There is an old saying on Wall Street that, “Mutual funds are sold, not bought.” This phrase can easily be applied more broadly to the investment world. Few investors are in a true sense, self-starters in that they seek out novel investment ideas. Most of us are in actuality following the recommendations of one outside source or another.

The BRIC phenomenon is a perfect example of this. While there are some good common reasons why one might group the BRIC countries together, it is not altogether clear why one might need a BRIC fund, including two separate BRIC ETFs (EEB, BIK).

Justin Fox at the Curious Capitalist weighs in on the BRIC phenomenon. He wonders whether this is really more of an “IC” phenomenon. In particular he sees some serious differences in the sustainability of what is happening in Brazil and Russia versus India and China.  In short,

BRICs, I fear, may be a great acronym in search of a corresponding economic reality. ICs doesn’t look or sound nearly as good, but that’s where the real action is.

Felix Salmon at Market Movers points out that the BRIC phenomenon was always more of an investment thesis than a macroeconomic thesis.  In that he is correct.   With China looking more like a bubble, Salmon notes the attraction of the “likes of CVRD and Gazprom.”*

Has the BRIC investment meme worked out?  So far, so good.  That is not the issue.  Just because something  works out, does not mean it was a solid idea to start with.

One of the principles behind emerging market investing is that it is a good portfolio diversifier.  We still fail to see why, in a strategic sense, a BRIC fund is a superior diversifier than a fund made up of a broad-based basket of emerging markets.

*For more you can check out a recent article by Allan C. Nichols at that takes a closer look at the  companies that make up Russia’s telecom industry.

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Please see disclosures here.

Please see the Terms & Conditions page for a full disclaimer.