Your gain is zero. Why this mutual fund's managers are allowed to take big money home ?these are dumb managers but making big money.they must forced to put their money in same fund where they make money and playing with others life.
You are right the figures only cover a year, will a tad bit of work the yield and year to day for any past calendar year can be found ..
Morningstar.com's Interactive Classroom
Understanding Total Return Total return encompasses everything we have discussed thus far: changes in NAV caused by appreciation or depreciation of the underlying portfolio, payment of any income (yield) or capital-gains distributions, and reinvestment of those distributions.
Here's how it works. Say you buy 10 shares of Fund A at $9 per share. After a few months, the fund's NAV rises to $12. The fund sells some of its winning stocks and makes a $2 per-share capital-gains distribution. It makes no income distributions. As a result, the fund's NAV falls to $10. Your distribution of $20 ($2 x 10 shares) is used to buy two more shares at the new $10 price. Finally, say the fund's NAV rises again, this time to $11 share.
So what is the yield on this investment? Zero, because it has not paid out any income. What about your overall return? Well, if you used only your NAV to calculate return, your shares would be worth the fund's final $11 NAV times your initial 10 shares, or $110. That's an NAV return of 22% on your original investment.
But that figure would be inaccurate, because you need to factor in the capital-gains distribution that you reinvested. Add that back in and you'll find your investment is actually worth that $110 plus the $22 your two new shares are worth, for a grand total of $132. Your total return is really 47%. Not too shabby.
I didn't say that Morningstar's yield calculation was wrong, just that the calculation is the current yield and doesn't reflect long-term changes. That's important because this thread started with a complaint that the fund's NAV hasn't changed in 14 years. That may be a true statement, but it doesn't reflect an investor's results from investing in it over that 14 year period because an NAV comparison ignores dividends and capital gains. And, a response that describes how to find the current yield does not describe how to find the yield over the last 14 years.
Just comparing NAV over long periods of time is very misleading. You can't ignore dividends. Since 1998 the value of an investment in this fund has more than doubled. That includes the so-called "lost decade."
Anyone who doesn't like the performance is welcome to take their money and go.