In order of my personal preference for risk/reward:

* Mutual Series ~ Mutual Discovery and Mutual Qualified Z shares (risk avoidance=high; cost=medium)

* Oakmark Global (risk avoidance=high; cost=high)

* Dodge & Cox Global (risk avoidance=medium, cost=low). Should be true in a few years. multi-managers.

* Vanguard Global Equity (risk avoidance=medium, cost=low). Not multi-managers; multi-teams containing multi-managers

* Polaris Global Value (risk avoidance=medium; cost=high)

* T. Rowe Price Global Stock (risk avoidance=low, cost=medium)

I draw the line at Vanguard Global, myself.
 

You might want to also look at global allocation funds, which give the managers the flexibility to hold various asset classes - in addition to investing anywhere. 

• Loomis & Sayles Global Markets (LSWWX) is very interesting. $100k min.
  
• Blackrock Global Allocation (MCLOX) is very steady, but has a high ER.
• First Eagle Global is exceptional, but pricey and some top analysts have moved on.
  

I consider Heebner's CGMFX to essentially be a global fund; he will go absolutely anywhere.  (Everyone should have a little CGMFX in their portfolio IMHO.  Heebner is a mutual fund legend, but will retire one day before too long.)

OAKBX is my single largest position, but I have some concerns about Clyde McGregor's new international partner on OAKGX - whose 2007 calls were poor.  Do some DD before buying. 

D&C global might be a little indexey, but is probably fine.  D&C lets their funds get too big, so I moved out.

Another approach is to build you own.  Say, the excellent HIINX plus your favorite domestic fund.

It depends,  without knowing the number of diff funds you own, a global go anywhere maybe right.  If you hold a lot of LC's then you may want exposure to Mid/ small foreign markets.

Why do you want a global fund?

Are you looking to get away from the dollar?  Euro? don't know?

Please understand the reasons for the global stock, that will help guide you in making a sound decision.  I'm 70% international, each holding has a reason, it may not be right, and I review the logic a couple times a yr.

uncleram:

I have been considering American Capital World  Growth and Income Fund (CWGIX). It has consistent performance with low volatility. Any comments.

If you have to pay the load then I don't think American Funds are worth it.  If you want a similar fund with low expenses and a massive asset base then you can substitute DODWX and save the load.   

This brainwashed diehard indexer would like to offer one more option. Vanguard plans to offer a global stock index fund. It will cover the entire world (wow!) in one simple fund. It doesn't get much easier than this. You could conceivably hold this fund, a bond fund, and a money market fund, and end up with only three funds total that cover all the major asset classes (except for non-U.S. bonds, which can be added separately, if desired, with something like RPIBX or BWX; also would be absent global small-caps (not sure why they are missing), which can also be added separately if desired).

Here is a quote from a recent article titled Vanguard to introduce Global Stock Index Fund:

"The new fund will seek to track the performance of the FTSE All-World Index, a float-adjusted, market capitalization-weighted index designed to measure equity market performance of large- and mid-capitalization stocks worldwide. The fund will invest in a broadly diversified sampling of securities from the target benchmark, which comprises more than 2,800 large- and mid-cap stocks of companies in 48 foreign countries. Approximately 55% of the index is made up of stocks from outside the U.S."

Dan