As I've mentioned before, my strategy for the recession was to have a year's worth of cash on hand in case of emergency. I made that goal a while ago at the expense of being considered a cheapskate. Oh well.
Over the past ~18 months I've begun moving my extra cash savings into stocks and the like. But I've wanted to broaden my strategy and invest in Asia. My best-performing Asian stock was Baidu, which I sold last year right before it did a nice 10:1 split (oops, but still made a profit).
At this point I'm willing to accept that it's a lot more difficult/time consuming for me to analyze Asian securities markets and I'm willing to invest in a mutual fund. But I'm concerned about the costs.
I've looked at two Asian-focused mutual funds:
Matthews Asian Growth & Inc Investor (MUTF:MACSX)
and
Matthews Asia Dividend Investor (MUTF:MAPIX)
Some of my benchmarks are Vanguard Total Intl Stock Index Inv and my standard boring Vanguard Wellesley Income Inv (MUTF:VWINX).
Now if I line up these funds in FINRA's great tool that calculates the relative costs of any three funds over time, it's clear that the Matthews Asia funds are several times more expensive over time.
So in order to invest in any of these higher-cost Asian mutual funds, I have to assume that the returns on the Matthews Asia funds will be significantly higher than my [cheap] Vanguard funds in my 401k and most of the individual stocks I invest in. Which is why I want to invest in them in the first place.
So the question is: is it reasonable to speculate that the Asian mutual funds will appreciate significantly more than cheaper US-based stocks/funds to outweigh their higher costs?