It was yielding over 20%. Of course it’s going to go down. Even if it went down by half it would yielding about 10%. As AUM increases, yield will fall. This is happening as expected. It’s also actively managed by Tad Rivelle. They may be trimming their risk. Cash looks to be building.

In the last 4 days it looked like the following
As of Date Ticker Dividend Rate
7/23/2020 MWFSX 0.001582083
7/22/2020 MWFSX 0.001426187
7/21/2020 MWFSX 0.001684689
7/20/2020 MWFSX 0.001714354
If we use 0.0015 daily we get about 4.5% annually.
It is one of the worse performer for one month and 3 months in my list
Ticker..1 Mo...3 Months
MIAYX 3.03 9.85
AIHAX 2.62 2.95
JIPAX 2.6 7.57
ADVNX 2.56 4.91
BMSAX 2.43 8.44
JSTIX 2.41 6.35
PDIIX 2.32 7.89
PLSFX 2.28 9.09
FCDDX 2.25 8.12
STISX 2.23 8.2
JMUTX 2.22 9.38
ASIGX 2.17 6.79
PUCZX 2.1 8.67
FADMX 1.97 7.98
MXIIX 1.73 5.63
JMSIX 1.66 9.01
HSNYX 1.64 10.57
PTIAX 1.61 4.95
IOFIX 1.54 16.42
SEMMX 1.34 10.66
PIMIX 1.3 6.31
TSIIX 1.27 7.29
EIXIX 1.09 8.01
DHEAX 1.08 8.04
VCFAX 0.88 7.78
MWFSX 0.84 4.06
RCTIX 0.43 4.45

in case anyone was wondering, I did not write 'oh my' :)

+1.
I saw the original.

SUPPLEMENT DATED MARCH 31, 2020 TO THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUSES AND PROSPECTUS FOR THE GRANDEUR PEAK EMERGING MARKETS OPPORTUNITIES FUND, GRANDEUR PEAK GLOBAL MICRO CAP FUND, GRANDEUR PEAK GLOBAL OPPORTUNITIES FUND, GRANDEUR PEAK GLOBAL REACH FUND AND GRANDEUR PEAK INTERNATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FUND (EACH A “FUND,” AND TOGETHER, THE “GRANDEUR PEAK FUNDS”) DATED AUGUST 31, 2019Effective April 1, 2020, the Grandeur Peak Emerging Markets Opportunities Fund, Grandeur Peak Global Opportunities Fund, Grandeur Peak Global Reach Fund, and Grandeur Peak International Opportunities Fund will reopen to all shareholders.Also, effective April 1, 2020, the Grandeur Peak Global Micro Cap Fund will reopen to all shareholders who purchase directly from Grandeur Peak Funds. The Fund remains open through financial intermediaries to shareholders who currently hold a position in the Fund. Financial advisors with clients in the Fund are able to invest in the Fund for both existing as well as new clients. The Fund also remains open to all participants of retirement plans currently holding a position in the Fund.

I’m not sure, Lewis. This was surprising to me. The order executed in my brokerage that’s part of my company’s 401k.

Yes, they opened back in early April. David wrote about it in his monthly commentary.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2020/4/
International Stalwarts is closed to third party financial intermediaries effective June 10.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/56200/grandeur-peak-international-stalwarts-fund-to-close-to-new-investors-via-financial-intermediaries
I picked up GPMCX for a non-taxable account.

Noticed this the other day. GPGOX, GPIOX, GPROX, GPEOX...I was evenable to pick up GPMCX in my 401k brokerage account...I guess I missed the announcement.

I respectfully disagree with some attributes ascribed above to PSLDX, while acknowledging that it has significantly outperformed funds that could nominally be called its peers.
While PIMCO dates its StocksPLUS strategy to 1986, this strategy is "used across [its] “PLUS” portfolios". The first PIMCO fund to use this strategy was PSTKX in 1993; PSLDX dates back only to 2007. MWATX, previously mentioned, started in 1998.
https://www.pimco.com/en-us/investments/mutual-funds/stocksplus-fund/inst
https://www.pimco.com/en-us/investments/mutual-funds/stocksplus-long-duration-fund/inst
The bond holdings in PSLDX strike me as less opaque than those of most PIMCO funds. It's in the name: long duration. No secret sauce. This fund, by mandate doesn't significantly alter its bond bets. Rather, this fund will soar (at least its bond portion will) as interest rates decline, and will crash as rates rise.
[Effective duration is calculated by starting with modified duration (a well-defined, mechanical calculation based on coupons and maturities). One or more models are then used to estimate the duration effects of all the oddities of the bonds.]
For this fund, effective duration = modified duration = 14.57 years (per M*). So there's very little going on outside of (long) vanilla bonds. Looking at the holdings, PIMCO appears to be tweaking around the edges with derivatives to adjust the bond portfolio attributes slightly.
The 2x strategy (or StocksPlus strategy) gets 100% exposure to stocks at minimal cost by buying swaps on the target stock index. It then uses the remaining cash (almost 100%) to invest in bonds. DSENX is 100.69% long in stocks, 91.32% long in bonds, and short in cash by a similar amount. That's the way it's supposed to work.
PSLDX goes further and adds even more leverage. You've still got the 100% stock exposure through swaps (M* says 102.31%). But the bond portfolio is leveraged: 127.69% per M*. So not only is this fund heavily exposed to interest rate risk (with its long bonds), but it is doubling down with leverage. Okay, it's just 1¼ x down; same idea.
Because the fund must hold long bonds, there's no secret sauce here, or none worth mentioning. Just very long bonds combined with extra leverage on the bond side.
FWIW M* classifies this fund as a hybrid (85%+ equity), while PSTKX, DSENX, and MWATX are classified as large cap blend funds. I suspect that's because the leverage on the bond side increases the bond exposure to the point that M* won't consider it a stock fund with just a bond kicker.
If one is confident that rates won't rise at all for some time and that the yield curve (whatever little curvature there is) won't begin to curve a little more, then going long makes sense. Otherwise, those scenarios will crush this fund, at least relative to the others or to a vanilla stock fund.
NTSX differs in several ways. Instead of 2x, it is 1.5x. Instead of 50/50 stock/bond exposure, it's 60/40. It does not have flexibility in allocating bond sectors; its only exposure is to Treasuries (via futures). Its target duration is 3-8 years, typically less than half of PSLDX, though I suspect more than that of the other funds. But it does actively manage duration.
Its blurb touts the ability of the 1.5x strategy (90/60) "to enhance returns" by investing the the extra 50% (1/3 of the portfolio) in "noncore assets such as long/short equities, risk parity, CTAs, or true alternatives." However, upon reading further, one finds that the fund itself "invests 90% of its net assets in the 500 largest U.S. stocks by market capitalization" and "60% notional exposure to U.S. Treasury futures (2-, 5-, 10-, 30-year ladder)."
That's not the same as the S&P 500 (which is not a compilation of the 500 largest US companies); nor does the prospectus even mention 500 companies. Rather "The Fund invests in a representative basket of U.S. equity securities of large-capitalization companies generally weighted by market capitalization." (Prospectus.) It invests directly in stocks rather than using swaps. That enables it to actively manage its equity side - another point of differentiation from the OEFs mentioned.
Over its short life it has done nicely. Much (not all) of its performance seems to be due to leveraging. If one takes VBIAX's annulized performance over the past 21 months (the lifetime of NSTX), calculates its monthly performance from that, leverages 50%, and compounds that, one gets an annualized performance of 10.45%, still measurably below NSTX's 11.23%.

It was yielding over 20%. Of course it’s going to go down. Even if it went down by half it would yielding about 10%. As AUM increases, yield will fall. This is happening as expected. It’s also actively managed by Tad Rivelle. They may be trimming their risk. Cash looks to be building.

"The funds are not required to disclose detailed data about the size of their bets"
"Long before the turmoil this spring, the Financial Stability Oversight Council, established by Dodd-Frank, had repeatedly identified hedge fund leverage as a risk."
“These strategies we thought we saw seemed an awful lot like the Long-Term Capital Management strategies"
"Early in 2017, Mr. Mnuchin, a former hedge fund manager, assumed control of the Financial Stability Oversight Council and the hedge fund working group was deactivated."
From "swamp" to stinking cesspool of corruption.

Vanguard Wellington VWELX is open to those who invest directly with the fund. They are also able to make additional purchases.
From July 1, 2020, prospectus:

Important Note Regarding Vanguard Wellington Fund
Vanguard Wellington Fund will be closed to all prospective financial advisory,
institutional, and intermediary clients (other than clients who invest through a
Vanguard brokerage account).
The Fund will remain closed until further notice and there is no specific time
frame for when the Fund will reopen. During the Fund’s closed period, all current
shareholders may continue to purchase, exchange, or redeem shares of the
Fund online, by telephone, or by mail.

Hi @wxman123
I can't dismiss the outstanding performance of VWELX and agree with you.
As this fund is closed for the most part to many; my question is whether an individual Vanguard account holder may place new money into this fund or only add if one already has a position in the fund? The other constraint for Donna's grandson is that it appears the minimum investment still is $3,000. If so, his $1,000 start money wouldn't allow for this fund purchase.
Those with knowledge of Vanguard's operation may be able to clarify.
I had a Vanguard account for many years, but only for the purpose of a 401k. That money was rolled to an IRA at Fidelity many years ago.
Regards,
Catch

The granddaddy of them all in this space is PSLDX. IMHO among the greatest mutual funds of all time. You can get it for $25K at vanguard, but it's no free lunch. After holding for a few years with enormous gains there was a point in the past few months where virtually all of those gains were wiped out (brought tears to my eyes). Whatever derivatives were in the secret sauce were crushed to oblivion. But it came back hard and now up 17% YTD. This is a great strategy but would never put more than I could afford to lose in any opaque derivative-driven fund. For an ETF along the same lines but not as extreme check out NTSX. I'm long this as well as Dseex (a fine long term hold for sure).

+1
David

@hank - linking tip. The time (or date) stamp under your name at the top of your posts is actually a link directly to your comment.
Here's the LINK to your March 2017 comment.

@JoJo26 and @msf
Being curious, I charted the "total return" of both of the indexes mentioned previous. The difference being .13% over the term of the compare.
Compare of FZROX and FSKAX from inception of the Fido Zero fund.

I took some heat back in March 2017 for referencing DSENX as “a bit of a black box.” It wasn’t meant to be derogatory. Heck, I’ve said the same thing about TMSRX which I own. But this old thread might shine light on some of the reservations expressed by me and others back when Gundlach had one of the hottest hands in town. A lot of my funds didn’t hold up well, either (DODBX for example) so I shouldn’t gloat about whatever fate may have befallen DSENX.
I wrote: “If you create a 100% exposure to some type of equity index(s) through use of derivatives, while at the same time investing a significant portion in fixed income, than of course you're leveraging-out the equity exposure. Price swings on the equity side should be exaggerated compared to actual equity values. The managers, as you suggest, probably count on their fixed income holdings to moderate or offset the inherent equity volatility. Lipper's breakdown of holdings:
Bonds: 42%
Equity: 33%
Other: 18%
Where I'd take a second look ... is at the types of bond holdings allowed. It appears from the prospectus that fixed income (average maturity out to a maximum of 8 years) may include CMOs, high yield, floating rate, and just about anything else the manager wants to buy - including the kitchen sink. A lot of funds will try to hedge equity fluctuation with high quality bonds. This latitude in the fixed income end is a bit concerning to me. But I'm not Jeff Gundlach. :) “
LINK - DSENX thread March, 2017 / You’ll need to hit the back arrow as this begins on the second page of a rather lengthy discussion.

Pended is a great CU. Anybody can join and they do it fairly. We refinanced several times over the years and found each time hundreds of dollars "mistakes" that had to be fixed because I was going to walk away hours before closing.
Penfed didn't have these mistakes.
Penfed was our last home debtor. In 2012, they offer a 5 years loan at 1.99% with zero fees. We use it to pay the previous mortgage + our kids tuition and how we finished paying our debt years earlier.

@hank - thanks for the last paragraph, otherwise I might have read the whole post as tongue in cheek.
Seriously, opening up a Fidelity (or any brokerage) account is little different from opening up a mutual fund account. If you do open up an account, don't spend the whole $10 in one place. Diversify :-)
One opens an account online here. (Look for the headings: Investing and Trading for taxable accounts, Saving for Retirement for IRAs).
Brokerage accounts all have a settlement (what Fidelity calls a "core") account. This is essentially your "checking" account for the brokerage. Fidelity currently gives you three choices for a core taxable account. Government MMF (SPAXX), Treasury MMF (FZFXX), and a sweep account. That's where the cash is put into bank accounts (semi-invisibly) and you earn bank interest (0.01%) instead of divs on the MMFs (0.01%). Any money you deposit into the brokerage account first goes into whatever your core account is.
After you open the brokerage account, you'll be offered the option of funding it. Fidelity should offer you funding choices: transferring cash from a bank account via EFT or mailing a check, possibly other ways. The EFT won't work with your debit card (I believe) but will take money from the account underlying your debit card. You need the routing number and account number to set this up.
Once your deposit clears, you're free to make online trades up to your full, incredible amount of $10. Fidelity is pretty good in that it usually makes cash available for trading quickly, even though it will hold cash deposits for several days if you want to withdraw that money. When you purchase something, it will show up as a separate holding in the same brokerage account.

“Generally, Fidelity funds have a $0 min.”
@msf - Does that mean that if I send $10.00 (ten-dollars) to Fidelity I can open 10 accounts in the amount of $1 each in 10 different funds? If so, I’m just crazy enough to do it!

Yup. I just entered an order for $1 of FLPSX, and the system took it. I immediately cancelled the order. Have fun!
P.S. The better paying (if you can call it that) MMFs have higher mins.

Yes “better paying” is perfect. :)
How does one pay the $10 house fee? Most casinos accept credit cards. Would Fidelity take a $10 debit from one of my bank cards? Playing a gold fund (or 2 or 3 at a time) would be a lot of fun. Where else can you pocket a 15-20% gain in a few days? And, if in a Roth the winnings would be a tax-free.
Hate to be so inquisitive. But I’ve never invested outside my direct accounts at a few old-fashioned houses. To my knowledge, no one has ever characterized T. Rowe or D&C as “fun” or “exciting.”

Having already having checked out your figures before giving numbers, I would have offered an explanation for the discrepancy after your 12:10 post.
Now I'll just offer the observation that many people like to post numbers without citing sources. I usually do better when posting numbers. Try to do better when reading them. It's called hypertext for a reason.