Back to top

Image: Bigstock

Is Fidelity Asset Manager 50% (FASMX) a Strong Mutual Fund Pick Right Now?

Read MoreHide Full Article

Any investors hoping to find a Mutual Fund Equity Report fund could think about starting with Fidelity Asset Manager 50% (FASMX - Free Report) . FASMX carries a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank of 2 (Buy), which is based on various forecasting factors like size, cost, and past performance.

History of Fund/Manager

FASMX finds itself in the Fidelity family, based out of Boston, MA. Fidelity Asset Manager 50% debuted in December of 1988. Since then, FASMX has accumulated assets of about $7.29 billion, according to the most recently available information. The fund is currently managed by Avishek Hazrachoudhury who has been in charge of the fund since April of 2018.

Performance

Of course, investors look for strong performance in funds. FASMX has a 5-year annualized total return of 7.47% and is in the bottom third among its category peers. But if you are looking for a shorter time frame, it is also worth looking at its 3-year annualized total return of 1.84%, which places it in the bottom third during this time-frame.

It is important to note that the product's returns may not reflect all its expenses. Any fees not reflected would lower the returns. Total returns do not reflect the fund's [%] sale charge. If sales charges were included, total returns would have been lower.

When looking at a fund's performance, it is also important to note the standard deviation of the returns. The lower the standard deviation, the less volatility the fund experiences. The standard deviation of FASMX over the past three years is 11.06% compared to the category average of 13.93%. Over the past 5 years, the standard deviation of the fund is 11.48% compared to the category average of 14.96%. This makes the fund less volatile than its peers over the past half-decade.

Risk Factors

Investors should not forget about beta, an important way to measure a mutual fund's risk compared to the market as a whole. FASMX has a 5-year beta of 0.59, which means it is likely to be less volatile than the market average. Because alpha represents a portfolio's performance on a risk-adjusted basis relative to a benchmark, which is the S&P 500 in this case, one should pay attention to this metric as well. With a negative alpha of -2.54, managers in this portfolio find it difficult to pick securities that generate better-than-benchmark returns.

Expenses

As competition heats up in the mutual fund market, costs become increasingly important. Compared to its otherwise identical counterpart, a low-cost product will be an outperformer, all other things being equal. Thus, taking a closer look at cost-related metrics is vital for investors. In terms of fees, FASMX is a no load fund. It has an expense ratio of 0.61% compared to the category average of 0.94%. FASMX is actually cheaper than its peers when you consider factors like cost.

Investors need to be aware that with this product, the minimum initial investment is $0; each subsequent investment has no minimum amount.

Fees charged by investment advisors have not been taken into considiration. Returns would be less if those were included.

Bottom Line

Overall, Fidelity Asset Manager 50% ( FASMX ) has a high Zacks Mutual Fund rank, and in conjunction with its comparatively weak performance, average downside risk, and lower fees, Fidelity Asset Manager 50% ( FASMX ) looks like a great potential choice for investors right now.

This could just be the start of your research on FASMXin the Mutual Fund Equity Report category. Consider going to www.zacks.com/funds/mutual-funds for additional information about this fund, and all the others that we rank as well for additional information. Want to learn even more? We have a full suite of tools on stocks that you can use to find the best choices for your portfolio too, no matter what kind of investor you are.


See More Zacks Research for These Tickers


Normally $25 each - click below to receive one report FREE:


Fidelity Asset Manager 50% (FASMX) - free report >>

Published in