|As of 9/29/2022|
|Total Net Assets:||$482.98 Million (6/30/22)|
|Morningstar Category:||Foreign Large Cap Growth|
|Benchmark Index:||FTSE All World Ex-US|
Fund Fact Sheet Q2 2022
PM Commentary Q2 2022
Fund Objective & Investment Philosophy
The investment objective of the Buffalo International Fund is long-term growth of capital. The International Fund invests primarily in equity securities of established companies that are economically tied to various countries throughout the world (excluding the U.S.).
For purposes of the International Fund’s investments, “foreign securities” means those securities issued by companies:
- Organized under the laws of, or with a principal office in, a country other than the U.S. and issue securities for which the principal trading market is in a country other than the U.S.; or
- That derive at least 50% of their revenues or profits from goods produced or sold, investments made, or services provided in a country other than the U.S., or have at least 50% of their assets in a country other than the U.S.
- Under normal circumstances, the International Fund does not expect its investments in emerging markets to exceed 35% of its net assets.
In selecting securities for the International Fund, the Fund managers use a bottom-up approach in choosing investments, seeking companies expected to experience growth based on the identification of long-term, measurable industry, technological, global or other trends. Companies are screened using in-depth, in-house research to identify those which the Fund managers believe have favorable attributes, including: attractive valuation, strong management, conservative debt, free cash flow, scalable business models, and competitive advantages.
In making portfolio selections the Fund managers will also consider the economic, political and market conditions of the various countries in which the Fund may invest.
Overall Morningstar Rating™ of BUFIX based on risk-adjusted returns among 390 Foreign Large Growth funds as of 8/31/22
Morningstar Sustainability Rating™ of BUFIX out of 7,756 Global Equity Large Cap funds as of 7/31/22, based on 100% of AUM
Carbon Metric Rating of BUFIX as of 6/30/22 in the Foreign Large Growth category, based on 94% of AUM; long positions only
Historical Sustainability Score Rank of BUFIX
When it comes to investing internationally, we believe our approach to stock selection is distinct. We are focused on finding good companies and aren’t constrained by benchmark alignment to countries or industries.
Our approach is based on finding companies with sound business models, exposure to long-term secular growth trends, and attractive risk/return growth and valuation characteristics, which we can own for the long-term.
Nicole Kornitzer, Portfolio Manager
|As of 8/31/22||3 MO||YTD||1 YR||3 YR||5 YR||10 YR||Since Inception|
|BUFFALO INTERNATIONAL FUND - Investor||-9.05||-26.17||-26.66||5.01||4.81||7.50||4.46|
|BUFFALO INTERNATIONAL FUND - Institutional||-9.04||-26.12||-26.57||5.16||4.96||7.65||4.61|
|FTSE All World Ex-US Index||-8.24||-17.67||-18.72||3.78||2.41||5.20||2.00|
|Morningstar Global Markets ex-US Index||-8.28||-18.32||-19.51||3.32||1.96||-||-|
|Lipper International Fund Index||-9.61||-21.18||-21.91||3.46||1.98||5.35||1.85|
|Morningstar Foreign Large Growth Category||-7.91||-27.11||-29.11||2.69||2.80||5.85||2.02|
|As of 6/30/22||3 MO||YTD||1 YR||3 YR||5 YR||10 YR||Since Inception|
|BUFFALO INTERNATIONAL FUND - Investor||-16.61||-26.47||-21.99||3.70||5.41||7.70||4.48|
|BUFFALO INTERNATIONAL FUND - Institutional||-16.59||-26.42||-21.90||3.85||5.57||7.86||4.64|
|FTSE All World Ex-US Index||-13.56||-17.95||-18.64||2.23||3.16||5.54||2.00|
|Morningstar Global Markets ex-US Index||-14.15||-18.86||-19.50||1.66||2.65||-||-|
|Lipper International Fund Index||-13.37||-20.48||-19.30||2.44||2.85||5.85||1.93|
|Morningstar Foreign Large Growth Category||-16.58||-27.69||-27.25||1.72||3.56||6.13||1.99|
|BUFFALO INTERNATIONAL FUND - Investor||19.01||19.29||-2.04||-0.45||3.19||29.33||-8.85||28.02||19.10||18.21|
|BUFFALO INTERNATIONAL FUND - Institutional||19.18||19.46||-1.89||-0.30||3.34||29.53||-8.71||28.20||19.24||18.42|
|FTSE All World Ex-US Index||17.81||15.62||-3.04||-4.46||5.12||27.47||-13.87||22.20||11.52||8.66|
|Morningstar Global Markets ex-US Index||17.36||15.71||-3.62||-3.65||5.45||27.37||-14.17||21.57||11.17||8.41|
3 Year Risk Metrics
|BUFIX vs FTSE All World Ex-US Index (As of 6/30/22)|
Hypothetical Growth of $10,000
|(As of 6/30/22)||
|# of Holdings||81|
|Median Market Cap||$31.52 B|
|Weighted Average Market Cap||$76.41 B|
|3-Yr Annualized Turnover Ratio||13.71%|
Top 10 Holdings
|Name of Holding||Ticker||Country||Sector||% of Net
|Schneider Electric||SU FP||France||Industrials||2.58%|
|Hexagon||HEXA B SS||Sweden||Technology||2.33%|
|Taiwan Semiconductor||TSM||Taiwan, Province of China||Technology||2.33%|
|Ashtead Group||AHT LN||England||Industrials||2.30%|
|Merck||MRK GR||Germany||Health Care||2.29%|
|Lonza Group||LZAGY||Switzerland||Health Care||1.88%|
|TOP 10 HOLDINGS TOTAL||22.78%|
|TOP 10 COUNTRIES||% of Portfolio
|Taiwan, Province of China||2.36%|
|TOP 10 TOTAL||82.43%|
CAPITAL MARKET OVERVIEW
Developed markets declined by double-digits in U.S. dollar terms. The dollar continued to strengthen in the quarter against foreign currencies, which made poor performance in foreign markets even worse for U.S. investors. The stock markets in Europe saw steep declines, as higher inflation weighed on consumer confidence, and worries multiplied about the possibility of a recession and a potential energy crisis if Russia were to completely cut of its supply of gas to the Eurozone. It became clear that more rate hikes from the European Central Bank are on the horizon. The Japanese market was also very weak due to currency moves, declining -4.60% in local terms, but -13.88% in U.S. dollar terms after the currency adjustment. As the Japanese central bank continued to resist rate increases, the yen carry trade continued and the yen continued to weaken against the dollar. Hong Kong was a relative bright spot in the quarter, as that developed market fell just -1.0% in U.S. dollar terms.
Emerging markets were also mostly negative in the quarter. The Brazilian and Korean markets were especially weak, producing returns of -26% and -21% in U.S. dollar terms, respectively. Chinese markets, however, were positive in local currency, and only slightly negative in U.S. dollar terms, like Hong Kong. Better results in China could be attributed to investors returning to the markets after the lockdowns in Shanghai, and other cities were successful in bringing down COVID infections, and also after the Chinese Government stated its intentions to support the economy.
While the S&P 5OO Index declined -16.10% during the quarter, the MSCI ACWI ex USA Index declined -13.54%, and the developed country MSCI EAFE Index fell -14.51%.
(As of 6/30/22) — The Buffalo International Fund (BUFIX) produced a return of -16.59% for the quarter, a result that slightly underperformed the MSCI ACWI ex USA Growth Index return of -15.59%. The Fund lagged the broad FTSE All-World ex US Index return of -13.56% by a greater margin.
Value stocks outperformed growth stocks in the period, and the Buffalo International Fund’s growth-oriented focus was a hindrance to performance, especially vs. the FTSE All-World ex US Index which has a larger allocation to value stocks. In terms of sector selection, the Fund’s overweight position in Technology was a drag, as that area was the largest underperforming sector in the quarter. On the other hand, Energy was a better performing sector in the quarter, but the Fund is generally underweight this deep cyclical area. Regarding country exposure, the Fund’s overweight position in the underperforming European markets weighed on relative performance, as did the underweight position to the better performing Hong Kong and China markets. Stock selection played a minor role in underperformance, while the Fund’s cash position helped temper steeper declines.
Top contributors in the period included BAE Systems Plc, Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Ltd., and Astrazeneca Plc. BAE Systems, a multinational provider of defense and aerospace systems, based in the U.K., is benefiting from plans to increase defense spending in the Eurozone. Next, Hong Kong Exchanges, the operator of HKEX, saw its stock price increase, as investors returned to the Hong Kong market in the quarter. Prior concerns related to both the mainland and Hong Kong’s management of coronavirus infections began to ease. Hong Kong Exchanges is expected to be a beneficiary of future initial public offerings (IPOs) and programs to connect Hong Kong markets with mainland China. Finally, Astrazeneca, one of the largest multinational pharmaceutical companies, presented positive data for a key pipeline drug to treat breast cancer.
Top detractors in the quarter were Ashtead Group Plc, Schneider Electric SE, and Hexagon AB.
Ashtead, an equipment rental company that operates in the U.S. and the U.K., continued to decline in the quarter on fears of a weakening economy in the U.S. and a softer construction outlook. We continue to like the company’s growth prospects from increased rental penetration and market share gains from smaller peers, but we are keeping an eye on U.S. construction markets, an important end market for their business. The increasing cost of owning, operating, and complying with laws surrounding new equipment makes rental preferable, thus growth in outsourcing equipment rentals should be an ongoing long-term trend.
Schneider Electric, a global manufacturer of electrical power products, saw its stock decline along with other companies in the industrial sector, due to fears of a recession, signs of a slowdown in European construction, and the negative impact from the COVID lockdowns in China. We expect that Schneider’s growth could moderate over the next year or two as a result but remain positive on the company’s prospects for growth longer-term, due to its exposure to secular trends in energy efficiency, industrial automation, and Internet of Things (IoT).
Hexagon, a global provider of design, measurement, and visualization technologies, declined for similar reasons as Schneider Electric. While Hexagon operates in cyclical end markets, we continue to believe that a majority of the business is fueled by secular growth trends, such as industrial automation or digitalization, Industrial Internet of Things (IoT) and digital twins, the transition to renewables, and autonomous vehicles. Nearly 60% of Hexagon’s revenues are from software and services, and a product portfolio that is geared to drive efficiency improvements for clients. This makes such spend a less attractive place to cut for corporates in difficult times. We expect Hexagon’s business to be more resilient in a slowdown relative to other industrial peers.
Given our overweight position in Europe, we are most concerned about the economic impacts on the Eurozone, and here we find that the situation has deteriorated. While a few months ago the signs of wage inflation were scant, there are now more clear signs of upward pressure on wages. The most worrisome situation in Europe, however, is the ongoing energy crisis, where the region could be facing a future with even higher prices and potential supply rationing. The European community is understandably concerned that Russia could fail to resume the flow of gas once the current shut-down for maintenance is completed. If the gas flow stops indefinitely, recession seems an inevitable outcome for the Eurozone, particularly in Germany. Either way Germany is determined to move as quickly as possible toward developing other sources of energy. We expect to see increased investment in alternative energy sources and increased spending with many companies to prepare for the potential loss of Russian gas.
In China the situation is somewhat different. The Chinese government has announced it is determined to maintain a “COVID zero” policy on the mainland, which will most likely continue to weigh on economic growth as restrictions on activity wax and wane. However, China is the one country in the world where monetary policy is loosening rather than tightening, and inflation remains under control. We remain cautious about the risks associated with investing in China due to government regulation, a weakening economy, and ongoing pandemic-related restrictions. However, we will seek out opportunities that fit our investment strategy and have fewer of these country specific risks.
The economic and geopolitical uncertainty around the world has driven a flight to quality, which includes the U.S. dollar, that has helped to strengthen the U.S. currency making it more challenging for international investors. As other central banks around the world catch up to the U.S. Federal Reserve in raising rates, it could alleviate some of the relative downward pressure on their currencies. However, we would imagine that the perceived safety of the U.S. dollar could nonetheless continue if the outlook abroad appears more uncertain than inside the United States.
Despite the challenges, we also look for positive takeaways. Supply shortages are finally easing around the globe, and consumers in many countries are spending their pandemic savings. Given the parity of the euro and U.S. dollar, now is certainly a good time for Americans to travel to Europe, and while our portfolio companies have considerable revenues in the U.S., a higher cost base in Europe will be a benefit. China’s weak economy is alleviating some of the pressure on commodity prices, and we foresee inflation peaking in the next quarter or two if energy inflation does not worsen considerably. Finally, as equity markets have declined considerably, we believe stock prices are already pricing in a mild recession for many of our portfolio holdings.
While it is impossible to know where the bottom of this bear market may be, we continue our long-term focused investment strategy. Our emphasis is on high-quality companies that have sound, sustainable business models, competitive advantages, and could benefit from secular growth drivers that drive growth throughout the business cycle. We thus prefer businesses that have strong balance sheets that generate strong free cash flow. In this inflationary environment we also favor companies that have the means to pass off cost pressures, such as those with high recurring revenues or companies whose products make up a small cost of a larger product. Faced with a potential recession, we prefer companies that can preserve margins even in a weaker economic environment. This includes businesses that are asset light, have low fixed costs, or possess the ability to drive efficiency improvements through a downturn. We pay close attention to the valuations of the companies in the portfolio, and seek out opportunities during periods of market weakness, or volatility, to buy high quality growth companies at attractive valuations. We believe that by continuing our disciplined strategy we should be able to post superior risk-adjusted returns over the long term.
International Fund News
Kiplinger recognized the Buffalo Flexible Income and International Funds as “Top-Performing Mutual Funds” in their recent fund analysis.
BUFIX and BUFHX were named to the Investor’s Business Daily Best Mutual Funds 2022 list in the International Stock Fund and U.S. Taxable Bond Funds categories, respectively.
- Investor’s Business Daily “Best Mutual Funds List” – April 21, 2022
- Kiplinger’s “Top Performing Mutual Funds” – April 18, 2022
- Kiplinger’s “Top Performing Mutual Funds” – March 10, 2022
- Kiplinger’s “Top Performing Mutual Funds” – January 24, 2022
- Kiplinger’s “Top Performing Mutual Funds” – December 21, 2021
- Kiplinger’s “Top Performing Mutual Funds” – November 18, 2021
- Kiplinger’s “Top Performing Mutual Funds” – August 18, 2021
- Investor’s Business Daily “Best Mutual Funds List” – March 22, 2021
- Investor’s Business Daily “Best Mutual Funds List” – March 23, 2020
- Citywire “Top 20 Female Portfolio Managers in the U.S.” – December 20, 2019
- Kiplinger Top-Performing Mutual Fund (5 Years) – November 15, 2019
- US News & World Reports – Best Mutual Funds – August 15, 2019
- Zacks “4 Non-U.S. Mutual Funds to Buy Now” – July 3, 2019
- Zacks “3 Non-U.S. Mutual Funds Worth Taking a Look” – May 3, 2019
- Morningstar 5-star Overall Rating – March 31, 2019 – out of 373 Foreign Large Growth funds*
- Morningstar 5-star Overall Rating – December 31, 2018 – out of 364 Foreign Large Growth funds*
- Zacks “Consider These Non-U.S. Mutual Funds for Excellent Returns” – October 25, 2018
- Morningstar 5-star Overall Rating – September 30, 2018 – out of 347 Foreign Large Growth funds*
- Citywire “Winning Women – Top 20 Female Portfolio Managers in the U.S.” – August 31, 2018
- Citywire “International Stars to Watch” – August 10, 2018
- Morningstar 5-star Overall Rating – September 30, 2017 – out of 325 Foreign Large Growth funds*
- Zacks “Four #1 Non-U.S. Mutual Funds” – September 22, 2017
- Citywire “Alpha Female 2017 – The Top Female Fund Managers in 7 Major Markets” – August 8, 2017
- Zacks “3 Strong Buy Non-U.S. Mutual Funds” – June 7, 2017
*Overall Morningstar Rating derived from a weighted average of the fund’s 3-, 5-, and 10-year risk adjusted return.
We get to know the companies we invest in and learn how they run their business.
Top-Down & Bottom-Up
We identify Top-Down broad, secular growth trends and search for companies from the Bottom-Up.
We construct our portfolios based on our own proprietary investment strategy.
Sticking to our disciplined investment strategy ensures we maintain a consistent, balanced approach.
The Morningstar Rating™ for funds, or "star rating", is calculated for managed products (including mutual funds, variable annuity and variable life subaccounts, exchange-traded funds, closed-end funds, and separate accounts) with at least a three-year history. Exchange-traded funds and open-ended mutual funds are considered a single population for comparative purposes. It is calculated based on a Morningstar Risk-Adjusted Return measure that accounts for variation in a managed product's monthly excess performance, placing more emphasis on downward variations and rewarding consistent performance. The Morningstar Rating does not include any adjustment for sales loads. The top 10% of products in each product category receive 5 stars, the next 22.5% receive 4 stars, the next 35% receive 3 stars, the next 22.5% receive 2 stars, and the bottom 10% receive 1 star. The Overall Morningstar Rating™ for a managed product is derived from a weighted average of the performance figures associated with its three-, five-, and 10-year (if applicable) Morningstar Rating™ metrics. The weights are: 100% three-year rating for 36-59 months of total returns, 60% five-year rating/40% three-year rating for 60-119 months of total returns, and 50% 10-year rating/30% five-year rating/20% three-year rating for 120 or more months of total returns. While the 10-year overall star rating formula seems to give the most weight to the 10-year period, the most recent three-year period actually has the greatest impact because it is included in all three rating periods.
©2021 Morningstar, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The information contained herein: (1) is proprietary to Morningstar; (2) may not be copied or distributed; and (3) is not warranted to be accurate, complete or timely. Neither Morningstar nor its content providers are responsible for any damages or losses arising from any use of this information. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Morningstar Sustainability Rating™
The Morningstar Sustainability Rating™ is intended to measure how well the issuing companies of the securities within a fund’s portfolio holdings are managing their financially material environmental, social and governance, or ESG, risks relative to the fund’s Morningstar Global Category peers. The Morningstar Sustainability Rating calculation is a five -step process. First, each fund with at least 67% of assets covered by a company-level ESG Risk Score from Sustainalytics receives a Morningstar Portfolio Sustainability Score. The Morningstar Portfolio Sustainability Score is an asset weighted average of company-level ESG Risk Scores. The Portfolio Sustainability Score ranges between 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating that a fund has, on average, more of its assets invested in companies with high ESG Risk. Second, the Historical Sustainability Score is an exponential weighted moving average of the Portfolio Sustainability Scores over the past 12 months. The process rescales the current Portfolio Sustainability Score to reflect the consistency of the scores. The Historical Sustainability Score ranges between 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating that a fund has, on average, more of its assets invested in companies with high ESG Risk, on a consistent historical basis. Third, the Morningstar Sustainability Rating is then assigned to all scored funds within Morningstar Global Categories in which at least thirty (30) funds receive a Historical Sustainability Score and is determined by each fund’s Morningstar Sustainability Rating Score rank within the following distribution: High (highest 10%), Above Average (next 22.5%), Average (next 35%), Below Average (next 22.5%), and Low (lowest 10%). Fourth, Morningstar applies a 1% rating buffer from the previous month to increase rating stability. This means a fund must move 1% beyond the rating breakpoint to change ratings. Fifth, they adjust downward positive Sustainability Ratings to funds with high ESG Risk scores. The logic is as follows: If Portfolio Sustainability score is above 40, then the fund receives a Low Sustainability Rating. If Portfolio Sustainability score is above 35 and preliminary rating is Average or better, then the fund is downgraded to Below Average. If the Portfolio Sustainability score is above 30 and preliminary rating is Above Average, then the fund is downgraded to Average. If the Portfolio Sustainability score is below 30, then no adjustment is made. The Morningstar Sustainability Rating is depicted by globe icons where High equals 5 globes and Low equals 1 globe. Since a Sustainability Rating is assigned to all funds that meet the above criteria, the rating it is not limited to funds with explicit sustainable or responsible investment mandates. Morningstar updates its Sustainability Ratings monthly. The Portfolio Sustainability Score is calculated when Morningstar receives a new portfolio. Then, the Historical Sustainability Score and the Sustainability Rating is calculated one month and six business days after the reported as-of date of the most recent portfolio. As part of the evaluation process, Morningstar uses Sustainalytics’ ESG scores from the same month as the portfolio as-of date. Please click on http://corporate1.morningstar.com/SustainableInvesting/ for more detailed information about the Morningstar Sustainability Rating methodology and calculation frequency. Sustainalytics is an independent ESG and corporate governance research, ratings, and analysis firm. Morningstar, Inc. holds a non-controlling ownership interest in Sustainalytics.
Morningstar Low Carbon Designation™
The Morningstar® Low Carbon Designation™ is intended to allow investors to easily identify low-carbon funds across the global universe. The designation is an indicator that the companies held in a portfolio are in general alignment with the transition to a low-carbon economy. The designation is given to portfolios that have low carbon-risk scores and low levels of exposure to fossil fuels. To determine carbon-risk scores and fossil fuel involvement, Morningstar uses Sustainalytics' company-level data. The Morningstar® Portfolio Carbon Risk Score™ measures the risk that companies in a portfolio face from the transition to a low-carbon economy. The Morningstar® Portfolio Fossil Fuel Involvement™ percentage assesses the degree to which a portfolio is exposed to thermal coal extraction and power generation as well as oil and gas production, power generation, and products & services. To receive a Morningstar Portfolio Carbon Risk Score, at least 67% of portfolio assets must have a carbon-risk rating from Sustainalytics. The percentage of assets covered is rescaled to 100% before calculating the score. To receive the designation, a portfolio must meet two criteria: 1) a 12-month trailing average Morningstar Portfolio Carbon Risk Score below 10 and 2) a 12-month trailing average exposure to fossil fuels less than 7% of assets, which is approximately a 33% underweighting to the global equity universe. Funds receive the Low Carbon designation based on the most recent quarterly calculations of their 12- month trailing average Morningstar Portfolio Carbon Risk Scores and Morningstar Portfolio Fossil Fuel Involvement. Funds holding the Low Carbon designation that no longer meet the criteria will not receive the designation for the subsequent quarter. All Morningstar Portfolio Carbon Metrics, including the Morningstar Portfolio Carbon Risk Score, Morningstar Portfolio Fossil Fuel Involvement, and the Morningstar Low Carbon Designation, are calculated quarterly. Please visit http://corporate1.morningstar.com/SustainableInvesting/ for more detail information about the Morningstar Low Carbon Designation and its calculation. Sustainalytics is an independent ESG and corporate governance research, ratings, and analysis firm. Morningstar, Inc. holds a non-controlling ownership interest in Sustainalytics.