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.
  • GLFOX - Lazard Global Listed Infrastructure Open, @Bee and others
    Below link is Fidelity site fund composition overview..........note: only 34 holdings per most recent report.
    We are not invested in this fund.
    https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/52106N442?type=sq-NavBar
  • DoubleLine's Gundlach Says Firm Bought Some Equities Two Weeks Ago
    FYI: (It would be nice to know which ones ?)
    Jeffrey Gundlach, the co-founder and chief executive officer of DoubleLine Capital, said on Friday that his firm purchased some U.S. stocks two weeks ago after their rocky start in January.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.reuters.com/article/doubleline-gundlach-idUSL2N1651GF
  • Artisan Small Cap Value (ARTVX) merging into Mid Cap Value (ARTQX)
    The team should be more focused now, IMO. The small cap strategy was taking up a majority of the team's time as it housed probably half of the names covered by the team across the U.S. value suite, but was very limited in terms of total assets managed by the team. Spending 50% of your time on less than 10% of your business isn't ideal... With the same size team (I know Scott is on his way out, but this has been known for awhile) now covering a smaller universe, I'd hope this leads to improved research on the rest of what they cover.
  • Larry Swedroe: Does GMO Add Value For Investors?
    FYI: Larry's series evaluating the performance of the market’s most prominent actively managed mutual fund families continues today with an in-depth analysis of the offerings from Boston-based Grantham Mayo van Otterloo (GMO).
    Regards,
    Ted
    (Click On PDF Upper Left For Easier Reading):
    http://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2016/02/25/does-gmo-add-value-for-investors
    M*: GMO Funds:
    http://quicktake.morningstar.com/fundfamily/gmo/0C00001YRE/fund-list.aspx
  • JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund to liquidate
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1217286/000119312516478119/d149787d497.htm
    497 1 d149787d497.htm JPMORGAN TRUST I
    J.P. MORGAN INTERNATIONAL EQUITY FUNDS
    JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund
    (All Share Classes)
    (a series of JPMorgan Trust I)
    Supplement dated February 25, 2016
    To the Prospectuses, Summary Prospectuses and Statement
    of Additional Information dated March 1, 2015, as supplemented
    NOTICE OF LIQUIDATION OF THE JPMORGAN ASIA PACIFIC FUND. The Board of Trustees of the JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund (the “Fund”) has approved the liquidation and dissolution of the Fund on or about April 6, 2016 (the “Liquidation Date”). Effective immediately, the Fund may depart from its stated investment objective and strategies as it increases its cash holdings in preparation for its liquidation. Unless you have an individual retirement account (“IRA”) where the State Street Bank and Trust (“SSBT”) serves as the custodian, on the Liquidation Date, the Fund shall distribute pro rata to its shareholders of record all of the assets of the Fund in complete cancellation and redemption of all of the outstanding shares of beneficial interest, except for cash, bank deposits or cash equivalents in an estimated amount necessary to (i) discharge any unpaid liabilities and obligations of the Fund on the Fund’s books on the Liquidation Date, including, but not limited to, income dividends and capital gains distributions, if any, payable through the Liquidation Date, and (ii) pay such contingent liabilities as the officers of the Fund deem appropriate subject to ratification by the Board. Capital gain distributions, if any, may be paid on or prior to the Liquidation Date. If you have a Fund direct IRA account where SSBT serves as custodian, your shares will be exchanged for the corresponding class of shares of the JPMorgan Liquid Assets Money Market Fund as specified below, unless you provide alternative direction prior to the Liquidation Date. For all other IRA accounts, the proceeds will be invested based upon guidelines of the applicable Plan administrator.
    Share Class of JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund Share Class of JPMorgan Liquid AssetsMoney Market Fund
    Class A Shares Morgan Shares
    Class C Shares Morgan Shares
    Select Class Morgan Shares
    Upon liquidation, shareholders may purchase any class of another J.P. Morgan Fund for which they are eligible with the proceeds of the liquidating distribution. Shareholders holding Class A Shares or Select Class Shares will be permitted to use their proceeds from the liquidation to purchase Class A Shares of another J.P. Morgan Fund at net asset value within 90 days of the liquidating distribution. They may also purchase other share classes for which they are eligible. If Shareholders of Class C Shares purchase Class C Shares of another J.P. Morgan Fund within 90 days of the liquidating distribution, no contingent deferred sales charge will be imposed on those new Class C Shares.
    FOR EXISTING SHAREHOLDERS OF RECORD OF THE FUND AS OF FEBRUARY 29, 2016, ADDITIONAL PURCHASES OF FUND SHARES WILL BE ACCEPTED UP TO AND INCLUDING MARCH 15, 2016 AFTER WHICH NO NEW PURCHASES WILL BE ACCEPTED. FOR ALL OTHER INVESTORS, PURCHASES OF FUND SHARES WILL NO LONGER BE ACCEPTED EFFECTIVE MARCH 1, 2016.
    INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
    WITH THE PROSPECTUS, SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND
    STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
  • FPACX
    A concern for us has been Romick's continued reference on the fund's long-term positive numbers, and a lack of discussion on recent (1+ year) under-performance. The downside is especially surprising considering the huge amount of cash he has hoarded in the fund. Yes, the 5-10-15 year numbers are good and they are competitive. But at least address why the high 10% loss in the last 12 months. We have not moved client dollars, but the fund is on our watch list.
  • Emerging Market Funds: Ugly, Scary And Not Getting Better: Point/ Counterpoint
    FYI; It's tough to be an emerging-markets fund manager these days. And it's not looking like it will get better anytime soon, at least not before the first quarter is over. For those in doubt, examine the five biggest developing world stock funds in the U.S. by assets.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2016-02-25/emerging-market-funds-are-having-a-quarter-to-forget
    Counterpoint:
    Research Affiliates joins BlackRock, Templeton in bull camp.
    Pimco All Asset Fund held 35% in emerging assets as of January
    Emerging-market assets are so cheap that they may be “the trade of a decade,” according to Research Affiliates LLC, a sub-adviser to Pacific Investment Management Co., one of the world’s biggest money managers
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-24/pimco-adviser-sees-the-trade-of-a-decade-in-emerging-markets
  • FPACX
    @shipwreckedandalone: Considering you still own VBINX another Moderate Allocation Fund, I think you've made a wise decision. Over the years FPCAX percentile ranking has slipped from 1-93.
    15 Years: 1
    10 Years: 10
    5 Years: 33
    3 Years: 48
    1 Year: 75
    YTD: 93
    Regards,
    Ted
  • Grantham: the end is not nigh
    Hi Professor David,
    Indeed Jeremy Grantham is famous for his long-term market segment predictions.
    Initially, he formulated his judgments for the upcoming decade; more recently he has shortened the timeframe to seven years. Initially, his projections seemed highly prescient; more recently his projections have proved less prescient. Like most of what happens in the marketplace, a reversion-to-the-mean iron law seems to be exercising its power.
    Any prediction worth scoring must be accompanied by a well defined timeframe. Certainly, Grantham’s long-term forecasts meet that standard. A fine organization such as the statistically oriented CXO Advisory Group are well aware of that requirement.
    Grantham not only made his more famous longer-term estimates, but he also made shorter-term predictions. The time scale of those predictions ranged from a single month to more than a year. CXO sorted his predictions based on their various time-spans and scored them accordingly. The 40 Grantham forecasts that CXO evaluated were done so consistent with the appropriate timeframes.
    I scanned those 40 test items to confirm the timeliness of the prediction/measurement compatibility. They appear to be properly assessed on a time basis. The CXO testing excluded, and therefore did not address, Grantham’s long-term 7 year forecasts.
    Dependent on what subject is being addressed, some long-term forecasts are feasible with the likelihood of reasonable accuracy; others are not. The marketplace appears to be in this latter category.
    To support my contention, just review the annual checkerboard patterns that have been registered by the various investment categories and are summarized by any Periodic Table of Annual Investment Returns. Here are Links to several examples:
    https://investment.prudential.com/util/common/get?file=1D065355D2CC360385257B7D00536F8A
    https://www.americancentury.com/content/dam/americancentury/ipro/pdfs/flyer/Periodic_Table.pdf
    These are just sample tables. The second reference even shows the drastic movements of various bond categories.
    Chaos is supreme. I surely do not see any pattern. Category leaders quickly descend to the bottom of the heap. Standard deviations are huge, especially when contrasted against average annual returns. I doubt many folks have the talent and/or the luck to persistently capture this chaotic behavior in any forecasting model.
    Super-forecasters do exist, but in very small numbers. Phil Tetlock’s research does establish their existence, although even within this elite group a regression tendency has been observed. Perhaps Jeremy Grantham is a member of this elite group. I hope so; I do like him, but my confidence has been eroded.
    Best Wishes.
  • Seafarer Fund Portfolio Review
    Andrew Foster dropped a note in my mailbox this afternoon to inform me that the 4th Qtr Portfolio review for SFGIX has been posted. As most know, Mr. Foster worked in Asia for some time before his days at Mathews and reacts (and doesn't react) to Asian events in uncharacteristic ways. Always worth a glance, IMO, even if one isn't prepared to have him work with your money just yet.
    http://www.seafarerfunds.com/fund/portfolio-review
    His current stance on Asia--- and on emerging market stocks in general--- has taken a turn, and I think it's worth a smoke in the pipe:
    February 2016 – In his latest portfolio review, Andrew Foster discusses a shift in the Fund’s composition, away from the Asian region, and toward larger stocks at the expense of smaller ones. Next, he speculates as to the cause behind the collapse in China’s capital markets. While he does not offer a definitive explanation, he does suggest that circumstances may be serious enough to warrant attention from investors.
    heezafe,
    Thanks for the information.
    It sounds like you know a bit about the Matthews Funds as well a Seafarer Overseas Growth and Income.
    If my research is correct and current, MAPIX is about 30% Japan and 35% China/Hong Kong, MACSX is about 36% China/Hong Kong and 6% Japan, and the last I looked SFGIX was about 17% China/Hong Kong and 3% Japan, with a total of 52% in Asia, so it is more diverse in the Asia space than MACSX or MAPIX. Also, SFGIX had a 13% position in Emerging Europe, 21% in Latin America, and 5% in South Africa.
    Currently I own MACSX (seems to be the least risky of the three) in a retirement account and I am trying to figure out if owning SFGIX and or MAPIX gives me added diversification, or I just would be collecting funds.
    Any thoughts would be appreciated.
    Mona
  • Walthausen Small Cap Value Fund reopening to new investors
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418191/000141304216000337/walthscvsupp.htm
    497 1 walthscvsupp.htm
    WALTHAUSEN SMALL CAP VALUE FUND
    TICKER WSCVX
    February 24, 2016
    SUPPLEMENT TO PROSPECTUSES DATED JUNE 1, 2015
    The Board of Trustees of Walthausen Funds (the “Trust”) has approved the re-opening of the Walthausen Small Cap Value Fund (the “Fund”), a series of the Trust, to new investors and new accounts effective on or about March 1, 2016. In connection with this action, the following changes are hereby made to the Fund’s Prospectus:
    The sentence “The Fund is closed to new investors. See “Investing in the Fund” on page 8 for additional details.” is deleted on page 4 and page 8 of the prospectus.
    The section under the heading “Investing in the Fund” is deleted on page 8 of the prospectus and replaced with the following:
    You may purchase shares directly through the Fund’s transfer agent or through a brokerage firm or other financial institution that has agreed to sell the Fund’s shares. If you are investing directly in the Fund for the first time, you will need to establish an account by completing a Shareholder Account Application (To establish an IRA, complete an IRA Application). To request an application, call toll-free 1-888-925-8428.
    ************
    Please retain this supplement with your Prospectus for future reference. You may obtain more information about the Fund at www.walthausenfunds.com or by calling toll-free 1-888-925-8428.
  • Grantham: the end is not nigh
    Interesting argument. There's always overvalued areas. However, for natural resource producers it's hard to make that claim. Gas is overpriced at $1.25 (excluding tax)?
    Tech is nearly impossible to value anyway. If you're building 8-track decks you're overvalued. If your aeorspace division is about to receive a big contract from NASA to supply the space station or ferry payloads to the moon, you might be undervalued.
    Central banks and lawmakers will do what they will do. But it would be rare indeed for a paper currency to maintain or increase in purchasing power over extended periods. This begs David's question a bit I suppose. But, even nominal gains in equities are preferable to little or no gain in cash.
  • Bond fund allocation
    If we are in a period of rising interest rates, I would be cautious with bond holdings in terms of duration, maturity, quality. At some point, there may be an opportunity to lock in 3, 4, 5% in CDs and short-term bonds. That's a ways off, for sure. But that would be a way to reduce potential volatility. We have clients that came to us with old single-premium fixed annuities that have minimum-interest guarantee of 5%. We told them to hang on to these. They were purchased in the 1990s when 5% seemed impossibly low. Just goes to show us.
  • Osterweis
    Fortunately OSTFX had the smarts to dump Valeant, unlike Sequoia and some others (Vanguard was also very late to dump, BTW). Perhaps the most important thing to keep in mind is that Osterweis started as a firm that managed money for ultra-high net worth families. Capital preservation was and is a high priority. The funds came along as an offshoot of the private money management, sort of a "what can you do for out grandkids" response. As a result, OSTFX has never been flashy, never been a style-box fund (it is most definitely not a midcap blend fund, another M* mistake), and strives to provide good returns over the long haul. Everyone of us has owned at least one fund that stumbles once in a while. Prior to last year's crappy number, you have a 10-year average return of that is very close to the S&P 500 with less risk. We are willing to give the team a little slack here. There has been very little turnover on the team, with Berler and Kovriga there since 2006. Are there concerns? Yes, there are always concerns with actively-managed funds.
    If OSTIX is compared to the Non-Traditional Bond category (which is where we believe it should be), it is a bracket buster. Are there concerns? Yes, but the YTD number is not because the team decided to take dumb pills. Like OSTFX, we are giving them some slack, but nothing suggests there is any flaw. Which reminds me again that I seldom read M* analyst commentary for a good reason.
  • Grantham: the end is not nigh
    Overpricing can be as small as 0.5%, so this comment alone does not cause me to worry. He did get it right in early March, 2009, when he said "the train is leaving the station." Too bad his management company's funds have not done particularly well and certainly do not reflect his outlook over the years. I am sure they have constraints that inhibit them from overweighting asset classes very much.
  • Grantham: the end is not nigh
    "Grantham's observation that stocks have been overpriced about 80% of the time over the past 25 years. " 25 years is a long time to wait for mean reversion. Maybe he needs to adjust his estimates of fair value.
  • Osterweis
    @Shostakovich OSTFX had a huge position in Valeant Pharma before analyst Andrew Left's take-down of it last Fall. I think OSTVX also had a significant chunk in it, too. They dumped it right away, before things got worse (as they have), but considerable damage had already been done.
    http://www.benzinga.com/analyst-ratings/analyst-color/16/02/6508179/valeant-gets-closer-to-lefts-50-target-after-new-account?curator=thereformedbroker&utm_source=thereformedbroker
    Combine that with the HY bond exposure in the fixed income sleeve, and a presence in MLPs, and you pretty much have your under-performance explained.