When stocks are priced for perfection as SBUX is, they are very risky. Just look at today's 10%+ drop in SBUX shares in a market that is up 1%.
My regular readers know that I have, for a while, warned investors that SBUX was overpriced and due for a correction. See "Get Off the SBUX Bandwagon Before It Crashes".
Each quarter, we provide the most comprehensive review of equity ETFs and mutual funds available. We review the Best & Worst ETFs and Mutual Funds by sector and style.
This article provides quick access to all our reports on Style funds.
Fund holdings affect fund performance more than fees or past performance. A cheap fund is not necessarily a good fund. A fund that has done well in the past is not likely to do well in the future (e.g. 5-star kiss of death). Yet, traditional fund research focuses only on low fees and past performance.
The small-cap value style ranks last out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 16 ETFs and 311 mutual funds in the small-cap value style as of July 20, 2012.
The mid-cap value style ranks eleventh out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on an aggregation of the ratings of 12 ETFs and 206 mutual funds in the mid-cap value style as of July 19, 2012.
The small-cap blend style ranks tenth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 27 ETFs and 608 mutual funds in the small-cap blend style as of July 19, 2012.
The small-cap growth style ranks ninth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 12 ETFs and 478 mutual funds in the small-cap growth style as of July 19, 2012.
The mid-cap blend style ranks eighth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Dangerous rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 19 ETFs and 279 mutual funds in the mid-cap blend style as of July 19, 2012.
The mid-cap growth style ranks seventh out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Neutral rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 10 ETFs and 367 mutual funds in the mid-cap growth style as of July 18, 2012.
The all-cap value style ranks sixth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Neutral rating, which is based on an aggregation of the ratings of 2 ETFs and 285 mutual funds in the all-cap value style as of July 18, 2012.
The all-cap growth style ranks fifth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It earns my Neutral rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 2 ETFs and 436 mutual funds in the all-cap growth style as of July 18, 2012.
The large-cap value style ranks fourth out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Neutral rating, which is based on an aggregation of the ratings of 38 ETFs and 744 mutual funds in the large-cap value style as of July 17, 2012.
The all-cap blend style ranks third out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Neutral rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 33 ETFs and 669 mutual funds in the all-cap blend style as of July 17, 2012.
The large-cap blend style ranks second out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Neutral rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 40 ETFs and 1127 mutual funds in the large-cap blend style as of July 17, 2012.
The large-cap growth style ranks the best out of the twelve fund styles as detailed in my style roadmap. It gets my Neutral rating, which is based on aggregation of ratings of 26 ETFs and 724 mutual funds in the large-cap growth style as of July 16, 2012.
This report identifies the “best” ETFs and mutual funds based on the quality of their holdings and their costs. As detailed in “Low-Cost Funds Dupe Investors”, there are few funds that have both good holdings and low costs. While there are lots of cheap funds, there are very few with high-quality holdings.
None of the fund styles earn a rating better than Neutral. See Figure 1 for my rankings on all twelve investment styles. My style ratings are based on the aggregation of my fund ratings for every ETF and mutual fund in each style.
Note that the attractive-or-better Predictive ratings do not always correlate with attractive-or-better total annual costs. This fact underscores that (1) low fees can dupe investors and (2) investors should invest only in funds with good stocks and low fees.
Each quarter, we provide the most comprehensive review of equity ETFs and mutual funds available. We review the Best & Worst ETFs and Mutual Funds by sector and style.
We begin the 3Q12 Sector series with our Sector Roadmap report, which details the best sectors for finding quality ETFs and mutual funds. Next we highlight the ETFs and mutual funds that stand out as the Best & Worst among all the sectors. We follow detaileds review of the Best & Worst for each sector. Look for a similar series of reports for all the Investment Styles next week.