Free Article titled - Reasons To Fire Your Mutual Fund Company: 12b-1 Fees Get Free Content For Your Website

Free Articles on Mutual Funds and many other topics
Another free Mutual Funds article for you by Mark Brandon
Titled: Reasons To Fire Your Mutual Fund Company: 12b-1 Fees
Get the Mutual Funds category RSS Feed Mutual Funds RSS Feed

Print This Article Instant Copy Text

Please support the Sponsors of uPublish.info

Reasons To Fire Your Mutual Fund Company: 12b-1 Fees

By: Mark Brandon
Posted on: 2006-01-03
Downloads: 218

Article Summary: This is the 2nd of 10 articles from the Sustainable Log. The whole series can be downloaded from http://sustainablelog.blogspot.com.

The 12b-1 fee is the obscurely-named outrage that dings investors in mutual funds so that management can market the fund. In 1980, the mutual fund industry successfully lobbied the SEC to allow this fee with the justification that a larger fund lowers the expenses for everybody. In theory, the logic is right when you take into account the same expenses being spread over a larger pool of assets. However, there are several problems with this thinking:

1) A larger fund does not necessarily become easier to manage. Over the last 25 years, multi-billion dollar mutual funds have become the norm. When I worked for Fidelity in the early 1990's, the largest fund in the world at the time, the famous Fidelity Magellan, was around $25 billion. Even then, concerns had set in that it had become too large to outperform the market. Since then, Magellan's size has been a deterrent. Like a large barge, meaningful changes in its trajectory take too long to implement. Of the funds with in excess of $5 billion, most of them track the S&P 500 minus their outsize fees because that is all they can do. Yet, even these large funds continue to charge the 12b-1 fee.

2) Certainly, if a fund is closed to new investors (which makes the fund easier to manage), the existing shareholders should be relieved of the 12b-1 fee. But, as of November 2003, when the House introduced HR 2420, 139 closed funds still levied the fee. The funds are charging a marketing expense for funds that no longer accept new investors. Huh? Like crack cocaine, fund management firms just became addicted to the stream of poorly disclosed fund fees.

3) A fund is able to call itself "no load" as long as the 12b-1 fee is 25 basis points (.25%) or lower, although many funds charge the max-allowable 100 basis points.

In practice, the 12b-1 fee is partially shared with advisers who tout the funds, and the rest is gravy to the fund firm. They do not disclose this fee as part of their management fee, and even obscure the fee in their overall expense ratio.

Two thirds of mutual funds charge this fee, and I would bet that few investors know about it. HR 2420, introduced by congressman Mike Castle of Delaware, sought to ban this fee for closed funds only, and even that was stalled in the Senate, despite broad bi-partisan support and backing from the white house.

Article Source: http://www.upublish.info

About the Author:
Mark Brandon
Mark Brandon is the Managing Partner of First Sustainable (http://www.firstsustainable.com), a registered investment advisory catering to socially responsible investors, and author of the Sustainable Log (http://sustainablelog.blogspot.com).

Free Articles on Mutual Funds and many other topics
Free Articles on Mutual Funds and many other topics - Add this category to your RSS Reader

Please Rate this Article

 

Not yet Rated

Click the XML Icon Above to Receive Mutual Funds Articles Via RSS!


Above are more free articles on Mutual Funds
U Publish Articles

© 2005-2008 uPublish.info All Rights Reserved.
Use of our service is protected by our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service
U Publish - Source for Free Articles - Free Reprint Articles - Free Article Publishing