Wealth Think

Whether it's protection of their own investments or a sense of responsibility to the world, there is an intriguing, if not unexpected, movement developing among mutual fund investors.

In their zeal to cash in on the latest investment craze, fund companies all too often have displayed a lack of originality and bad timing when launching new funds. Since exchange-traded funds have taken all of the major indexes, those that have come late to the ETF rage have come out with incredibly narrow niche and enhanced index funds that defy logic.

They may be late to the party, but they seem to be making up for lost time.

With the stratospheric salaries that hedge fund managers are earning these days, there may be more to mutual fund managers' interest in employing hedge fund strategies than performance. Sure, they claim they're turning to riskier tactics to deliver better returns and distinguish themselves from the competition. In fact, many experts believe that mutual funds' use of hedge fund strategies is a growing trend and that the lines between institutional and retail investment strategies will blur.

It's been three years since the Securities and Exchange Commission began requiring funds to annually disclose their proxy voting records. When the measure was passed, many dismissed it as a mere administrative nuisance, reasoning that even if investors eventually began to pour through funds' voting records, the day when they would be able to systematically make sense of the information, let alone actually be interested in it, was a long way off.

The comment period for the independent directors rule ended a month ago, and as the Securities and Exchange Commis-sion nears a vote on the measure, speculation is increasing that it will bend to the industry's fierce opposition to having fund boards run by independent chairmen. SEC Chairman Christopher Cox recently said that one alternative might be appointing a lead independent director, and industry insiders have indicated that the SEC might merely call having an independent chairman a "best practice."

Critics of 401(k) plans say they have failed the nation's workers because they don't equip them with financial advice. Although the Pension Protection Act prescribes giving guidance, it is vague on what it should constitute and, therefore, hasn't prompted many plan sponsors or administrators to provide such assistance. Without clear rules, they are afraid of fiduciary liability.