The 100 Best Mutual Funds You Can Buy, 2003 (100 Best Mutual Funds You Can Buy, 2003)

Rating:
Summary: 100 Best Mutual Funds You Can Buy in 2004 by Williamson
Review: A mutual fund is essentially held by shareholders and managed
for an investment fee. This book discusses some of the top
mutual funds in the market together with the considerable
returns. Top funds are American Century Global Gold,
Vanguard Health, Longleaf Partners, Clipper and Calamos Growth.
These funds all have a double digit yearly rate of return.
Aggressive growth funds tend to have the maximal capital gains.
These funds can turn downward in a faltering economy so it is
critical to invest coincidentally with an upturn. If you catch
the bottom of a recession and invest, it is possible to
have three to four times your money in just a few years.
Many of these funds have good investment newsletters which
are important to read carefully. The key is to diversify risk
by placing your portfolio in a managed risk mix of investments.
i.e. safe returns, intermediate risk and aggressive funds

Rating:
Summary: Not worth the money
Review: general information about mutual fund, something you can easily find on the internet.

Rating:
Summary: Not worth the money
Review: It seems to be a very useful and helpful book for me. Since I usually ask the opinions about the mutul funds from my financial advisor, I found this book can even replace him! Now, I am waiting for the profits I will get from buying those mutul funds.

Rating:
Summary: Uses old data, poor labels and tables would be better
Review: The 2003 edition of The 100 Best Mutual Funds uses data through December 31, 2001.
The book is primarily a collection of two page profiles on each fund. The profiles start with a 5 star ranking system to grade Total Return, Risk Reduction, Management, Current Income and Expense Control. Next the author uses 5 category grades to evaluate up-market performance, down-market performance and predictablility of returns. The grades are excellent, very good, good, fair and poor. I have two problems with these grading systems. First, the categories are too broad, second the author does not specify which time period or periods he used to determine the up and down market performance.
Finally, the two page profiles should be replaced with tables. Tables would make it easier to compare the mutuals funds in each category to one another. Tables would also eliminate the "same words but different numbers" monotony of the text.
I would recommend using Standard & Poor's Net Advantage database if it is available at your local library. If not the American Association of Individual Investors www.aaii.com provides a quarterly mutual fund data table, focusing on low load funds, at a reasonable price. The table can be downloaded into an Excel Worksheet so you can use Excel's filter feature to produce a list of funds with specific criteria.