Excuse me, but, you of course don't mean, her: Causeway International Value Fund, that Morningstar rated as, "THE BEST INTERNATIONAL VALUE STOCK FUND", heading into 2024. Perhaps, you could kindly inform me of which one you are referring to, since I'm not very well informed of Ms. Kettererer's management work, I'm mainly knowledgeable about my own poor management skills. 😢
Sure Geno. I was talking about the International Value Fund. But to be fair I was comparing it to funds that include US stocks which have done far better. However, the fund has a total return of only 54% for the 10 year period which is nothing to write home about.
most active managers underperform their index, so why invest with them? Ketterer seems to advocate a 'garbage' picker strategy. Sometimes you find gems in the trash, but mostly garbage is in the garbage can because it is garbage.
Disney needs new blood on the Board. As she gingerly alludes to, the current Board has allowed Disney to be left in dust by Netflix This is why a shareholder representative - Peltz- would be a smart addition, for sake of accountability.
It doesn't take an MBA to pull-up a comparison chart of U.S. total-stock-market vs. total non-U.S. for the last half-century, to see where you should have been..and that doesn't even include foreign taxes that you will owe, higher expense ratios on non U.S. funds, and foreign currency-exchange "wierdness". Yes..yields are somewhat better on non-U.S. stocks.. still, I'm going to stick with the late Jack Bogle's advice, and stay all U.S; all the time.
That's not necessarily a consistent comparison. A lot of global companies are domiciled/ listed in the US. Overtime some companies have preferred to be listed on non US borses
The parent company of Gucci - "Kering" (KER-FR) is an exceptional business, with gross margins consistently above 70% and ROE averaging between 20-25%. The CEO (François-Henri Pinault) owns 40% of the company and is a disciplined capital allocator. The business is currently navigating a difficult period, but I wouldn't bet against Pinault.
There is a reason why EU (not Europe, people are always get it wrong, but more than half of Europe is actually Russia, so people mean EU, not Europe and as it is mostly NATO it has nothing to do with continental Europe) is so cheap, Actually there a alot of reasons - bad demography, warmongering of EU/NATO (US will use it as gigantic aircraft career and rocket launch base for probably starting a nuclear war in Eurasia), bad ideology (new axis of evil), neocolonialism, protofascism and so on and so forth....EU is not attractive at all. Maybe Zimbabwe or Paraguay is interesting, but DEFINITELY not the Africa of 21st century, aka EU. "We love EU, but buy Canadian Pacific (which is at all time high) :))))" ajajaj.....listen more to such experts and you will stay poor.
Privyet, pardon my Anglais, Russia: may be seventy-seven (77%) in Asia, twenty-three (23%) may be in Europe, forty (40%) percent of European landmass may be Russian, with fifteen (15%) percent of the population of Europe, perhaps. Of course Europe's most populous country. ❤❤❤
Her fund has far underperformed. Not sure why anyone would pay for this active management?
Excuse me, but, you of course don't mean, her: Causeway International Value Fund, that Morningstar rated as, "THE BEST INTERNATIONAL VALUE STOCK FUND", heading into 2024.
Perhaps, you could kindly inform me of which one you are referring to, since I'm not very well informed of Ms. Kettererer's management work, I'm mainly knowledgeable about my own poor management skills. 😢
Sure Geno. I was talking about the International Value Fund. But to be fair I was comparing it to funds that include US stocks which have done far better. However, the fund has a total return of only 54% for the 10 year period which is nothing to write home about.
most active managers underperform their index, so why invest with them? Ketterer seems to advocate a 'garbage' picker strategy. Sometimes you find gems in the trash, but mostly garbage is in the garbage can because it is garbage.
She has 45 billion in AUM, so they’re doing something right.
@@jimarnold7561 US stocks are not the right benchmark for this fund. Compare it other international indexes or funds.
Disney needs new blood on the Board. As she gingerly alludes to, the current Board has allowed Disney to be left in dust by Netflix This is why a shareholder representative - Peltz- would be a smart addition, for sake of accountability.
It doesn't take an MBA to pull-up a comparison chart of U.S. total-stock-market vs. total non-U.S. for the last half-century, to see where you should have been..and that doesn't even include foreign taxes that you will owe, higher expense ratios on non U.S. funds, and foreign currency-exchange "wierdness". Yes..yields are somewhat better on non-U.S. stocks.. still, I'm going to stick with the late Jack Bogle's advice, and stay all U.S; all the time.
That's not necessarily a consistent comparison. A lot of global companies are domiciled/ listed in the US. Overtime some companies have preferred to be listed on non US borses
Thank god for stock pickers, so I can just index and forget about it.
Thank you, Consuelo.
GREAT EPISODE
Thanks!
LOL GUCCI???? what a dumb idea for investing.
Are you perhaps saying that this investment is one where they are not using their intellectual abilities while investing in GUCCI? 😢😢😢
The parent company of Gucci - "Kering" (KER-FR) is an exceptional business, with gross margins consistently above 70% and ROE averaging between 20-25%. The CEO (François-Henri Pinault) owns 40% of the company and is a disciplined capital allocator. The business is currently navigating a difficult period, but I wouldn't bet against Pinault.
There is a reason why EU (not Europe, people are always get it wrong, but more than half of Europe is actually Russia, so people mean EU, not Europe and as it is mostly NATO it has nothing to do with continental Europe) is so cheap, Actually there a alot of reasons - bad demography, warmongering of EU/NATO (US will use it as gigantic aircraft career and rocket launch base for probably starting a nuclear war in Eurasia), bad ideology (new axis of evil), neocolonialism, protofascism and so on and so forth....EU is not attractive at all. Maybe Zimbabwe or Paraguay is interesting, but DEFINITELY not the Africa of 21st century, aka EU. "We love EU, but buy Canadian Pacific (which is at all time high) :))))" ajajaj.....listen more to such experts and you will stay poor.
All the information available is already priced into EU stocks. Apparently the EU stock markets do not agree with your bleak assessment.
Privyet, pardon my Anglais, Russia: may be seventy-seven (77%) in Asia, twenty-three (23%) may be in Europe, forty (40%) percent of European landmass may be Russian, with fifteen (15%) percent of the population of Europe, perhaps. Of course Europe's most populous country. ❤❤❤
@@GENO-wi1wo Russia will never be part of the EU.
Rhodesia would have been interesting. Not inflation ravaged Zimbabwe.