You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Which regulation forbides mutual funds from selling to stay in cash?
- Thread starter crgarcia
- Start date
i have been looking for this one too. its really hard to find in a search, there are too many websites with the words like âmutual fundâ and âshort saleâ in them, searches only return a list of things that dont help. add the word âregulationâ to the mix and the results are about the uptick ruleâ¦
come on now, somebody has got to know it⦠is it even true that mutual funds legally cant short and have to stay a certain % invested at all times? or maybe its just highly regulated and difficult for them? those get rich quick trading schools that promote themselves on paid programming really love to pump this issue, thats for damn sure.
come on now, somebody has got to know it⦠is it even true that mutual funds legally cant short and have to stay a certain % invested at all times? or maybe its just highly regulated and difficult for them? those get rich quick trading schools that promote themselves on paid programming really love to pump this issue, thats for damn sure.
Mutual funds are regulated by the Investment Company Act of 1940 which states that:
SEC. 12. ø80aâ12¿ (a) It shall be unlawful for any registered
investment company, in contravention of such rules and regulations
or orders as the Commission may prescribe as necessary or
appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of
investorsâ
(1) to purchase any security on margin, except such shortterm
credits as are necessary for the clearance of transactions;
(2) to participate on a joint or a joint and several basis in
any trading account in securities, except in connection with an
underwriting in which such registered company is a participant;
or
(3) to effect a short sale of any security, except in connection
with an underwriting in which such registered company is
a participant
http://www.sec.gov/about/laws/ica40.pdf
SEC. 12. ø80aâ12¿ (a) It shall be unlawful for any registered
investment company, in contravention of such rules and regulations
or orders as the Commission may prescribe as necessary or
appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of
investorsâ
(1) to purchase any security on margin, except such shortterm
credits as are necessary for the clearance of transactions;
(2) to participate on a joint or a joint and several basis in
any trading account in securities, except in connection with an
underwriting in which such registered company is a participant;
or
(3) to effect a short sale of any security, except in connection
with an underwriting in which such registered company is
a participant
http://www.sec.gov/about/laws/ica40.pdf
I think most funds stay near fully invested these days. I'd say the reasoning is that if you didn't want to invest in stocks, you'd sell the fund. In other words, how would you feel if you invested in a muitual fund thinking you were getting some exposure to stocks, the market then goes up, and you find out your mutual fund manager was sitting in cash. Would that bother you? LOL.
So if you think stocks are going down, simply shift your money out of the fund into a money market fund.
They can't sell short unless it is something that is covered in their prospectus. Some funds can. One that comes to mind is Ken Heebner's fund.
But again, if you want to short, go ahead. Most of the investing public does not want to.
OldTrader
So if you think stocks are going down, simply shift your money out of the fund into a money market fund.
They can't sell short unless it is something that is covered in their prospectus. Some funds can. One that comes to mind is Ken Heebner's fund.
But again, if you want to short, go ahead. Most of the investing public does not want to.
OldTrader
Quote from BJL:
Mutual funds are regulated by the Investment Company Act of 1940 which states that:
SEC. 12. ø80aâ12¿ (a) It shall be unlawful for any registered
investment company, in contravention of such rules and regulations
or orders as the Commission may prescribe as necessary or
appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of
investorsâ
(1) to purchase any security on margin, except such shortterm
credits as are necessary for the clearance of transactions;
(2) to participate on a joint or a joint and several basis in
any trading account in securities, except in connection with an
underwriting in which such registered company is a participant;
or
(3) to effect a short sale of any security, except in connection
with an underwriting in which such registered company is
a participant
http://www.sec.gov/about/laws/ica40.pdf
Just thought I'd mention, this must not be the whole story because there are mutual funds who both margin and sell short. He's a link to the prospectus on Ken Heebner's Focus Fund, which does both:
http://www.cgmfunds.com/pdf/2007-05-01-focus-prospectus.pdf
Quote from OldTrader:
Just thought I'd mention, this must not be the whole story because there are mutual funds who both margin and sell short. He's a link to the prospectus on Ken Heebner's Focus Fund, which does both:
http://www.cgmfunds.com/pdf/2007-05-01-focus-prospectus.pdf
Yeah, I think they must have updated those regulations (i'm definitely not an expert on US regulations) as I read
http://mutualfunds.about.com/cs/hedgefunds/l/blhedgefunds.htm
The fund must ultimately follow their written investment policy. If the fund says no more than 5% cash, then no more than 5% cash.
Investors like to know what to expect when purchasing a fund, so the written rules are necessary.
Investors like to know what to expect when purchasing a fund, so the written rules are necessary.
thank you everyone for your responses
thats a good point, i never really thought about it that way. its always bothered me the other way around when they stay long as the market eats it. this puts it in a more 50/50 perspective.
would that also then mean that they dont care too much if their fund eats it, just as long as it eats it less than the indices? kind of puts the whole mutual fund industry in a shady light... but i guess it really falls on the shoulders of the investors to demand more, which they are not doing.
Quote from OldTrader:
I think most funds stay near fully invested these days. I'd say the reasoning is that if you didn't want to invest in stocks, you'd sell the fund. In other words, how would you feel if you invested in a mutual fund thinking you were getting some exposure to stocks, the market then goes up, and you find out your mutual fund manager was sitting in cash. Would that bother you? LOL.
thats a good point, i never really thought about it that way. its always bothered me the other way around when they stay long as the market eats it. this puts it in a more 50/50 perspective.
Quote from USAtrader:
Mutual fund managers are judged primarily on relative performance to their respective indices. Being in too much cash is a risky proposition for them; they don't want to miss a move and under perform their index. It's not regulatory.
would that also then mean that they dont care too much if their fund eats it, just as long as it eats it less than the indices? kind of puts the whole mutual fund industry in a shady light... but i guess it really falls on the shoulders of the investors to demand more, which they are not doing.