Performance
The calendar year returns show a mixed picture between both funds, he said, based on data from Morningstar. The Aberdeen fund registered a return of –8.0%, -2.1% and -14.8%, respectively, for 2013, 2014 and 2015, while the Schroder fund generated a return of -2.1%, -4.3% and -13.2%, respectively, he said.
This compares to their benchmark index – the MSCI Emerging Markets with a return of -2.6%, -2.2% and -14.9%, respectively.
On the cumulative returns front, except for three-year returns when they failed to beat their benchmark (Aberdeen: -17.0%, Schroders: -15.5%, MSCI: -14.1%), the Aberdeen fund has outperformed in most periods and its near term performance has also been strong, he said.
As of the end of May, based on data from Morningstar, Sim said the one-year return of the Aberdeen fund was -12.6%, the Schroder fund was -16.1% and the MSCI was -17.6%.
During the first five months of 2016, the funds and benchmark were all in positive territory.
“Despite having a more concentrated portfolio, they have also been able to outperform the general market (using MSCI Emerging Markets as a comparison index) during a broad base rally [over the past year].
“The Aberdeen fund has come with higher volatility compared to the Schroder fund and the comparison index. The Schroder fund’s returns on the other hand, seem closer to the market,” he said.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Performance of the two funds and their benchmark over the last three years, according to FE Analytics
