The news is by your side.

When does a performance history stay, of course, if will it go?

- Advertisement -


Last month Nedgroup Investments announced not wearing running shoes would not be in a position to publish the performance good reputation for its Managed Fund. This followed zhanging your investment strategy that restricted it only to committing to South African assets.

Until which you cannot use, the fund have been competent to invest up to 25% offshore. However, Nedgroup Investments had to make a switch to accommodate both this fund as well as its new balanced fund, which can be both managed by Truffle, while in the same unit trust category.

As part of this process, the Association for Savings and Investment Africa (Asisa) were required to evaluate the change. Asisa’s fund classification standing committee opted that because became a material improvement in investment policy, the fund should drop its performance background and begin at a clear slate.

This was a controversial decision considering that the fund had been with the extended period of underperformance. Nedgroup Investments had replaced RECM when the managers from the portfolio in November 2015 at any given time once the Managed Fund was the worst performing unit rely upon the South Africa multi-asset high-equity category more than one, three, five and decade. In Truffle’s first year of managing the fund, it lost another 10.3%.

Many people therefore saw the dropping from the performance history for a whitewash. They argued that whilst the manager had changed, Nedgroup Investments should be judged on the past decisions it had made.

“In our thoughts the Nedgroup Investments Managed Fund history should reflect the options of Nedgroup,” argued Gerbrandt Kruger, Investment Analyst at Morningstar. “They built their brand by locating the best managers regarding their funds, and the performance history should reflect these decisions

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.