I'm considering buying FOR. 15% of my assets are currently in...

I'm considering buying FOR.

15% of my assets are currently in cash. I am considering investing ~half of this cash into FOR.

15.2% of my assets are currently in the Forager International Fund. If I follow through, I will have ~23% of my assets invested with Forager.

My Reasons:
FOR has performed horribly in the past two years and investors are wanting out, hence the current discount to NTA. If the fund was still unlisted, there would be large redemption requests. It has been shown that investors follow their emotions and tend to invest in funds when short-term returns are good and withdraw money when short-term returns are poor. The Fidelity Investments' study on the average individual investor's return in Peter Lynch's famous Magellan Fund was negative, despite the overall fund returning 29%pa over 13 years (story and link are below). Investors were, on average buying at peaks in performance and selling in troughs. It is presumed that if an investor had instead done the opposite they could have achieved returns far greater than 29%pa. This situation with Peter Lynch's Magellan Fund reminds me of the average Forager experience. The current poor performance and stench of Forager (especially the Australian fund), create an opportunity in three ways.

1. We can invest in a fund at its low point and gain exposure to a possible reversal in its performance
2. We can buy units at a ~20% discount to NTA (The Magellan Fund Investor did not have this opportunity)
3. We can buy units that presumable carry some unrealised loss, meaning that if there is a reversal in performance that a portion of those gains will be free from both tax and performance fees

I enjoy reading the growing amount of Forager bashing on Hotcopper as it means as the opportunity and discount to NTA are growing. As with the average Magellan Fund investor, if you follow what everyone else is doing, you're likely to receive a poor relative outcome.

"Fidelity Investments conducted a study on their Magellan fund from 1977-1990, during Peter Lynch’s tenure. His average annual return during this period was 29%. This is a remarkable return over the 13 year period. He was easily one of the best performing fund managers for his asset class. It should be noted that this was not a secret. Fidelity’s Magellan fund became one of the largest mutual funds due to its success under Peter Lynch, so it is clear that investors were aware of its performance. Whether the investors in the fund were chasing performance or investing due to his expertise is unclear. What is clear is that investors learned that Peter Lynch was investing in a method that worked.Given all that, you would expect that the investors in his fund made substantial returns over that period. However, what Fidelity Investments found in their study was shocking. The average investor in the fund actually lost money. You read that correctly… The average investor lost money in the Fidelity Magellan fund under Peter Lynch’s tenure during a period of time when the fund returned around 29% annually." https://www.innovativewealth.com/wall-street-wisdom/individual-investors-bad-investing/