It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
AMG is not as hands-off as I once thought.Here's a more detailed history of AMG:
https://www.referenceforbusiness.com/history2/13/Affiliated-Managers-Group-Inc.html
Until I checked, I also thought: "Affiliates operate independently" and "AMG invests in independent investment managers and allows them to remain independent". But it surely can't be coincidence that a large number of AMG branded funds had complete management changes and sometimes radical objective changes in or around March.
For every OEF I've checked for the past six months, Yahoo stopped counting cap gains during year-end 2020 and has not corrected the problem. Of course that's made a hash of any total return calculations that include that time, given how many funds handed out large capital gains distributions then.For many years the Yahoo historical data for funds included capital gains in the "dividend" historical data. Some time in the last three months, only "dividend-dividends" appear in the amounts. (Go look at a fund that pays sometimes-whopping CG but not income like RYPNX for proof.) So back to scraping prospectuses for the data.
Re “the impending launch of a whole new series of funds from T. Rowe Price”
I have been very impressed with TROW as a stock holding...anyone own TROW?https://morningstar.com/stocks/xnas/trow/quote
Quick comparison with PRWCX, TRRBX, & TROW over the life of TRRBX.
TROW Comparison
https://www.ft.com/content/fdbf6284-b724-11e2-841e-00144feabdc0The rationale for the concept had a degree of logic. A 130/30 fund combines a gross long position of 130 per cent with a short position of 30 per cent, meaning it still has the same 100 per cent net exposure to the market as a traditional long-only fund.
However, long-only managers can only underweight, not short, stocks they do not like. This leaves little room to generate outperformance from these stocks, particularly if they are say, only 0.1 per cent of the index.
If one uses shorting to time the market rather than to magnify the impact of stock picking skills, it's easy to get burned:"The problem came when many asset managers discovered they did not have the necessary skills to short,” says Amin Rajan, chief executive of Create Research, a consultancy. “It’s a very specialised skill. It’s more a psychological than academic discipline.”
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-2002-10-13-0210120267-story.htmlWhile some mainstream fund managers periodically have shorted stocks - Mario Gabelli of the Gabelli funds and CGM's Kenneth Heebner come to mind - most have shied away from it.
The late 1990s story of manager Jim Crabbe and his Crabbe-Huson Special fund illustrates why. Crabbe-Huson Special (eventually sold to Liberty Funds Distributors, now part of FleetBoston Financial) adopted shorting provisions in the mid-1990s to guard against a downturn. But Crabbe got bearish early, going short on technology stocks just as they rocketed to new heights. From 1995 through 1999, the fund lost more than 20 percent, while the Standard & Poor's 500 index was up roughly 200 percent; years of gains in the fund were wiped out.
Are you with every American living paycheck to paycheck 100% of the time? Or are you just monitoring all of them from your Orwellian control tower at Fox News? Also, do you think it's possible for any young American to hold down a job and perhaps juggle their family responsibilities today without a cellphone?It may be wage-related for some, but how about those living paycheck to paycheck (or close to it), but they still have iPhones, iPads, go out to eat and drink regularly, and basically just spend frivolously 100% of the time
While I know some poor people probably do buy an iPhone--for the same reason poor people used to want high-end Nike and Addidas sneakers--to pretend to be rich, most people buying these phones are middle-class or wealthy.The brand most predictive of top income in 1992 is Grey Poupon Dijon mustard. By 2004,the brand most indicative of the rich is Land O’Lakes butter, followed by Kikkoman soy sauce. By the end of the sample, ownership of Apple products (iPhone and iPad) tops the list. Knowing whether someone owns an iPad in 2016 allows us to guess correctly whether the person is in the top or bottom income quartile 69 percent of the time. Across all years in our data, no individual brand is as predictive of being high-income as owning an Apple iPhone in 2016.
@Mav123: A few, but the ones I pay most attention to are some guys who call themselves Hedgeye. They're data dependent and have a straightforward system. Their details are on a subscription basis, which was a bargain a few years ago and is less of a bargain now ... but all it takes to justify the fee is a couple of trades. I run only a small part of the portfolio based on their analysis, but also like to consider it in more of a macro sense.Curious, which "analysts" do you follow, and do you find them reputable?
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved.
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved. Powered by Vanilla