A. THE DERBY SANS REMFs
If this past weekend's Kentucky Derby was a race that featured mutual funds, those specializing in real estate (REMFs) would not have qualified. If the race was modified to feature just REMFs and measured by performance rather than time, one of the lowest course records would have been set, instead of the blistering pace of this year's winner, Monarchos.
Though a comparison of REMFs and the Derby is a bit of a stretch, the interesting aspect is that the field for selecting a strong REMF performer would have appeared to provide good odds. As measured by our performance returns, five out of 13 equity groups of real estate investment trusts (REITs) posted double digit returns so far this year. Three mortgage REIT groups average in the 25% range. And the highest returns, between 25% to 40%, were from three housing groups. (Please see Non-Core REITs Shine.) With such strong performances, why has the average REMF reigned in only 0.96% gains? Further, out of 148 REMFs, why have only three of the funds been able to exceed 11% this year?
There are several reasons REMFs have not been attracted to the best performing stock groups so far. First, most portfolio managers are hesitant to bet against winners. Last year the core industrial REITs (office, apartments and industrial) yielded total returns of about 20% while those of other groups languished. Second, most investment managers did not significantly alter their allocations, largely in part due to the herding instinct to stay with the similar investment philosophies as other managers. Third, since managers are rated on the performance of their peers, the herd effect helps improve their odds of having satisfactory returns and therefore increased job security. Fourth, the size of the companies in these other categories are relatively small (in terms of market capitalization) and many managers avoid positions that may be rather illiquid and volatile. Finally, out of some 300 companies RealtyStocks covers, only about one fifth are followed by more than one analyst. The lack of analyst coverage, with limited staff analysts anyway, makes most REMF portfolio managers reluctant to take positions in the majority of real estate stocks.
Although most REMFs have a policy mandate that requires at least 65% of their holdings be in REITs, and some to avoid mortgage REITs, over 90% of the stocks in most REMFs are equity REITs. This effectively eliminates any meaningful returns from investments in mortgage or non-REITs. To date, the only major non-REIT mutual fund is Fidelity's Select Construction & Housing Fund (FSHOX). Despite their name, they have avoided positions in home building, manufactured housing and construction stocks, thereby missing the strong gains in this area. The best performing REMFs this year are from just four firms (out of dozens) that have taken a departure from the herd and also assumed more risk by taking strong positions in financials, housing or REITS involved in mortgages, health care and hotels. (Please see the REMF section below.)
With over 100 REMFs, it would seem prudent for some investment group to offer a more balanced approach to a real estate mutual fund, while still being somewhat risk adverse. Such an index type of fund could require holdings with no more than 50% equity REITs, with the remainder in housing, construction, financing (including mortgage REITs) and real estate related issues. Besides providing an alternative from the herd, such a fund in today's economic environment could not only run for the roses, it might even win. (Please see our web site regarding REMFs.) Top