Stocks

Consumer Cyclicals Sector 1Q18: Best And Worst Funds

The Consumer Cyclicals sector ranks fifth out of the 11 sectors as detailed in our 1Q18 Sector Ratings for ETFs and Mutual Funds report. Last quarter, the Consumer Cyclicals sector, previously named “Consumer Discretionary”, ranked fifth as well. It gets our Neutral rating, which is based on an aggregation of ratings of 16 ETFs and 11 mutual funds in the Consumer Cyclicals sector as of January 3, 2018. See a recap of our 4Q17 Sector Ratings here.

Get Our Activist Investing Case Study!

Get the entire 10-part series on our in-depth study on activist investing in PDF. Save it to your desktop, read it on your tablet, or print it out to read anywhere! Sign up below!

Figures 1 and 2 show the five best and worst rated ETFs and mutual funds in the sector. Not all Consumer Cyclicals sector ETFs and mutual funds are created the same. The number of holdings varies widely (from 25 to 373). This variation creates drastically different investment implications and, therefore, ratings.

Investors seeking exposure to the Consumer Cyclicals sector should buy one of the Attractive-or-better rated ETFs or mutual funds from Figures 1 and 2.

Our Robo-Analyst technology empowers our unique ETF and mutual fund rating methodology, which leverages our rigorous analysis of each fund’s holdings.[1] We think advisors and investors focused on prudent investment decisions should include analysis of fund holdings in their research process for ETFs and mutual funds.

Figure 1: ETFs with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5

Consumer Cyclicals Sector 1Q18

* Best ETFs exclude ETFs with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity.

Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Four ETFs (PMR, RCD, FTXD, PSCD) are excluded from Figure 1 because their total net assets (TNA) are below $100 million and do not meet our liquidity minimums.

Figure 2: Mutual Funds with the Best & Worst Ratings – Top 5

* Best mutual funds exclude funds with TNAs less than $100 million for inadequate liquidity.

Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

ICON Consumer Discretionary Fund (ICCCX) is excluded from Figure 2 because its total net assets (TNA) are below $100 million and do not meet our liquidity minimums.

State Street SPDR S&P Retail ETF (XRT) is the top-rated Consumer Cyclicals ETF and Fidelity Select Leisure Portfolio (FDLSX) is the top-rated Consumer Cyclicals mutual fund. Both earn a Very Attractive rating.

PowerShares DWA Consumer Cyclicals Momentum Portfolio (PEZ) is the worst rated Consumer Cyclicals ETF and Fidelity Advisor Consumer Discretionary Fund (FNCAX) is the worst rated Consumer Cyclicals mutual fund. PEZ earns a Neutral rating and FCNAX earns an Unattractive rating.

448 stocks of the 3000+ we cover are classified as Consumer Cyclicals stocks.

The Danger Within

Buying a fund without analyzing its holdings is like buying a stock without analyzing its business and finances. Put another way, research on fund holdings is necessary due diligence because a fund’s performance is only as good as its holdings’ performance. Don’t just take our word for it, see what Barron’s says on this matter.

PERFORMANCE OF HOLDINGs = PERFORMANCE OF FUND

Analyzing each holding within funds is no small task. Our Robo-Analyst technology enables us to perform this diligence with scale and provide the research needed to fulfill the fiduciary duty of care. More of the biggest names in the financial industry (see At BlackRock, Machines Are Rising Over Managers to Pick Stocks) are now embracing technology to leverage machines in the investment research process. Technology may be the only solution to the dual mandate for research: cut costs and fulfill the fiduciary duty of care. Investors, clients, advisors and analysts deserve the latest in technology to get the diligence required to make prudent investment decisions.

Figures 3 and 4 show the rating landscape of all Consumer Cyclicals ETFs and mutual funds.

Figure 3: Separating the Best ETFs From the Worst ETFs

Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

Figure 4: Separating the Best Mutual Funds from the Worst Mutual Funds

Sources: New Constructs, LLC and company filings

This article originally published on January 4, 2018.

Disclosure: David Trainer and Kyle Guske II receive no compensation to write about any specific stock, sector or theme.

Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and StockTwits for real-time alerts on all our research.

[1] Ernst & Young’s recent white paper “Getting ROIC Right” proves the superiority of our holdings research and analytics.

Article by Kyle Guske II, New Constructs