I went to a talk by the managers of MWTRX (20 years ago?) before MetWest was acquired by TCW. One of the audience questions was how they would compare themselves with PTTRX. They said that PIMCO funds (and PTTRX in particular) were so large that PIMCO had to manage their funds top down (macro calls), while at MetWest they focused on issue selection.
(Since MetWest was acquired by TCW and their funds have grown so large, I suspect they also no longer have the ability to significantly benefit from astute issue selection.)
This is not necessarily a bad thing; it's just a different approach. But like any high conviction approach, it is subject to periodic bad calls (in hindsight). It comes with the territory. One should understand this and not let rapid losses take one by surprise. (This is a reason why I prefer not to ignore "upside risk" - it can be indicative of future downside risk.)
Over at Templeton, Hasenstab is known for managing this way. So it should not come as a surprise that he too got caught by the drop in the Argentina peso.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/52009/hasenstab-loses-1-8bn-in-single-day-as-big-bet-blows-up-femgx-tpinx
His Templeton funds are quite different from PIMCO's funds, so I'm not saying they're directly comparable. Still, I find Hasenstab's funds to be more transparent (notably with respect to currency exposure), making it easier to figure out what happened.
Regarding ERs: PIMIX's actual ER last year was 1.05%. That's from the annual report, dated 3/31/2019. Interest expenses stated in a prospectus (which is what all the figures before this post are quoting) are forward looking guesses, usually based on last year's actual expenses. We won't know what PIMIX is actually spending on interest now until it completes a reporting period.
To conclude with another knock on M*'s new format - M* used to give both ER figures (prospectus and annual report), but now doesn't seem to give the actual (annual report) figure. Giving both numbers had caused much confusion, but IMHO omitting data is not the right "solution".

Sold out of most mama's fidelity equities positions at openings . Will Add more Fbnd and fidelity2015 TDF

The fund companies finally realized that one size does not fit all, so they've got multiple series of TDFs.
Would your Fidelity 2015 fund be:
FFVFX (Freedom® 2015), that "Seeks high total return until its target retirement date. Thereafter, the fund's objective will be to seek high current income and, as a secondary objective, capital appreciation"?
Or FLIFX (Freedom® Index 2015), that "Seeks high total return until its target retirement date. Thereafter, the fund's objective will be to seek high current income and, as a secondary objective, capital appreciation"?
Or FIRUX (Simplicity RMD 2015), that "seeks total return until its horizon date through a combination of current income and capital growth. Thereafter, the fund's objective will be to seek high current income and, as a secondary objective, capital appreciation"?

@MikeW. I've been pretty much all-in with IOFIX, so nothing more to add really. (Hmmm ... unless I use margin.) As such, I watch it pretty closely ... and the folks at Garrison politely answer my inquires when the fund dips (eg., "Charles, the 5 penny move yesterday was just the dividend ... !"). My only other fund is ZEOIX, another steady-eddy. Gone are my days in funds like FAAFX, which I once called my "Great Pumpkin" fund. It's actually been having a decent year.

Thanks MikeW and Junkster. Steady as she goes. I do think very highly of Tom Miner, the fund's principal. He's supported well by rest of staff at Garrison Point. I see the AUM has grown to $3B. (So much for closing soon.) I hope to visit them again in November and update the profile. I will be attending Litman Gregory's update on Alt Master's fund at that time. Will reach out to folks at Zeo as well. All three SF based. My bad has been a long delayed profile on Alambic ... an interesting small family of funds. Just been consumed with the Premium site, which I must say has never been better, especially now that we've transitioned to a new user portal and the WordPress framework ... and, I've become less of a hack in php, javascript, jQuery, ajax, json, html, etc. Just added some additional data to MultiSearch results table recommended by Sam Lee. Working now on risk and return at the rolled-up portfolio level ... that too long delayed. Also hope to create a "tight channel" screening criteria inspired by Junkster. At some point, will get back to profiling. (I can hear David sighing now.) Actually, I've struggled a bit with the role of reporting on funds (or strategies). Some strategies just require a long time to be validated, including the stock market itself. So, while we report on "good" funds and show 1, 3, 5 year performance ... that may simply not be enough time to judge, which I know is counter to Fund Alarm. (Oops, I can see David shaking his head!) Some rambling from Orcas this good August morning. c

M*'s write, IMHO; is full of fluff and touchy/feely words.
While RMD requirements would change (for the good), basically; the tax revenue raised by reducing the stretch period will subsidize the other programs.
So, taking from much of the middle class, NO; I'll change that to "working class" who have tried their best to save for retirement, and if the spouse(s) pass before using all of their tax sheltered account monies..............well, the children or whomever will get the tax whack. I'm not writing about the ultra wealthy, but the regular folks.
I questioned (shortly after the passing of the house version) our U.S. rep. about the nature of this transfer of wealth for the working class; but have not had a reply yet, and they are still on break.
Better overview of SECURE ACT.

FYI: Some of Vanguard’s funds appeared to lose as much as half their value on Monday—but the company says those losses were just pricing glitches that were quickly rectified.
The $56 billion Vanguard Wellesley Income fund (ticker: VWINX), which invests in large cap value stocks and investment-grade bonds, appeared to lose 56%, according to Vanguard’s website.
The $105 billion Vanguard Wellington fund (VWELX), which Vanguard says is its oldest mutual fund and the nation’s oldest balanced fund, appeared to lose 32%, the company’s website showed.
The $17 billion Vanguard Target Retirement Income fund (VTINX)—a product designed for people already in retirement—appeared to lose 45.6%, according to its website.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/vanguard-pricing-glitch-causes-funds-to-appear-to-lose-half-their-value-51565663400?refsec=funds

Sold out of most mama's fidelity equities positions at openings . Will Add more Fbnd and fidelity2015 TDF

Not bailing nor trimming. Rocking along with my asset allocation of 20% cash, 40% income and 40% equity. Looking for my next spiff buy step to appear somewhere around the 2750 range for the S&P 500 Index.

@Charles has held this through thick and thin and that is the best way to play IOFIX - buy and hold. Anyone who hasn’t established a position it’s best to buy after a down day. Down days often occur a couple days before the second to last trading day of the month. Then again, if one hasn’t already had a position why now after its stellar returns since inception. I have been as high as 100% of my liquid net worth at various times the past couple years. As I detailed made the mistake of going from 89% to 55% recently and after today’s close back up to 67%. Will add more when I see a weak day or two. IOFIX seems correlated to absolutely nothing and why I call it the mystery fund. YTD everyone seems to be a bond genius and set for double digit annual returns in all sorts of bond categories so be wary of becoming a Johnny Come Lately.

See my post above. I'm looking at the current (July 31, 2019) summary prospectus.
Vanguard is reporting the ER as of 6/10/2019, i.e. prior to the current prospectus. So its figure isn't current. It comes from last year's prospectus, dated July 30, 2018.
The only difference is that "Other Expenses" (interest expense) is stated to be 0.24%. This is going to vary year by year, as the fund borrows more or less, and as rates rise or fall.

I reduced my equity position to 45% of holdings last week. This is more of a tactical move for now. Will be looking to increase this back gradually as the market goes down (assuming it continues).

Mostly just watching the show. (Did make one minor portfolio adjustment this afternoon to lock in a loss.) Things have become interesting. Just checked my YTD returns. Up 9.8% through COB today. That's good for my asset mix. Don't really have a good sense for where the market will go from here. Even if I did, it would have a 50% chance of being wrong!
@hank 's method for squirreling away 2020 $'s makes sense to me. I have enough $'s in ZEOIX, SHV, and few other similar funds in my Cash Pot to take of that (that's as close to "cash" as I get). Distributions near the end of the year will cause me to do some portfolio shuffling however.....

Nada. Month ago I stashed 100% of 2020 budget needs in cash - near the year’s highs. Worked well last year.
Otherwise, steady as it goes. If I was 10-15 years younger I’d be fire-walking / buying down with every 750-1000 point drop in the Dow. Too old for that kinda s*** any more.
Thanks to those who have / will respond. Interesting market. Bears watching. If this continues, there will be calls from many (including some in Congress) to fire Powell. Such is the environment we find ourselves these days. (And I’m trying very hard to steer clear of politics.)

Interest expense is what the fund pays to borrow money -- it is not paid to PIMCO. They get paid 50 bps (for the institutional class shares anyway) which is pretty competitive (although they raised their fees 5 bps about a year ago even though they were amassing huge increases in AUM).

Yes, beginning last Thursday and completing yesterday. I sold all equity funds down to a foothold status with the exception of VHCOX, RPMGX and VGHCX. the first two simply due to the protected nature of the share class in my account. Vanguard Healthcare remains fully invested due to it being what I consider to be defensive in nature. All foreign holdings are reduced to that foothold status since they're a mess.
Still, I have about 50% equities due to REITs and divi payers, which are currently safe havens.

has not made a change to portfolio
lucky we changed Mama's retired portfolio to 30/70 3 or 5 months ago.. followed several member's ideas since last yr and sold out of mama's stocks portfolio from 80 to now ~ 30s%.
thx MFO members!!!

@catch22
I like 50/50.
But I remain heavy IOFIX.
One my best purchases. Helps make up for WBMIX, FAAFX, and AQRIX ... to name a few.

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/continue-buy-bonds-positive-yields-153141810.html
Continue to Buy Bonds With Positive Yields: Janus Henderson
?? buying more bonds? bonds...recession coming?
canada
new zealand
usa

FYI: The 25 wealthiest dynasties on the planet control $1.4 trillion.
The numbers are mind-boggling: $70,000 per minute, $4 million per hour, $100 million per day.
That’s how quickly the fortune of the Waltons, the clan behind Walmart Inc., has been growing since last year’s Bloomberg ranking of the world’s richest families.
At that rate, their wealth would’ve expanded about $23,000 since you began reading this. A new Walmart associate in the U.S. would’ve made about 6 cents in that time, on the way to an $11 hourly minimum.
Even in this era of extreme wealth and brutal inequality, the contrast is jarring. The heirs of Sam Walton, Walmart’s notoriously frugal founder, are amassing wealth on a near-unprecedented scale — and they’re hardly alone.
The Walton fortune has swelled by $39 billion, to $191 billion, since topping the June 2018 ranking of the world’s richest families.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bloomberg.com/features/richest-families-in-the-world/