Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
  • new deep-dive swr math
    At one time when working & doing my taxes, advisor fees could be itemized. Thus cutting drag. With 401-k I never paid much attention to drag when account was smart, but as the years went bye & account grew the pain became noticeable !!
    Enjoy your weekend, Derf
  • new deep-dive swr math
    For those who pay an advisor to manage their money, those advisor's management fees need to be accounted for as well. These fees represent an additional "withdrawal" to your SWR rate.
    The two largest fees are your fund's expense ratios (mutual fund or ETF management fee) and your independent advisor's management fees. If you employ a portfolio manager often they will withdraw 1% of your portfolio yearly. That kind of a 1% "drag" on your SWR can reduce a very significant amount of your wealth over long periods of time (30 - 40 years in retirement for example).
    To illustrate this, I will use a highly efficient mutual fund (VFINX...low ER) and run a simulation through Portfolio Visualizer. I set the withdrawal rate of 1% over the life of the simulation to see what the impact of just the management fee would be on the portfolio's ending value. I used $1,000 as the starting Portfolio value.
    https://portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest
    Time frame: 1985 - 2023 (38 years)
    Paying management fees of 1% (withdrawn yearly) on a portfolio starting value of $1K in 1985, this portfolio would have grown to $38K by 2023. The Inflation adjusted value of that $1K in 1985 = $13K in 2023.
    Removing the 1% withdrawal the during this same time frame, $1K(1985) grew to $56K (2023), with and adjusted inflation value of $19.5K.
    This means that the a retiree, who paid a 1% management fee throughout retirement (1985-2023), had a portfolio that was 33% less than the same retiree who self managed their retirement portfolio.
    Another way of looking at this is that your advisor made $18K (the difference between $56K-$38K) advising you over these 38 year. You made $27K. If you need advice...pay for it hourly, not as a percentage under management.
    If there is one thing we all can do to improve our success with SWR in retirement it would be to reduce the fees that we pay on both the funds we invest in and advisor fees we pay others.
  • Matt Levine / Money Stuff: Ugh! The debt ceiling...
    I don’t know. Bloomberg’s Chris Anstey and Liz McCormick report:
    Investment bank clients are peppering Wall Street with questions about what happens if the US Treasury in coming weeks runs out of cash and does the unthinkable — failing to make payments due on Treasury securities, the bedrock of the global financial system. …
    One school of thought is that the impact might not be so damaging. After all, since the 2011 debt-limit crisis, market participants have worked out a process for dealing with the Treasury announcing that it couldn’t make an interest or principal payment.
    But JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon warned earlier this month that even going to the brink is dangerous, with unpredictable consequences.
    “The closer you get to it, you will have panic,” he said in a May 11 interview with Bloomberg Television. “The other thing about markets is that, always remember, panic is the one thing that scares people — they take irrational decisions.”
    And even a key group that helped to compile the emergency procedures, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York-sponsored Treasury Market Practices Group, has issued its own caution.
    “While the practices contemplated in this document might, at the margin, reduce some of the negative consequences of an untimely payment on Treasury debt for Treasury market functioning, the TMPG believes the consequences of delaying payments would nonetheless be severe,” it said in its December 2021 gameplan.
    And:
    “We are likely to see localized dislocations in the event of missed payment,” if that were to happen, JPMorgan rates strategists, co-led by Jay Barry, wrote Friday in a Q&A for clients on a technical default.
    RBC Capital Markets strategists, also writing Friday, said they “doubt” a downgrade would trigger any forced reallocation by fund managers away from Treasuries.
    At the same time, RBC’s Blake Gwinn and Izaac Brook cautioned that the “back-office issues” of delaying payments “could very easily bleed into the front-office, causing disruptions to liquidity and market functioning.”
    The TMPG noted that firms holding Treasuries in custody for other financial institutions tend to advance payments scheduled for those securities, and would need to sort how to proceed if those payments weren’t received from the Treasury on time.
    Firms that offer pricing on Treasuries could run into challenges, “such as setting the price of a Treasury subject to a delayed payment to $0,” the group said.
    Some market participants “might not be able to implement” the contingency plans, “and others could do so only with substantial manual intervention in their trading and settlement processes, which itself would pose significant operational risk,” the TMPG said.
    Yesterday FT Alphaville published much of that JPMorgan rates strategy Q&A, which I would say is broadly sanguine about market plumbing. The first point is that, if the US government does default, that will probably cause the prices of Treasury bonds to go up, since a government debt default is a crisis and crises cause a flight to safety and the safest assets are, still, Treasuries:
    This is certainly not our modal view, but in the unlikely event of a technical default, we think Treasury yields would decline and the curve would steepen. This seems unusual in the context of a default, but Treasuries have rallied into the latter stages of other serious debt ceiling debates in 2011 and 2013.
    From first principles, if a US debt default does not reduce the value of Treasuries, then Treasuries should remain pretty useful for plumbing and collateral purposes. Of course very little about financial plumbing is derived directly from first principles, and if your computer has a switch that is like “IF bond is defaulted THEN don’t accept it as collateral,” then there are problems. But people have had years of debt-ceiling warnings to adjust their switches and one hopes they have things kind of right:
    Treasury can, in principle, delay coupon or principal payment dates. If Treasury announces its intention to postpone a payment date in advance (the day before the payment is due), the security will remain in Fedwire, and would therefore still be transferable. …
    If Treasury fails to notify investors of its intent to delay a principal payment due the following day by approximately 10:00 PM, the security in question will drop out of Fedwire, and such defaulted security will not be transferable. If (only) a coupon payment is missed, however, the underlying security is still in the system and remains transferable. ...
    The status of Treasury collateral depends on the timing of Treasury’s notification of any delays in payments. If done in the timeframe discussed earlier, the security remains in Fedwire and is still transferable. As a result, it could in principal be used as collateral for repo and derivatives transactions, although possibly with higher haircuts.
    If notification deadlines are not met, particularly for principal payments, that particular security is dropped out of the system and is no longer transferable, and as a result, cannot be used as collateral. It is possible that an OTC market may develop for securities that drop out of the system, but the likelihood of such an outcome is unclear at the present time.
    Since Treasury securities do not have cross-default provisions, other Treasury securities that have not had a delayed/missed payment will remain transferable on Fedwire and can therefore continue to be used as collateral. ...
    Under the US non-cleared margin requirements (NCMR) finalized by CFTC and prudential regulators, Treasury securities are considered eligible collateral even in the case of a missed payment. However, this is not the case under the UK and EU NCMR regimes. Thus, for any transactions facing counterparties in those regions, defaulted Treasury securities would be assigned zero collateral value, requiring the swap counterparty to substitute or post additional collateral. …
    We believe the Federal Reserve will accept defaulted Treasuries as collateral at the discount window.
    And so on. Money market funds, for instance, hold about $1 trillion of short-term Treasuries; “ultimately,” say JPMorgan, “we believe these funds would not be forced to liquidate Treasury securities in a technical default.”
    I want to make a couple of points here:
    • 1) I assume that they are basically correct not to be too worried about the plumbing. We have been having debt-ceiling crises every few years for ages now, and surely everyone has war-gamed this out over and over again. Financial markets are not full of idiots, and it would be annoying if this extremely predictable and predicted event brings down the global financial system through some technicality.
    • 2) That said, I assume that with, like, 85% confidence. There is a lot of stuff out there. Surely the biggest global banks and asset managers have gamed out how they will keep markets going in the event of a US default, but is there some smaller firm whose computers will say “Treasury price = $0” and cause chaos? Maybe!
    • 3) If you work in some corner of financial plumbing that you think won’t work in the event of a default, please do let me know! Send me an email. Also, though, fix it? You still have a little bit of time, and you’ve had plenty of warning.
    • 4) Wouldn’t it be so tiresome to work in financial plumbing at some big bank and have to go to all the meetings about this stuff? To have to build all the systems to deal with a US government default, just because the US government can never get its act together to get rid of the debt ceiling, and because debt-ceiling negotiations always have to go to the last second? Like imagine pulling the all-nighters at JPMorgan to prepare for this, scrambling to save the US government from the consequences of its own incompetence and malice, and meanwhile the Securities and Exchange Commission is fining because sometimes you text your colleagues about work. Just pay your debts, come on.
  • In case of DEFAULT
    @dtconroe…. Me as well. As I have de-risked our assets I feel that I have prepared as best I can under the circumstances. As a former History grad student I have been pondering how this will be viewed fifty years from now if we indeed blow it up.
  • In case of DEFAULT
    @fred495...question if you are comfortable answering...how much of a change meaning your 100% Treasury MMKT and FDIC CD portfolio from your past portfolio...were you very heavy in those investments prior and if so what % of your portfolio?
    FWIW...I've been 85-90% for many years in those types of investments....now ~ 95%...."stop playing the game if you feel you've got enough...don't get greedy...get your portfolio where you can sleep well at night" I'm still working and do I guess you would say better than average out there...working for the "fun of the game, camraderie and challenge.."
    ...who the heck knows though right?
    Good Luck to ALL,
    Baseball Fan

    I am a retired and fairly conservative investor who really doesn't need a lot more money - but I certainly don't want to lose a lot. In the current environment, preserving capital is more important to me than seeking return on capital. I prefer to err on the side of caution. As you said, "who the heck knows"?
    I have been 100% in a Treasury only MM fund and in FDIC insured CDs from large national banks since the early spring of last year. Currently, the split between Treasury MM and CDs is approx. 40/60. This percentage will change as CDs mature and the proceeds are reinvested in the future.
    Prior to that I was approx. 50% in allocation/options/macro trading funds with fairly low standard deviations, such as FMSDX, JHQAX, BLNDX, PVCMX, etc., and the other 50% in bond funds, such as NVHAX, OSTIX, RCTIX, TSIIX, etc.
    Good luck,
    Fred
  • just noticed re:BRUFX
    Patience sometimes pays off, eh, @hank? I've been tracking Brother Industries out of Japan. BRTHY.
    https://www.stockrover.com/research/insight/summary/quotes/BRTHY
    Thx @Crash. I rarely sell something that’s down. (But occasionally head for the exit if nauseated. :))
    I think some foreign holdings non dollar-hedged is a good diversification tool in a risk averse portfolio. Just keep the commitment light. As my prior post indicated, the FX (foreign exchange markets) can sink even the mightiest ship. Patience for sure where currencies are in play. Grantham mentioned Japan about 2 years ago as one area where there might still be some value in an inflated global market. I took his lead. Of course, they’ve risen a lot over those 2 years. Buyer beware at this late stage.
  • just noticed re:BRUFX
    @hank,
    Japanese Companies = yes
    Japanese Economy = not so sure
    Buffet's 5 Japanese stocks:
    japanese-stocks-that-warren-buffett-just-bought
    Japanese Funds/ETFs i have followed:
    HJPNX
    HJPSX
    FJPNX
    DXJ - great returns over the last 5 years
  • just noticed re:BRUFX
    Just from general reading, Buffett is high on cash - apparently leery of valuations. That would be in line with @Crash’s comment re BRUFX. As noted previously, Buffett’s been buying in Japan. ISTM the S&P is inflating due to a handful of stocks. Elephant chasing his tail comes to mind. But could be wrong. Perhaps it’s heading for a permanently high plateau.
    Personal note - Have had a small hold on Japan stocks thru an index fund for couple years. Because it isn’t dollar hedged against the yen I took a clubbing last year even as Japanese stocks rose. Happily, I’ve gotten that back this year as the dollar has weakened against the yen and Japanese stocks have continued to rise.
  • Money Creation (Fractional Reserve System) and the US Debt
    I am starting this thread because I have more questions than answer when it comes to money creation. Econ 101 explains that "money creation" is what banks do with excess reserves and how banks can create $9 of debt (loaned money...known as a liability) from a single $1 of revenue (known as an asset or as a bank deposit).
    From Econ 101:
    The Banking System and Money Creation
    From this reading, I then found data on US income tax payments (deposits (taxes) made to the IRS).
    Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
    Let's consider the Federal Reserve and the IRS as one big bank. In 2019, the IRS collected $3.56 Trillion dollars in tax revenue. This was collected from earned and unearned income (taxes owed by US citizens). On the liability side of this bank, US citizens are running a debt (issued by the US government) of 31.8 Trillion dollars.
    https://usdebtclock.org/
    In the banking world (fraction reserve system),
    Assets + Liabilities = Total Deposits
    So,
    US Tax revenue ($3.56T) + US Debt ($31.8T) = $35.36T
    Using the same numbers we can determine that 10% reserves equals $3.536T which is slightly less than the $3.56T collected in tax revenue (IRS assets). This would make a bank's accountant department happy. ;)
    If this Fractional Reserve system is how banks operate (10% bank deposits & 90% bank loans), it appears the US government (Bank of USA) operates in a similar manner, collecting about 10% in revenues (taxes) and loaning out 90% in debt (liabilities).
    Now, if we all can agree that the US national debt is "loaned out" and that it will create new tax revenues for years to come and so long as we are collecting at least 10% of "total deposits" in tax revenue each year we should be as solvent as the banking system...
    O.K., now I see the problem! :(
  • In case of DEFAULT
    @dtconroe what makes a banking account (checking and savings) more liquid than a money market fund at the likes of Schwab?
    Hi Mona, I have a brick and mortar branch of my bank 10 minutes away. I literally can get whatever cash I need out of that bank within just a few minutes. If the bank is closed, I have a drive through ATM 5 minutes away where I can get cash. I can move money between my checking account and savings accout online, instantly. I have FDIC protections and I have tremendous trust in my bank as a result of many years of membership. I also have a large number of bills linked to my bank account online, for monthly drafting to pay the expenses. I also have a large number of ongoing deposits from social security, spouse pensions, etc. and if any of those are disrupted by Default problems, then I have other cash available in my bank savings account that I can quickly shift to my checking account for bill drafting coverage.
    With my Schwab brokerage MM account, I have to put in a trade to sell a certain amount of the MM fund, and it goes to brokerage cash the next day. Then I have to transfer the brokerage cash electronically to my bank, and it takes a couple of days for the trade to settle and the transfer to be completed. Sometimes the weekend delays the process for a few more days. When the money finally arrives at my bank, then I can go through the withdrawal, bill paying process, that I already described.
    From my perspective, everything is faster and more dependable by have adequate assets in my banking account, and quite frankly I trust my bank more than my Schwab brokerage to protect my cash.
  • In case of DEFAULT
    @Riskless
    10%+ can be easily chopped from discretionary defense spend with no impact at all to our military capabilities. But then how would the GOP pay for their masters in the MIC. Kissing the ring isn't sufficient payback ya know, it's just cherry on the top.
    There's something rotten in Denmark when Congress provides MORE defense money than asked for (as happened a few years back)
  • In case of DEFAULT
    @fred495...question if you are comfortable answering...how much of a change meaning your 100% Treasury MMKT and FDIC CD portfolio from your past portfolio...were you very heavy in those investments prior and if so what % of your portfolio?
    FWIW...I've been 85-90% for many years in those types of investments....now ~ 95%...."stop playing the game if you feel you've got enough...don't get greedy...get your portfolio where you can sleep well at night" I'm still working and do I guess you would say better than average out there...working for the "fun of the game, camraderie and challenge.."
    Have to say, my current thinking is you might be "safer?" in AAPL as due to a better balance sheet than the govt (no printing press though) as it is a utility without the interest rate exposure of a normal utility and has plenty of "fan boys/girls/others" who are addicted to their products...maybe BRK-B too but I saw during the Pandemic ole'Warren kinda froze up a bit, he seemed really rattled for someone who has had many trips around the sun...
    I've been adding to FPACX...nice cash buffer in portfolio, thinking Romick and the boys will know what to do AND act at the somewhat correct time...heard on recent podcasts that the "technicals" are looking better, throwing off buy signals...who the heck knows though right?
    Good Luck to ALL,
    Baseball Fan
  • Alternative to Artisan International Value (ARTKX)?
    Several Matthews Asia funds were mentioned.
    I personally would stay away from all Matthews Asia funds in the near-term (possibly long-term).
    There has been an exodus of talent at the firm over the past few years.
    https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/152046
    https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/156101
    https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/159415
    I agree.
    @randynevin. Look at DODWX. It is global, not strictly international. Great track record.
    https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/dodwx/quote
  • Money market funds
    @hank said,
    "Anybody care to speculate on what caused BAMBX to fall to earth after several great years?"
    I feel your pain...
    I am trying to figure out the same with a somewhat similar holding of mine, PTIAX. It has recently had a "slight recovery" from that fall, but it has a long ways to go. PTIAX recently tumbled much further than BAMBX. I am assuming due to its pure bond makeup. BAMBX holds about10% in equities. I was not prepared to stomach a 12% loss (2022) in a fund that I selected as a cash alternative.
    BAMBX Compared to PTIAX
  • Money market funds
    Anybody care to speculate on what caused BAMBX to fall to earth after several great years? From 2016 through 2021 it was positive every year - delivering (by my estimate) around 5% yearly returns on average. That type performance from a low / moderate risk fund is going to attract eyeballs. But it fell 3% in 2022 and is dead-even (0%) YTD.
    OK - 2022 was reasonable considering the whacking both equities and fixed income received, But this year makes no sense. All I can figure is that it’s invested heavily at the short end of the yield curve and has struggled against sharply rising short term rates. If that’s the case, it stands to do much better when short-term rates begin falling. Just a guess. Anybody see anything different?
    “Black box” is probably a misnomer. Yet, ISTM this type of investment process makes it a real challenge to “get under the hood” and really understand what makes the fund behave the way it does.
  • Alternative to Artisan International Value (ARTKX)?
    I’ve owned ARTKX for 13 years, and it’s my only foreign fund that hasn’t disappointed. I’ve diversified into other foreign funds over the years and haven’t found anything that compares. However, if I wasn’t able to invest in ARTKX and wanted a foreign fund, I would consider FMIJX and FIVFX. The two in tandem would provide a good balance between growth and value.
    I’ve been scaling back on foreign funds, however, because of their long term underperformance. I know investing runs in cycles, but I’m afraid I’ll be dead before foreign stocks pay off. I’ve still got about one-fourth of my stocks in foreign funds, so I’ll get some benefit if they ever outperform. I suspect that there are systemic reasons why foreign stocks continue to disappoint and that their lower valuations are probably justified.
  • Alternative to Artisan International Value (ARTKX)?
    Have you looked at Matthews Asia ETFs?
    Unrelated, but I recently switched MATFX (w/painful distributions) to MINV.
    https://www.matthewsasia.com/funds/etfs/
    I'd be careful with MATFX. It's basically an asia tech fund, the prevoius name of the fund was actually asia science and technology. As a tech focused growth fund, it got hit pretty bad over the last 3 years.
    I'd also be leary of Matthews. This is a well covered topic on here (do a quick search on here), but they've lost a ton of very talented portfolio managers in the past few years and assets have plunged due seemingly to poor management. They are not the firm they once were, that's for sure.
  • Schwab Taps Credit Markets To Raise $2.5 Billion In Debt
    "Actually, for the vast majority of customers, uninvested cash held in a Schwab brokerage account is deposited at an affiliated Schwab bank"
    @sfnative- not sure about that. We've used Schwab for many years, and when cash is generated from dividends or the sale of a position Schwab always deposits that cash in their brokerage cash account, which has no FDIC protection. If I want FDIC I have to transfer from the brokerage account over to the bank account. As I mentioned, transfers are no-hassle instantaneous either way between brokerage and Schwab bank.
    We always receive separate statements from Schwab- one from the bank and another from the brokerage.
  • Anybody Investing in bond funds?
    [snip]
    Now the problem for me with locking up money in a CD is that it limits my ability to move in and out of what I believe are more profitable investments while that money is tied up. I’ll take the 4+% on cash Fido currently pays in return for being able to pick up equities anytime I want. While you’re tied up in a 3 year or 5 year C/D some hard assets or equities you watch could fall by 25%, making them an attractive buy. Do the math and you’ve actually lost money if you buy those assets a few years later after the prices have rebounded, even considering your “profit” from the C/D. When you lock up cash for any length of time you pay an opportunity cost.
    [snip]
    Well said!
  • Anybody Investing in bond funds?
    No one size fits all. If we get back to 15% on CDs like under Volker I’ll take a look. Generally, I’d rather invest in things than in cash. That’s just a personal prejudice born of 50+ years watching markets. Now the problem for me with locking up money in a CD is that it limits my ability to move in and out of what I believe are more profitable investments while that money is tied up. I’ll take the 4+% on cash Fido currently pays in return for being able to pick up equities anytime I want. While you’re tied up in a 3 year or 5 year C/D some hard assets or equities you watch could fall by 25%, making them an attractive buy. Do the math and you’ve actually lost money if you buy those assets a few years later after the prices have rebounded, even considering your “profit” from the C/D. When you lock up cash for any length of time you pay an opportunity cost.
    Let’s not put all bond funds in one basket / trash bin. There are, by many accounts, some good opportunities in EM bond funds for folks willing to take on some added risk. If you like to “play” the fixed income market, buy and sell something like a GNMA bond fund as the 10 year fluctuates up and down in yield. Mostly, that’s govt. backed paper. High yield and convertible bond funds allow a good manager to profit from his/her research and analytical skills in markets that skirt the line between equity and traditional bond. I would not simply write those types of investments off as “just another bond fund.” And some international bond funds profit from playing the FX markets - making better returns possible beyond the coupon rates on those bonds. I used to have an anger problem too. Got better after Ted departed - although I miss him greatly.