HEAD-TO-HEAD: Fidelity versus Invesco

123456

Source: FE Analytics (fund NAVs in US dollars)

Performance

Both funds have good medium- to long-term track records, according to McDermott. Over three and five years they are first quartile in their common sector, significantly outperforming the peer group average.

The Fidelity fund has performed better over one- and five-year periods, but over three-years the Invesco fund has generated slightly superior returns,” he said.

Invesco has earned a 48.95% three-year cumulative return, a tad higher than the 47.74% return generated by Fidelity. Both have out-performed the MSCI AC Asia ex-Japan index (44.1%) during the period.

McDermott pointed out that the funds tend to do well in different market conditions.

“The Fidelity fund tends to add most value in down markets, with maximum drawdown typically lower, less downside risk and fewer negative periods,” said McDermott.

That’s not to say it doesn’t do well in rising markets, he added.

“2019 has been particularly strong and it has more than held its own on other occasions, but the less volatile performance in falling markets helps maintain the consistency of the fund.”

McDermott stressed the importance of the recent change in management of the Invesco fund.

“William Lam has a consistent track record on a very similar fund he runs for UK investors. While maximum drawdown and negative periods are still higher than for the Fidelity fund, the gap is much narrower,” he said.

Calendar year performance %

 Source: FE Analytics. In US dollars.

*Equity – Asia Pacific ex-Japan

123456