As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Tim Middleton’s Bad Mutual Funds

This article was written by in Investing. 8 comments.

Over on MSN Money, Timothy Middleton warns the public about seven “bad” (poor-performing, actually) mutual funds. Luckilly, I don’t own any of them. I own various types of broad index funds except for a few more specific funds offered by my 401(k) — I don’t have a choice. Anyway, Middleton has specific advice for holders of these underperforming mutual funds:
* American Funds Washington Mutual A (AWSHX): Buy
* Fidelity Growth & Income (FGRIX): Weak hold
* Templeton Foreign A (TEMFX): Buy
* Putnam Fund For Growth & Income A (PGRWX): Sell
* Janus Fund (JANSX): Hold
* Putnam Voyager A (PVOYX): Weak hold
* Fidelity Asset Manager (FASMX): Buy

As I said above, I believe in index funds. Timothy doesn’t, and is empahtically:

The efficient-markets theory asserts that nobody can beat the market because information is too freely available to give any one participant an advantage over another. That theory is bunk. Much of the information that’s available is dangerous, because it’s incomplete or otherwise flawed. And some investors never do any homework. Thank goodness for an inefficient market. A little knowledge in investing is a powerful thing.

So now that we have knowledge from the MSN Money columnist, we should expect to gain some money in the short term if we follow his advice. I don’t have the money to test him, but perhaps someone does.

Updated June 17, 2014 and originally published May 9, 2006. If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to the RSS feed or receive daily emails. Follow @ConsumerismComm on Twitter and visit our Facebook page for more updates.

Email Email Print Print
Points: ♦127,645
Rank: Platinum
About the author

Luke Landes is the founder of Consumerism Commentary. He has been blogging and writing for the internet since 1995 and has been building online communities since 1991. Find out more about Luke Landes and follow him on Twitter. View all articles by .

{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }

avatar Doobie

Hmmmm…he lists the seven “worst” but recommends selling only one of them (Putnam Growth & Income).

Reply to this comment

avatar Luke Landes ♦127,645 (Platinum)

“Worst” is in terms of recent performance relative to benchmarks. So they’ve beed bad lately, but perhaps not in the future.

Reply to this comment

avatar Doobie

I know, but it’s misleading. They present it to the reader as the “worst” mutual fund(s) (implying past and future value) when it should have been presented more along the “poorest performers” line.

Reply to this comment

avatar Luke Landes ♦127,645 (Platinum)

It threw me off at first, as well.

Reply to this comment

Leave a Comment

Connect with Facebook

Note: Use your name or a unique handle, not the name of a website or business. No deep links or business URLs are allowed. Spam, including promotional linking to a company website, will be deleted. By submitting your comment you are agreeing to these terms and conditions.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.