style conviction, combined with the all cap mandate and concentrated portfolio has resulted in volatility levels that are significantly higher than the index and peer group. It has however, done very well in down markets. For the most recent five year period, it has experienced more than 120% of the market’s upside, yet realized less than half of the downside. Despite this, I would be reluctant to use it as a core holding. I believe it is just too volatile for most investors. Instead, I would go with a fund that is more large cap focused as a core holding. Also, while recent performance has been excellent, as with any fund where the managers are disciplined and remain true to their style, the fund may experience periods of significant underperformance. While I wouldn’t recommend it as a core holding, I do think it can be a nice compliment in a portfolio, bringing some all cap equity exposure into the mix. There are a lot of things to like about it, including the strong management team, disciplined, repeatable process, and a portfolio that looks nothing like its index. National Bank U.S. Equity Fund (NBC 443) – When Nadim Rizk and his team took over the management duties of this fund back in 2012, performance improved dramatically. For the three years ending February 28, it has posted an average annualized gain of 26.5%, slightly lagging the S&P 500, but handily outpacing much of its competition. Using a fundamentally driven, bottom up investment process, they look to find best of breed companies that offer excellent growth potential, yet are trading at reasonable valuations. Portfolio turnover is relatively modest, and significantly lower than with the previous management team. For 2013, turnover was just under 20% and was on pace for that level after the first half of the year. Using this bottom up approach, the portfolio is very different than the index. It is a concentrated portfolio, holding just over 30 names. The sector mix is the byproduct of the stock selection process and at the end of February, it had no exposure to energy, communications or utilities, was significantly underweight technology, and was overweight industrials, consumer, and healthcare names. For those looking for pure U.S. equity exposure, this is definitely a fund you should take a look at. I expect it to provide index like return, with comparable levels of volatility. It could be a great core equity holding in most portfolios. Mackenzie Ivy Foreign Equity Fund (MFC 081) - I have long said that this is the global equity fund you want to own when markets get volatile, and that point was driven home by recent market activity. Between September 1 and October 16, the MSCI World Index dropped by nearly 6% in Canadian dollar terms. During the same period, the Ivy Foreign Equity Fund dropped a little more than 3%, or roughly 56% of the downside movement of the market. This is in line with its historic average. The managers run a concentrated portfolio of high quality companies from around the world with strong balance sheets and excellent management teams that are trading at a reasonable valuation. They pay no attention to benchmark weightings and build the portfolio on a stock by stock basis. As a result, it is much different than the index, with no exposure to energy, communications, and a significant underweight in financials. It is heavily weighted to consumer and industrial names. They are very patient in their approach as evidenced by their low levels of portfolio turnover. For the most recent five year period, it has averaged less than 20% per year. With more volatility likely in the next few quarters, those investors looking for a way to gain global equity exposure with lower volatility will want to consider this offering. One warning, given the conservative nature, it is likely to lag in rising markets. For those comfortable making that tradeoff, this is one of the best all-around global equity funds to own. I expect it will continue to offer excellent risk adjusted returns and continue to protect capital in volatile markets. Mutual Funds / ETFs Update is published monthly by BuildingWealth.ca. All Rights Reserved April 2015