The problem, as I see it, is that there are alot of small players in that fund. Most are only a few percentage points of the fund. Just because they are in the top ten in holding, doesn’t mean that they are going to have the best gains for the fund. For instance, suppose the top ten all are represented at 3% or greater in the fund. It could be that one that is sitting at 0.5-2.0% is significantly outperforming any of those above 3%.

Remember, stocks constituting a fund at higher percentages tends to be a growth stocks, not a value stocks They provide stability at the expense of explosive growth. The riskier stocks in the fund are represented at lower percentages due to their risk but their returns MAY eclipse the conservative picks.

If you are putting this investment in the category of ‘speculative’, I’d just do some research on this sector and try and find some potential winners regardless of the percentage that they are represented in this fund.

A 1.2% fee is not EXCESSIVE (although I tend to avoid funds much above this level like the plague) but the load is. There is absolutely no reason ever to pay a load.

FWIW, my core portfolio tends to be in index funds with no load and VERY low fees (0.10% in many cases). If you’ve read any Bogle, he spends alot of time beating this point home–a fund has to significantly beat the market to just break even with high fees.