Is profit booking from
equity mutual fund a crime?
I have never seen any AMC
relationship manager telling any of their client to book profit from equity
mutual fund. Distributors are also guided accordingly by AMC RMs and they also
guide their client not to book profit as it is meant for long term i.e. till
the goal.
First of all both investors and
distributors should think why AMCs will like their AUM to go down. Not only the
fund is earning good revenue but officials are also earning good
bonus/incentive because of higher AUM.
May be distributors also thinking
that if their AUM goes down then they might also earn less trail commission and
so keeping that same “stay long term” mantra they also tell their investors not
to book profit.
Its investors money on which both
are enjoying the fruit. Investors should always look, evaluate and do what is
beneficial for them. If someone does not book profit then still in long term
that investor will get good return but booking profit does not necessarily mean
its wrong. All depends on situation.
Lets look at 2 situations.
Situation 1: Assuming that if
someone has invested 100 and in one case there is for 2 successive year there
is 50% growth and 3rd year 50% fall.
|
Year beginning |
Growth |
Year end |
Year 1 |
100 |
50% |
150 |
Year 2 |
150 |
50% |
225 |
Year 3 |
225 |
-50% |
112.5 |
Situation 2: Assuming that if
someone has invested 100 and in one case there is for 2 successive year there
is 25% growth and 3rd year 25% fall.
|
Year beginning |
Growth |
Year end |
Year 1 |
100 |
25% |
125 |
Year 2 |
125 |
25% |
156.25 |
Year 3 |
156.25 |
-25% |
117.1875 |
From the above 2 examples in
which situation after 3rd year the net growth is more?. It's situation 2.
Let us look another example
Situation 3: Assuming that if
someone has invested 100 and in one case there is for 2 successive year there
is 75% growth and 3rd year 75% fall.
|
Year beginning |
Growth |
Year end |
Year 1 |
100 |
75% |
175 |
Year 2 |
175 |
75% |
306.25 |
Year 3 |
306.25 |
-75% |
76.5625 |
Situation 4: Assuming that if
someone has invested 100 and in one case there is for 2 successive year there
is 20% growth and 3rd year 20% fall.
|
Year beginning |
Growth |
Year end |
Year 1 |
100 |
20% |
120 |
Year 2 |
120 |
20% |
144 |
Year 3 |
144 |
20% |
115.2 |
Situation 5: Assuming that if
someone has invested 100 and in one case there is for 2 successive year there
is 15% growth and 3rd year 15% fall.
|
Year beginning |
Growth |
Year end |
Year 1 |
100 |
15% |
115 |
Year 2 |
115 |
15% |
132.25 |
Year 3 |
132.25 |
15% |
112.4125 |
When I again look at situation 3,4,
and 5 then its very evident that if there is very high gain the recent 2 years
and if there is reversal at same rate for next year part of gains are wiped
off. In fact in situation 3 it has gone less than the capital invested and loss
is there.
The higher the gain in recent
past more is the risk if trend reverses. Investor should always see that
volatility w.r.t long term average return and at some stage should book at
least some profit.
Being long term in investment
does not necessarily means to be in long term in same fund. The short term
performance of that fund should be viewed. More the high return in short term
vis a vis past long term average return then some profit needs to be booked and
shifted towards another good fund within same peer group where reversal risk is
less. Booking of profit and movement of money should happen within 3-5 funds of
same peer group.
If one does this then that
investor is still staying in long term in the funds. Yes, one might end up paying
capital gain tax but if net of tax it is advantageous for investor then still
can be considered.
My view is total investment (in a
portfolio of 3-5 funds within same category) is for long term but fund wise
evaluation should be of short term also (in every rolling 3 years/5 years) and
lateral movement of money should happen if need arise so.
Investor should be in love with their
money and not any particular fund. At present we are in situation where this
3/5 years evaluation and rebalancing required.