The gap between the best and worst-performing funds is wider in the cautious managed sector than in global equities, according to Thames River.
Multi-manager Gary Potter analysed Lipper data for 165 cautious managed funds and 229 global funds from October 1, 2007 to November 11.
He found the difference in performance between the best and worst funds in the cautious sector was 77.2 per cent, compared to 76 per cent in the global sector.
The best fund in the cautious managed sector was up by 55.4 per cent and the worst was down by 21.8 per cent, while in the global sector the best fund was up by 41 per cent and the worst fell by 35 per cent.
The average cautious fund had 20.4 per cent in UK fixed income, 22.4 per cent in overseas fixed income and 9.2 in alternatives or other strategies to the end of September.
The highest allocation to UK fixed income was 66.4 per cent and the lowest was zero. In overseas fixed income it was 74 per cent and 0 per cent respectively. The highest allocation to alternatives was 20.9 per cent and the lowest was 0.
Potter says: “You can see a massive variation in what is considered a cautious managed fund and there needs be further clarification of this category.”