Roger Nusbaum

Roger's blog: Roger's wealth management firm:
Become a Contributor Submit an Article
  • Font Size:
  • Print

roger nusbaumRoger Nusbaum submits: One reader questioned why only having 2% in frontier markets thinking 3% is about the minimum for a holding. I tend to weigh most stocks at 2 or 3% -- I don't think 2% is too small.

The context of 2% is that emerging markets are somewhere around 7% of the global market. So 2% in a frontier stock/single country fund/broad-based fund is around 1/3 of the allocation.

When I first bought the Vietnam Fund [VTOPF] that I have written about a zillion times I felt it had the potential to double. If correct, a 2% weight adds 200 basis points to the total portfolio, which I think is a lot, and is what I'm going for with something like this.

It came close to doubling; I scaled back to about 2%, and still think it can double, but I have no idea in which direction the next 30% might be.

Most of the frontier markets seem to have that kind of potential, but clearly where that potential does exist so too does cutting in half exist as a real possibility.

There are individual stocks and a few LSE traded vehicles that are kind of like closed end funds available too. There are three NYSE CEFs that invest in Russia/Eastern Europe that you can check out, Central Europe & Russia Fund CEF (CEE), Templeton Russia & Eastern Europe Fund CEF (TRF) and Morgan Stanley Eastern Europe Fund Inc. (RNE). The each have their quirks, and are not ideal, but they are easy if that is what you are looking for.

If you want this type of exposure I think you need to be prepared to roll up your sleeves to find and then get to know the choices.

Articles on related themes