What a coincidence! I was thinking of meeting them to see if good to invest too. I think their conservative approach to a high risk area will fit into my core equity segment quite well.
Their 16.7% returns over 4.5 years may beat benchmark but it is not good to me. But I blame the focus on small caps rather than their expertise. So in fact the contrarian in me thinks small caps may fulfill their potential once the economies of the world recover. But this year? Not sure leh.. But I am willing to put in if they impress and be prepared to double down again in 2013 or 14. Got to also see how they allow add on investments.
(13-08-2012, 09:56 PM)KopiKat Wrote: [ -> ] (13-08-2012, 08:22 PM)nitro Wrote: [ -> ]Lumiere Value Fund is featured in this week TheEdge magazines.
http://lumierecapital.com/
http://www.theedgesingapore.com/componen...?task=view
The 2 x Fund managers are value investors too, looking at their performance, their funds have outperformed STI index.
http://lumierecapital.com/Factsheet.pdf
Not sure if these 2 x Fund managers do visit VB?
Was looking at the LUMIERE VALUE FUND. NAV is slightly below $1 after having started out at $1 in 2008. What does it mean?
I suppose it means that the investors who had put in money at inception will not break even if they sell now.
In the interview, it was mentioned that the Fund Managers were bullish on MTQ and they expected an upside of 50% to 100%. Even though I am vested in MTQ, I see no good reasons for their bullishness.
Or perhaps they should have given a time frame for their forecast?
did i see wrongly or it said their AUM is 31mio?
for those who are thinking of investing in the fund, you need to meet the min criteria before they will accept you as an individual investor.
unless you have personal asset of SGD2mil or you earn at least SGD300k, you can forget about it.
I quote from the FAQ
"(a) an individual:
(i) whose net personal assets exceed in value S$2 million (or its equivalent in foreign currency) or such other amount as MAS may prescribe in place of the first amount; or
(ii) whose income in the preceding 12 months is not less than S$300,000 (or its equivalent in foreign currency) or such other amount as the Authority may prescribe in place of the first amount;"
Just curious how the calculations work. If someone put money in at inception at $1 and now the NAV is 98c, it appears that he has lost money. However, why is the cumulative returns showing a large +ve gain? The difference is due to fees?
(13-08-2012, 09:59 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: [ -> ] (13-08-2012, 09:56 PM)KopiKat Wrote: [ -> ] (13-08-2012, 08:22 PM)nitro Wrote: [ -> ]Lumiere Value Fund is featured in this week TheEdge magazines.
http://lumierecapital.com/
http://www.theedgesingapore.com/componen...?task=view
The 2 x Fund managers are value investors too, looking at their performance, their funds have outperformed STI index.
http://lumierecapital.com/Factsheet.pdf
Not sure if these 2 x Fund managers do visit VB?
Was looking at the LUMIERE VALUE FUND. NAV is slightly below $1 after having started out at $1 in 2008. What does it mean?
I suppose it means that the investors who had put in money at inception will not break even if they sell now.
(14-08-2012, 09:28 AM)wee Wrote: [ -> ]Just curious how the calculations work. If someone put money in at inception at $1 and now the NAV is 98c, it appears that he has lost money. However, why is the cumulative returns showing a large +ve gain? The difference is due to fees?
It largely depends on the base of your calculations. If it's based on the fund's inception, then indeed there has been negligible losses - probably real losses due to inflation.
However, if you are one of the investors who subscribe during the pits of 2008 and you ride along Lumiere's success in Osim, then your returns will probably be a few baggers.
Of course, the calculations complicate further if you wish to look based on US$ or SGD returns.
to be fair to them, they started the fund in Oct 2007 where STI peaked at 3800+. This shows that timing matters as well when you are buying funds.