Regarding BLNDX, Standpoint, it's done well YTD but...............the 5% down in one day last autumn still holds in my memory and I have reduced my position here....
Baseball Fan

I felt that pain last year, too. I like the idea of BLNDX, but that kind of move should not happen.
ATESX is a long-short fund that has done ok in its 4 years (all positive), and its held up pretty darn good YTD. Could be worth a look.

@Charles Lynn Bolin...enjoyed the recent commentary...resonated with me.
Charles, how do you feel about putting monies into funds that have a somewhat "black box" dynamic to them...yes, they explain their positions but sometimes I wonder, how safe of an investment are some of these funds?
I've had my eye on Grant Park Multi (GPANX) for a while now and have stepped in, toes first, testing the waters...other than I bonds, and Tbills, 2 yr treasury, I think this type of fund might be the only way you can scrape up mid single digit returns for the next few years.
Regarding BLNDX, Standpoint, it's done well YTD but I am concerned the mgr's model might not be picking up quickly enough if there is a trend change, meaning stonk markets really flush, like a limit down day I mean and/or bond yields start moving down and the commodity futures trades turn quickly on him...the 5% down in one day last autumn still holds in my memory and I have reduced my position here....did pick up a bit on PQTAX PIMCO Trend as I'm not certain but my perception (and I could be way wrong) is that their models might be quicker to account for a turn in certain markets and likely less stonk mkt exposure?
Hold on Palm Valley, PVCMX, nibble position started recently in RPEIX T Rowe Global Dynamic Bondo.
Continue to shovel in cash into 90 day Tbill, 6 month T bill, 1 and 2 Yr T Notes.
Safety first, rule1 don't lose money.
Of course, do what works for you, don't listen to anyone on line like me who does not know anything about anything, I just post here to share what I'm doing and only for entertainment purposes.
Good Luck to all,
Baseball Fan

FBGRX, Fidelity Blue Chip Growth, has actually outperformed TRP’s Blue Chip fund. Also heavily tech and growth names. Just another alternative for “bottom fishing.”

Thanks for the information
I have in the distant past owned TRBCX. Was a fine fund 15 years ago. But things change. It fell 3% today putting it down over 33% YTD. If you liked it at the end of 2021, you gotta love it now - at 2/3 the price.

@BaluBalu, in the heady days of allocation/balanced funds, some even touted their performance beating SP500 with one hand tied in the back (i.e. 30-40% in bonds). Of course, that claim couldn't be sustained.
FPURX now is also much different from the past. It used to have value tilt for equities but the new FPURX has been quite growthy for years (VWELX is going through that shift now but it chose a bad time for that). For the time period you looked at, there was no magic but FPURX lost much less than SP500 by 1974 - i.e. it came out way ahead by not losing that much in that bear stretch (1972-74).

Using the FPURX 1/1/65-12/31/80 chart from Yogi's post, I shrunk it to start 2/1/1970 and FPURX nearly tripled in the next eleven years and handily beat SPY. Not sure what conclusions one can make without digging deeper as to the workings of FPURX at that time that allowed that type of performance. Even if we know the answers, how can we use those answers to invest now?

Have the first five months of 2022 been the worst start to any year for moderate and conservative allocation funds?
ISTM that while using calendar year boundaries for losses may make sense from a tax perspective, the market doesn't have that same level of respect for the calendar.
That said, there's an obvious period to look at, albeit one very different from today: the 1930s.
According to M* (old chart), VWELX lost 29.18% from 12/31/1931 through 5/31/1932. Keep in mind that M*'s data for this period seems to be monthly.
So one should set the dates to show five steps, at the end of Jan, Feb, Mar, April, and May. For the old chart, that means using a start date of 1/1/1932, while the new interactive chart works with 12/31/1931 as the start date. Either way, 5/31/1932 is the end date.
1974 was indeed an ugly year, but it took nine months to reach its nadir. Wellington was only off 9% by the end of May. Both 1932 and 1974 differ from 2022 in that our current market decline started this year, while the market had been declining for at least a year prior in the other periods. Our current decline may and probably does have longer to run.
Wellington declined from the beginning of 1973 through Sept 1974. And it declined from its inception in mid-1929 through the middle of 1932. The former period was a deep recession; the latter the beginning of the Great Depression. The US has yet to enter a recession now.
While those eras and in particular those years were significantly different from 2022, differences in Wellington then and now are less clear:
Bogle said that "Wellington Fund has followed the same balanced approach to investing ever since it began operations in mid-1929." And it has paid quarterly divs since 1930.

Added to OPGSX which appears to have gone nowhere in a year. Opened small spec position in GLTR which invests an a mix of precious metals. Had a buy order in on DKNG AT $10, but it rebounded after touching about $10.40. Did buy a bit at $11 yesterday. (currently $11.36)
I like the action in gold having followed it closely for a few years. Near the bottom of a trading range it’s been in for a year or two. Several macro developments may help - including the recent decline in Bitcoin

I've owned Matthews funds (MAPIX, MAPTX) previously and believed Matthews was an estimable firm.
Lydia So and Rahul Gupta left the firm in April 2020.
Tiffany Hsiao, YuanYuan Ji, and Beini Zhou left August 31, 2020.
These PM departures occurred within a short timeframe which really concerned me.
I no longer have a high regard for Matthews because of this and mediocre overall performance in recent years.
@ProtonAnalyst33,
I was not aware that a private equity firm has an ownership stake in Matthews.
Do you know when this PE firm initiated its stake?

Mr. Grant's outlook has generally been somewhat pessimistic over the years.
He currently contends that he is not being pessimistic.
Ptak: "So, maybe turning back to portfolio strategy, if you will, given the fact that it sounds like you're a bit pessimistic on the 60/40."
Grant: "I wouldn't say pessimistic. I'm trying to be clear sighted. People who are optimistic, because they're wrong are no more helpful than those of us who are pessimistic and wrong."

Hah, i read this. Pessimistic people never think they are pessimistic.

I've invested with Matthews for decades, but redeemed in the last 5 years as they have lost a lot of key young PMs and next generation management, and investment performance has become mediocre at best (related, the CEO change is long overdue).
I saw their ETF announcements but was left underwhelmed.
1) The china strategy managed by andrew mattock is the most benchmark-aware strategy in matthews lineup. The fund only has an active share of 50-60%. So this looks very much like an index fund, but with a much higher expense ratio and performance is middle of the pack.
2) Asia Innovators used to be called the Asia Science and Tech fund...irrespective of the name change, the PM Michael Oh is the same and the strategy is still...largely an Asia ex Japan tech fund. They are obviously trying to take market share from Kraneshares and KWEB which is one of the biggest Asia ETFs in existence. So not shocked an ETF version is launching.
3. Matthews Emerging Markets strategy has been around for almost 3 years, but the track record is pretty mediocre and assets have remained very small. Not surprising since Matthews has not hired any real emerging markets staff since launch. I questioned if Matthews was really committed to becoming a true EM manager when they first launched this fund....I am still skeptical. ETF launch doesn't mean anything to me with that performance!
My big question: Where are the flagship strategies? Pacific Tiger, Asia dividend are noticably absent from the ETF launch. Not even Japan equity? The absence of these major strategies makes me think this is not a move to try and help investors.
I am of the same mindset as Crash. Matthews has lost its mojo and I've stayed away. They used to be the pinnacle of active management but now their flagship fund Pacific Tiger can't even beat the index! When you see so many young, next gen staff leave for other firms ---> huge red flag that indicates its time to move on. Also, I've heard from people internally that a private equity firm is a part owner and has been trying to cut costs to "beautify" the firm for sale, which hasn't helped with moral.

TRBCX (TPLGX) are mentioned at MOFO as a potential buy. M* fund analysis says that the fund's long term manager retired and a new manager took over in October 2021, and that the new manager previously managed only $7B (compared to the asset base in this strategy $160B).
The fund has lost 35% in total return since its recent high on November 16, 2021. M* charts show $10K invested 3 years ago in QQQ and TRBCX would result in a balance of $17K and $12K, respectively. TRBCX balance is the same as it was pre-Covid (February 19-20, 2020) (i.e., gave up all the gains since beginning of Covid).
Is the PM change a concern, as in, does he need more time to prove himself?
Is the large asset base a concern?
Edit: the fund’s P/E ratio is 31 as of 3/31/2022. At a time when the market seems to have low tolerance for high P/Es, is the high P/E ratio of its constituents ( and thus of the fund) a concern?
P.S.: the fund is open to new investors.

Mr. Grant's outlook has generally been somewhat pessimistic over the years.
He currently contends that he is not being pessimistic.
Ptak: "So, maybe turning back to portfolio strategy, if you will, given the fact that it sounds like you're a bit pessimistic on the 60/40."
Grant: "I wouldn't say pessimistic. I'm trying to be clear sighted. People who are optimistic, because they're wrong are no more helpful than those of us who are pessimistic and wrong."

@WABAC- Thanks so much for your note. I well remember the old Customs Building on Kearny Street- at 18 I first went there to enlist in the Coast Guard; four years later went there to get my FCC license. I loved the LORAN service- after the year at Tarumpitao Point they sent me to another LORAN station up at Point Arena in Mendocino County.
My folks had a weekend place at Guerneville, which is roughly halfway between SF and Point Arena. I learned to drive on Highway 1, which in those days was typically a 1 1/2 lane "highway" where you were lucky to have a painted line down the center. Great memories, for sure. My four year Coast Guard stint and my final 20 years with San Francisco Public Safety Radio were the most rewarding years of my employment life.
Semper Paratus.

@JonGaltill: I am reluctantly facing the fact that my current SCG funds would have to rally an amazing amount to get me back to level. The arithmetic is against me.
SCV has had some success, notably Bridgeway’s BRSVX. Charles’ write up on bond, equity, and alternative funds above water this year mentions Aegis Value. The manager looks to be a genius by transforming AVALX into a highly concentrated fund, 71% basic materials and 23% energy; that is not a diversified fund in my mind’s eye. The value equity funds that showed some success YTD all hold big energy positions. My fave, one that did not make the list, is GQEPX, up 6% YTD. It is wrongly classified as a LCG fund by M*, but the holdings tilt towards value.
The managed futures egg heads really look like geniuses this year; several AQR offerings and PIMCO’s PQTAX are shooting the lights out. However, those are funds I have never considered for purchase because they were real plodders for many years and my understanding of what they do is inadequate. PQTAX holds 40% in the home town commodities fund; will the PMs of these concentrated funds be able to turn their ships around quickly when the prices of « stuff » return to earth? Will alternative funds resume their pedestrian ways when the current crisis wanes?

@ Derf- Even in hot-to-trot California things are dicey. A recent survey found that almost 25% of existing charging stations are either inaccessible or out of service at any given time. By far the larger factor is the installation of home charging stations: how many people are actually going to wait for half an hour or more to charge at some public station? Especially if when they get there they have to wait in line for a charger to become available?
By the way, the survey that I mentioned did not include any Tesla charging stations- those are not available to the general public- only Tesla vehicles.
I get the distinct impression that many of the upcoming electric vehicles will start availability in the next couple of years. How many years does anyone think that it's going to take to get a reasonably sufficient charging infrastructure into place? And who exactly is going to pay for all of that?
None of this should be interpreted to suggest that I'm against the transition- in the long run, it's necessary. But I'm very skeptical that it's going to be a smooth one.
☞ Link to article: "California wants more electric cars. But many public chargers don’t work"

@Crash- Your pic is eerily reminiscent of my year of isolated duty as an electronics tech at Tarumpitao Point on Palawan Island in the Philippines. The Coast Guard had chains of very high-powered navigation broadcast stations all over the word at that time (1950s/60s), many located in very isolated and remote areas. (Those stations were made obsolete by satellite GPS technology.)
Certainly one of the best years of my life.

I think this is one of the more interesting tech stories this year. . . and my interest has ZERO to do with politics or free speech. It has to do with the mismanagement of the company for many years and how Elon will turn it around in short order. He's already (cryptically) presented some creative ideas on how to turn around the company. He's a prolific user of Twitter and spends close to ZERO on advertising. Why would he? He's had the audience of Twitter etc. I continue to think he's three steps ahead of everyone else.
Will there be obstacles in the purchase? You bet! Re: The "Delay" Lawsuit - It's interesting that the plaintiff stands to gain $20M from the sale Edit/Add: and the pension fund will be negatively impacted (in a big way) if the sale doesn't go through. Oh, and if he had a pre-arrangement with Dorsey et al... why would he have threatened a "tender"? A tall leap by the pension fund and even a "pact" does not equal 15% single interested stockholder.
There's plenty of people against the idea. His financing and concentration will not be an obstacle. I'd bet on that.

On a different note, ISTM cash for acquisitions is nice to possess now. Correct me if wrong, but it seems a lot of M&A activity in recent years has been financed by borrowing. With rates rising that’s become a lot more expensive and activity has slowed. (Barron’s notes the slowdown in this weeks edition.) So Buffett would seem to be able to negotiate a “better deal” (better price ) with his pile of cash - or am I missing something?
Edit: It’s occurred to me one might not necessarily get a “better price” with cash. More likely it’s a case of not having to compete against as wide a field of bidders. Those who would have used a leveraged loan to finance said acquisition have in a sense been priced-out of the bidding by more expensive credit. Those with cash have a competitive advantage in the bidding process.

For years Buffet was criticized for holding lots of cash.
Did he really come out ahead by keeping his "powder dry" for years? I think the numbers show that the opportunity cost of holding onto that power exceeded the benefit of waiting. While Buffett is often used as a model of patient investing, patience has its price.
He purchased about $51B worth of equity in Q1 2022 (plus repurchasing $3.2B of Berkshire Hathaway stock).
$11.6B of that was to acquire Alleghany Insurance at a 25% control premium. That's BH's primary MO - to buy control, not equity for income/gain. So IMHO we can discount this as not a "regular" investment.
Of the remaining $40B, at least $14B (35%) went into Chevron stock. You can infer this by noting that the $4.5B owned at the beginning of the year was worth 40% more at end of quarter. Subtracting that $6.B from the $25.9B owned at the end of the quarter means that BH bought shares worth $19.6B at end of quarter. The cheapest those shares could have been purchased in the quarter was $14B (at beginning of quarter).
So it is fair to focus on CVX.

• Had the same shares been purchased at the beginning of 2017 instead of the beginning of 2022, he would have made 24.6% cumulative, 4.5% annualized instead of whatever cash was paying over those five years.
• Had he purchased the shares at the beginning of 2018, he'd still have beaten cash, though not by much, with an annualized 3.02% return.
• Investing three years ago (beginning of 2019) would have yielded 7.68% annualized. Now were talking real opportunity costs.
• Two years ago? 4.07% annualized return.
• And had he invested at the beginning of 2021 instead of the beginning of 2022 or later, he would have come out a whopping 46.32% (or more) above where he wound up.

Certainly he benefited from waiting with some stocks, such as OXY. Though if we're going to look at other acquisitions, we should also look at AAPL (even though he bought "only" $600M during the quarter). Using the same links I gave above for Portfolio Visualizer analyses, one sees the opportunity costs of waiting to buy AAPL. A purchase 5 years ago (beginning of 2017) would have returned 45% annualized; 4 years ago, 45% annualized; 3 years ago, 67% annualized (!), 2 years ago, 57%; and the return he could have had by deploying that cash at the beginning of 2021 was 35%.
Even though BH didn't add much to its AAPL holdings, its worth a mention because Buffett made a big deal about buying more on a three day dip. After a multi-year meteoric rise.
FWIW, here's BH's cash and cash equivalent holdings over the past five years (always over $100B):
https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/BRK.A/financials/annual/balance-sheet

+1, @DavidF. Equities are deep in Deathcross Land but near the January low, and therefore maybe ripe for a rebound, but how high and for how long? The next months, at least, are primed for bad YOY comps and disappointing earnings and growth, Fed pressure to the economic downside, and supply problems and supply chain damage via pandemic, de-globalization, and war (hot and cold) that may not be anywhere near fixed for months if not years.
On the plus side, there are a fair number of hedged, multi-asset approaches that are working well in this climate.