| What’s Next for Heebner and CGM? | 11/3/09 |
|
It’s been a distressing year for investors in Ken Heebner’s flagship CGM Focus Fund (CGMFX). Heebner, once one of the top performing fund managers and still one of the most closely watched, continues to face challenges after world-beating numbers in 2007. Year to date, CGM Focus is up just 3%, while the S&P 500 has moved higher by close to 15%. According to Morningstar, investors pulled $326 million out of the fund in the first half of the year. The Focus Fund returned a remarkable 80% in 2007, raising Heebner’s profile with many investors. With the deadline for institutions to disclose Q3 holdings right around the corner, investors will be curious to see where he’s putting his money now. CGM’s top holdings from the start of Q3 across all of its funds showed Heebner making moves in a number of sectors, focusing on growth-oriented names. Heebner opened new positions in global online giants Google (GOOG) and Baidu (BIDU), pharmacy benefit management company Express Scripts (ESRX), and exchange CME Group (CME). However, it appears likely Heebner has since rotated out of many of these names, which have done well since the start of Q3. During Q3, CGM Focus returned about 11% compared to 15% for the S&P 500. Of course, Heebner is known for making big portfolio moves very quickly so there has no doubt been some shuffling among his top holdings over the last few months. Investors won’t be sure of where Heebner stands now until later this month, when the deadline for end-of-Q3 filings hits. At tickerspy.com, members can track Heebner’s latest holdings, see a graph of their combined performance, and be notified when his new holdings are made public. Pro portfolio performance is based on institutions’ top-15 holdings as disclosed in quarter-end filings with the SEC. Pro performance does not take into account additional holdings beyond the top 15 nor does it include positions that are not required to be disclosed by the SEC. As such, Pro portfolio performance should be considered an approximation and not a precise record of how an institution has performed over time. |
