BargainValueHunter Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/03/12/oceanstone-fund-james-wang/ "He reads all of the books of Buffett, and also Ben Graham, Philip Fisher. He's a bottom-up investor." http://fortunewallstreet.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/oceanstone_fund_total_return.jpg
eclecticvalue Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 I have a theory that more reclusive the fund manager the returns are better. It seems once a fund manager starts appearing in the media, they tend to lose their luster. You start seeing the returns fall off.
Parsad Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 So he's got a whole 5 years of record? ;) Yup! There is a best manager every year in the media. Cheers!
BargainValueHunter Posted March 23, 2012 Author Posted March 23, 2012 So he's got a whole 5 years of record? ;) So he's got a whole 5 years of record? ;) Yup! There is a best manager every year in the media. Cheers! Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Micheal Burry had similar returns after 5 years. I don't know how long one has to be a manager before he or she is officially good and not lucky but what would worry me as an investor in his fund is his Madoff-like secrecy.
Liberty Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Micheal Burry had similar returns after 5 years. I don't know how long one has to be a manager before he or she is officially good and not lucky but what would worry me as an investor in his fund is his Madoff-like secrecy. What matters most is how the record was achieved. I'm sure some people can do 10x a year on tons of leverage, but they all eventually blow up..
Guest valueInv Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Micheal Burry had similar returns after 5 years. I don't know how long one has to be a manager before he or she is officially good and not lucky but what would worry me as an investor in his fund is his Madoff-like secrecy. What matters most is how the record was achieved. I'm sure some people can do 10x a year on tons of leverage, but they all eventually blow up.. Aren't there limits to how much leverage you can use in a mutual fund?
Tim Eriksen Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 His returns are due to a very good 2009 and 2010. He did have a very small base those years. Not that I am one to criticize about that since I have the same issue. June 2008 $679,000 June 2009 $1.5 million June 2010 $4.7 million June 2011 $15.4 million Dec 2011 $14.6 million BAC fans should like that he had over 10% of the fund in BAC at year end. The next few years will reveal the truth.
DCG Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Brutal 5 years? The market is up 100% since the lows of 2009. Who knows if he was even invested in anything for 2007-2008.
Tim Eriksen Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Brutal 5 years? The market is up 100% since the lows of 2009. Who knows if he was even invested in anything for 2007-2008. You can look it up on SEC Edgar. The fund's semi-annual and annual reports are all there. At Dec 2008 the fund was 13.7% cash. Wellpoint was largest holding (10%) and SuperValu was second (6.9%).
compoundinglife Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Brutal 5 years? The market is up 100% since the lows of 2009. Who knows if he was even invested in anything for 2007-2008. You can look it up on SEC Edgar. The fund's semi-annual and annual reports are all there. At Dec 2008 the fund was 13.7% cash. Wellpoint was largest holding (10%) and SuperValu was second (6.9%). Also on the funds website: http://www.oceanstonefund.com/shareholder.htm Skimmed over most of his annual and semi annuals, lots of turn over in his top holdings. Not a bad thing IMO, seems like very methodical buy at below IV sell at IV and move on. Will be interesting to see where he is at in another 5-10 years.
augustabound Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 Frank has done 2 posts recently. http://www.frankvoisin.com/2012/03/16/james-wang-on-earnings-prospects-and-the-intrinsic-value-multiple/ http://www.frankvoisin.com/2012/03/14/james-wang-the-best-value-investor-youve-never-heard-of/
valueinvesting101 Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 When you his funds under management increased at following pace: June 2008 $679,000 June 2009 $1.5 million June 2010 $4.7 million June 2011 $15.4 million Dec 2011 $14.6 million Did he raise more money or did he manage to turn initial 679K into 14.6mil?
OracleofCarolina Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 He will probably get a flood of money from this story. Then his returns will probably suffer and then folks will take their money out, then his returns will go up....the cycle repeats
Parsad Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 So he's got a whole 5 years of record? ;) So he's got a whole 5 years of record? ;) Yup! There is a best manager every year in the media. Cheers! Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Micheal Burry had similar returns after 5 years. I don't know how long one has to be a manager before he or she is officially good and not lucky but what would worry me as an investor in his fund is his Madoff-like secrecy. I wasn't picking on him. I was picking on the title of your thread! ;D Cheers!
original mungerville Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 Is This Reclusive Fund Manager the Best in the World? Odds are that he isn't. There are a lot of people in this World.
Rabbitisrich Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 His investor letters are a study in courteously recommending questioners to F OFF.
zippy1 Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 Actually he seems to be a humble guy trying to invest well by himself and avoid fame and notoriety. I don't see him claiming to be the "best in the world" himself. Quickly looking at his holdings over the years, they actually have some overlap with stocks mentioned here.
Guest Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 I was looking at this fund several months ago. One of the trustees of the fund is a guy who runs this fund: http://quote.morningstar.com/fund/f.aspx?t=PRGRX
zippy1 Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 I was looking at this fund several months ago. One of the trustees of the fund is a guy who runs this fund: http://quote.morningstar.com/fund/f.aspx?t=PRGRX Actually, more than one directors of Mr. Wang's fund are connected with this other fund. Also, I do wonder how small funds like these can sustain themselves economically. An asset base of US$15M with 1.8% expense ratio is only US$270K. Now for PRGRX, I am wondering why they did not pull the plug.
Guest Hester Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 When you his funds under management increased at following pace: June 2008 $679,000 June 2009 $1.5 million June 2010 $4.7 million June 2011 $15.4 million Dec 2011 $14.6 million Did he raise more money or did he manage to turn initial 679K into 14.6mil? No that is including raised funds. If he turned $679 thousand to $14.6 million in that period of time, that would be roughly a 140% annual return. Fund managers with this level of success over such a short period statistically have to exist when there are so many hedge funds in operation. So I'm always reluctant to get into a tizzy when I see a great 5 year performance. I'm not saying he is successful due completely to blind luck, but I think the odds are higher that he is an (possibly far) above average investor with a string of good luck (whilst benefitting from a small capital base) rather than the next Warren Buffett. EDIT: And the only reason I say that last sentence is because of the grandiose title of the thread.
Packer16 Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 With an annual turnover of 132% to 420% per year this on the surface sounds more like a momentum or trading fund than a value investing fund. Just an observation. Packer
Tim Eriksen Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 With an annual turnover of 132% to 420% per year this on the surface sounds more like a momentum or trading fund than a value investing fund. Just an observation. Packer Not necessarily. Take BAC. It looks like the fund had 0 shares at 9/30/11 and then it becomes an 11.4% position at 12/31/11. BAC closed the year at $5.69. It is now $9.85. If he chose to take profits on his gain is that a trading fund or good timing on buying something cheap and seeing it trade back toward fair value?
BargainValueHunter Posted March 24, 2012 Author Posted March 24, 2012 So he's got a whole 5 years of record? ;) So he's got a whole 5 years of record? ;) Yup! There is a best manager every year in the media. Cheers! Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Micheal Burry had similar returns after 5 years. I don't know how long one has to be a manager before he or she is officially good and not lucky but what would worry me as an investor in his fund is his Madoff-like secrecy. I wasn't picking on him. I was picking on the title of your thread! ;D Cheers! I apologize. I went ahead and changed the thread title.
BargainValueHunter Posted March 24, 2012 Author Posted March 24, 2012 Those kind of returns in one of the most brutal 5 years in decades are impressive. Brutal 5 years? The market is up 100% since the lows of 2009. Who knows if he was even invested in anything for 2007-2008. 2009? Wouldn't that be three years?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now