Description
Monthly newsletter recommending mutual funds and ETFs for a variety of risk tolerance-based portfolios.
Overall Rating
Rating: 3.3/5. From 16 votes.
Please wait...
3.4
Rating from 63 votes
If you’ve subscribed to NoLoad FundX, please click the stars below to indicate your rating for this newsletter, and please share any other feedback about your experience using the comment box below.
Investment Performance
Rating from 17 votes
Rating: 3.5/5. From 17 votes.
Please wait...
Your vote
- 5 Stars 4 Votes
- 4 Stars 5 Votes
- 3 Stars 5 Votes
- 2 Stars 2 Votes
- 1 Stars 1 Votes
Quality Of Writing/Analysis
Rating from 14 votes
Rating: 3.5/5. From 14 votes.
Please wait...
Your vote
- 5 Stars 3 Votes
- 4 Stars 6 Votes
- 3 Stars 1 Votes
- 2 Stars 3 Votes
- 1 Stars 1 Votes
Value For Price
Rating from 16 votes
Rating: 3.4/5. From 16 votes.
Please wait...
Your vote
- 5 Stars 5 Votes
- 4 Stars 3 Votes
- 3 Stars 4 Votes
- 2 Stars 2 Votes
- 1 Stars 2 Votes
Customer Service
Rating from 16 votes
Rating: 3.3/5. From 16 votes.
Please wait...
Your vote
- 5 Stars 3 Votes
- 4 Stars 3 Votes
- 3 Stars 5 Votes
- 2 Stars 5 Votes
- 1 Stars 0 Votes
Having subscribed to Noload Fund-X for about a year I find it to be a good resource, but not the only one I need. Fund-x uses pure technical analysis with a back-tested formula. The strategy is to switch from low performing funds to well performing funds. It has 4 levels of risk and “but”, “hold” and “sell” for each covered fund.
What this will do is help you follow the market trends. This works quite well when things are reasonably consistent (which they are most of the time). In these turbulent times it has been less effective (but most strategies have been challenged). However I have made $ overall.
What would seem like a good approach is to couple this with some timing – which I have started to do but don’t know the results yet.
Happy investing!
Does the newsletter Fund selection match their Mutual Fund picks? I think the upgrader fund in the newsletter has 5 funds per category? The fund, (let’s pick FUNDX), has 10 funds. Do you know if the top five funds in the mutual fund (FUNDX) match the 5 recommendations for the same newsletter upgrader class?
I think this newsletter could work well in the first & second business cycles, and maybe the first part of the 3rd business cycle, but would do poorly in most of the 4th business cycle. It also seems to be very susceptible to large drawdowns for any kind of Black Swans.
Cory’s posting of 09-03-10 explains the basics of the newsletter. For me, it’s been the “greatest thing since sliced bread”.
Here’s some of what I share with others when I’m trying to convince them to try FundX.
*************************
Why I like FundX
1) Great documented track record.
2) Track record is independently confirmed (Hulbert’s Financial Digest)
3) Track record is “real actual results”, not “hypothetical” or “back tested” results. With back tested results, the presenter can manipulate the situation by changing the portfolio being offerred to match up with past actual trends, so that the resulting backtested performance data always shows superior results. This was a major problem with a newsletter I used in the past, where the publisher would constantly add new portfolios initially showing several years of (almost unbelievable) back tested results – and would drop old and unsuccessful portfolios.
4) Long history, since 1980. Their superior performance has “stood the test of time”.
5) Highly rated (Hulbert Financial Digest, Kiplinger’s)
6) Their approach is “quantitative”. To me, this means that results are more likely to repeat themselves vs. an approach that is “subjective” (based on human judgment).
7) Easiest to use of the top ranked newsletters
8) My portfolio consists of “no load funds”, with no sales charges
9) No 1% to 2% annual wrap fees (a percentage of your total account balance), that you get with most investment counselors. These add up to huge amounts over time.
10) Since being with FundX since 2003, my personal results have been consistent with FundX’s published results — usually better in fact, mainly because my “sell cutoff” is tighter than theirs, meaning that I upgrade a little more aggressively than they currently recommend.
I was a subscriber to NLFX from ’99 -’12. And think I did pretty well with it. But in that time there were two big losses . One was 2000 – 2003 where even their Class 3 (best recommended approach) lost 36 % (requires 56 % to get even) and in 2008 lost 40 % (requires 66 % to get even). the end result (by Hulbert) is that their stat % look like this for Class 3 vs Wishire 5000 and the SP500.
YEAR/S Class 3 Wishire SP500
1 12.52 16.06 15.96
3 4.67 11.15 11.10
5 -3.16 2.03 1.25
10 7.08 7.85 6.24
15 9.06 4.86 ?
NLFX did very well through stable times in the 80’s leading to its big 15 year % advantage but has consistently lagged for the last 10 years and I think will continue to do so because of the likely volatility of future markets and the 12 month performance in its rating formula which is too long for volatile markets.
Over the last 11 years the SP500 index fund outperformed all classes of NLFX and outperformed their own FUNDX, RELAX, INCMX and all of the other homegrown funds except for HOTFX which beat it by about 5%. And the Index fund did that without a single trade.
As history indicates (I think), very few fund managers or newsletter have beaten the SP500 over 20 years.
I have used this service for over 20 years. There have been some losing years but overall I am quite happy with the recommendations.