![Show Menu](styles/mobile-menu.png)
![Page Background](./../common/page-substrates/page0750.png)
12
•
Fund Family Shareholder Association
www.adviseronline.comcertainly less than $10 billion),
Vanguard probably can’t get too jazzed
up about jumping into that fray.
The only real excitement going on
among the foreign funds these days
has been the June announcement that
Vanguard would add smaller stocks to
Developed Markets Index
,
Emerging
Markets Stock Index
,
European
Index
and
Pacific Index
, along with
a new allocation to mainland-China
A-shares in the emerging markets fund,
something I wrote about in the July
2015 issue.
In the past, I’ve noted that since
Global Equity
became multimanaged
in 2004, Vanguard hasn’t had a foreign
fund run by just one management team
for years. Global Minimum Volatility
breaks that streak, though its non-tra-
ditional investment objective makes it a
bit of an outlier.
In the August letter, we took an in-
depth look at investing overseas and
whether it makes sense to hew to a
40% (of equities) allocation to foreign
stocks at all times, as Vanguard seems
to believe, or to allow the markets and
your head and heart to determine where
your allocation should stand.
One thing we didn’t discuss was
the actual funds themselves. So, let’s
do that. But first, I do want to mention
something called fair-value pricing,
which is the day-to-day manipulation
of fund prices (not ETF prices) that
Vanguard engages in (as required by
the SEC) to prevent attempts to jump
ahead of news events that may cause
market moves in time zones many
hours different from our own. Investors
might, for instance, try to trade Pacific
Index, which has about 60% of its
assets allocated to Japanese stocks and
another 25% or so in Australian and
Korean stocks, when those markets are
closed and there is major, market-mov-
ing news occurring in those countries
while U.S. markets remain open.
The difference between the price
of a fund’s regular shares and its ETF
shares can sometimes tell the tale of
a Vanguard intervention. Last year,
for instance, Emerging Markets Stock
Index’s daily return and the return of its
ETF shares varied by as much as 1.4%
to 1.8% on a couple of days. As I said,
differences between ETF and open-
end fund performance tend to even out
within a day or two, and unless you’re
trading in and out of the open-end fund,
which Vanguard will quickly put a stop
to once their computers catch up, you
shouldn’t worry too much about fair-
value pricing.
With all of that said, and with
August’s primer on investing over-
seas as backup, here’s where Vanguard
stakes its foreign investing claims.
Developed Markets Index
Sell.
Once a fund of funds, Developed
Markets Index now holds individual
stocks, just like the rest of Vanguard’s
foreign funds. While the benchmark the
fund tracks has changed over time, and
is changing again, its mission remains
the same: Tracking a broad set of stocks
from established foreign markets. The
new index to which the fund will tran-
sition, the FTSE Developed All Cap
ex-U.S. index, includes smaller stocks
as well as Canadian stocks, something
the fund did not hold in previous incar-
nations. Based on historical data, these
additions have added to performance
over time, though up/down volatility
has also increased. As you might expect,
Developed Markets Index ignores the
emerging markets component that one
finds in
Total International Stock
Index
or
World ex-U.S. Index
. And
there’s the rub. If you buy into the index-
ers’ credo that one should index “all”
markets rather than a slice of the pie,
then this fund is a non-starter. However,
if you’re tempted, remember that the
fund has ETF shares (VEA) available.
Emerging Markets Stock Index
Hold.
Here’s another fund that’s
getting a new benchmark, but this one
is fraught with issues that you won’t
find in Vanguard’s other funds. As
Jeff and I have reported before, most
recently in the July letter, Vanguard
is making a push into the volatile
A-shares market of mainland China.
The FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap
China A Inclusion index is the first
of Vanguard’s benchmarks to venture
into the highly regulated and opaque
mainland China arena. Vanguard has
already said that it’s going to have to
deviate from the index by “sampling”
rather than “replicating,” and this new
index will be adjusted by FTSE on an
ongoing basis because of the limits
that the Chinese government puts on
foreign entities’ ownership of A-shares.
But this isn’t some huge change overall.
While the small caps that will be added
to this fund will increase holdings sub-
stantially, the exposure to China should
only grow by about 3% from the cur-
rent 27% or so.
The emerging markets are consid-
ered a growth engine, internationally,
but they’re also riskier than mainstream
domestic markets. And China’s slow-
down, just as Vanguard is upping the
ante there, begs the question of whether
the risk-return balance favors returns as
much today and tomorrow, as it has in
the past.
Also, are the large-cap domestic
companies you own today already giv-
ing you enough exposure to emerging
markets through their global opera-
tions, or do you need and want a
focused fund such as this one? I think
a small allocation here can make sense,
as there will always be local companies
that will understand and be able to take
advantage of local markets in a fashion
the bigger global conglomerates won’t.
That said, it’s not a risk I’m taking
right now.
As with Vanguard’s other foreign
index funds, there are ETF shares
(VWO) available.
Emerging Markets Select Stock
Hold.
Vanguard’s first and only
move into active management in the
emerging markets space looked good at
the onset, but has proved a loser. It was
a cautious move—doling out portions
of the portfolio to four separate firms:
Wellington, M&GCapital Management,
Oaktree Capital Management and Pzena
Investment Management.
Having four firms on this fund reduc-
es the risk of a single manager misstep,
but at the same time limits the ability
of any one manager to add significant
FOCUS
FROM PAGE 1
>