Is ECMMX a Strong Bond Fund Right Now?
Muni - Bonds fund seekers should not consider taking a look at Eaton Vance MA Municipals C (ECMMX) at this time. ECMMX possesses a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank of 4 (Sell), which is based on various forecasting factors like size, cost, and past performance.
Objective
ECMMX is one of many Muni - Bonds funds to choose from. Muni - Bonds funds invest in debt securities issued by states and local municipalities, which are typically used to pay for infrastructure construction, schools, and other government functions. These securities can be backed by taxes (revenue bonds), but others are known as "general obligation" and are not necessarily backed by a defined source. These bonds are especially attractive because of their inherent tax benefits.
History of Fund/Manager
ECMMX is a part of the Eaton Vance family of funds, a company based out of Boston, MA. Since Eaton Vance MA Municipals C made its debut in July of 2006, ECMMX has garnered more than $2.13 million in assets. Craig Brandon is the fund's current manager and has held that role since February of 2010.
Performance
Of course, investors look for strong performance in funds. ECMMX has a 5-year annualized total return of -0.93%, and is in the bottom third among its category peers. If you're interested in shorter time frames, do not dismiss looking at the fund's 3-year annualized total return of 2.13%, 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. Over the past three years, ECMMX's standard deviation comes in at 6.14%, compared to the category average of 9.77%. The standard deviation of the fund over the past 5 years is 6.34% compared to the category average of 10.82%. This makes the fund less volatile than its peers over the past half-decade.
Bond Duration
Modified duration is a measure of a given bond's interest rate sensitivity, so when judging how fixed income securities will respond in a shifting rate environment, it is an excellent figure to look at.
If you believe interest rates will rise, this is an important factor to look at. ECMMX has a modified duration of 7.92, which suggests that the fund will decline 7.92% for every hundred-basis-point increase in interest rates.
Income
It is important to consider the fund's average coupon because income is often a big reason for purchasing a fixed income security. Average coupon is a look at the average payout by the fund in a given year. For example, this fund's average coupon of 4.62% means that a $10,000 investment should result in a yearly payout of $462.
For those seeking a strong level of current income, a higher coupon is typically good news. However, it could pose a reinvestment risk if rates are lower in the future when compared to the initial purchase date of the bond. Investors also need to consider risk relative to broad benchmarks, as income is only one part of the bond picture.
With a beta of 0.7, this fund is less volatile than a broad market index of fixed income securities. Taking this into account, ECMMX has a negative alpha of -1.75 , which measures performance on a risk-adjusted basis.Ratings
Investors should also consider a bond's rating, which is a grade "AAA" to "D" given to a bond that indicates its credit quality. With this letter scale in mind, ECMMX has 66.89% in high quality bonds rated at least "AA" or higher, while 23.85% are of medium quality, with ratings of "A" to "BBB". The fund has an average quality of AA, and focuses on high quality securities.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, ECMMX is a no load fund. It has an expense ratio of 1.57% compared to the category average of 0.84%. Looking at the fund from a cost perspective, ECMMX is actually more expensive than its peers.
Investors should also note that the minimum initial investment for the product is $1,000 and that each subsequent investment has no minimum amount.
Fees charged by investment advisors have not been taken into consideration. Returns would be less if those were included.
Bottom Line
Overall, Eaton Vance MA Municipals C ( ECMMX ) has a low Zacks Mutual Fund rank, and in conjunction with its comparatively weak performance, average downside risk, and higher fees, this fund looks like a somewhat weak choice for investors right now.
Your research on the Muni - Bonds segment doesn't have to stop here. You can check out all the great mutual fund tools we have to offer by going to www.zacks.com/funds/mutual-funds to see the additional features we offer as well for additional information. Zacks provides a full suite of tools to help you analyze your portfolio - both funds and stocks - in the most efficient way possible.
#1 Semiconductor Stock to Buy (Not NVDA)
The incredible demand for data is fueling the market's next digital gold rush. As data centers continue to be built and constantly upgraded, the companies that provide the hardware for these behemoths will become the NVIDIAs of tomorrow.
One under-the-radar chipmaker is uniquely positioned to take advantage of the next growth stage of this market. It specializes in semiconductor products that titans like NVIDIA don't build. It's just beginning to enter the spotlight, which is exactly where you want to be.
See This Stock Now for Free >>Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report
Get Your Free (ECMMX): Fund Analysis Report
This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research (zacks.com).
Source Zacks-com
