Search

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.

David Snowball's April Commentary
We still have Crescent on our watch list. For them to suggest that the MSCI ACWI Index is a good benchmark is impossible to swallow. FPACX's make-up is 37% cash, 43% U.S. stocks (mostly very large cap), 8% international stocks, 5% bonds, and 6% Other. The ACWI Index is basically 55% U.S. stocks and 43% international stocks. Where is the comparison? It is just too convenient.

BobC April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Federated Strategic Value Dividend Is No. 1 (SVAAX)
FYI: The last time dividend investing was really in favor was back in the mid-1980s—long before the era of the smartphone and the MP3 player. Laptops had just made their debut; the Internet as we know it today remained merely a gleam in the eye of Silicon Valley geeks.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.wsj.com/articles/federated-strategic-value-is-no-1-fund-1459735515
M* Snapshot SVAAX;
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/SVAAX/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot SVAAX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Fund/SVAAX
SVAAX Is Ranked #23 In The (LCV) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-value/federated-strategic-value-dividend-fund/svaax

Ted April 2016 in Fund Discussions
sun edison: plummets
SunEdison (NYSE: SUNE) shares plummeted more than 50 percent in after-hours trading Friday amid a report that the troubled energy company could file for bankruptcy.
OppenheimerFunds, David Einhorn's Greenlight Capital and Vanguard Group(5.95% : naesx, vtsmx,visgx,vexmx) are among the largest SunEdison shareholders

dicksonL April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Will Danoff Leaves Fidelity Contrafund To Manage Sequoia Fund
The management (not ER) fee on FCNTX is 0.56%. On $107B, that's about $600M. Let's say Danoff gets half of that, or $300M. That's not even beginning to count his pay for managing New Insights and lots of other funds.
SEQUX's management fee is 1.00%, the same as its ER, because the management company is responsible for all the fund expenses (similar to what American Century does with its legacy funds like TWCGX). But for the sake of argument, let's say that Danoff gets to keep all of it. That's still only $55M ($5.5B fund).
So, if Sequoia stops printing prospectuses and investor statements, stops taking in money and selling shares, stops doing all the other things that fund distributors do, and if its management company stops taking any cut, and ..., then its fee might go up just a tad instead of a whole lot to pay for Danoff.
Of course, he could volunteer take a pay cut to go back to having fun managing something smaller than a whale.

msf April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Investor Derby: Gold Won First Quarter, Stocks Win Long Term
Read this before Ted posted it (pretty rare!). I thought the article a bit shoddy. 5 & 10 years (to my thinking) are too short of time frames to draw big assumptions. If I recall, they compared gold's performance to the S&P 500, REITS, and international and EM markets over the past 5 & 10 years. All of these are subject to substantial deviations over short periods. But I do think the overall point being made is valid: Investing regularly over time in a broad basket equities can be very profitable. Hard to disagree on that. But the time frames used are very short.
Re gold, I sold all of my small speculative position in OPGSX last week. It was up 37% YTD and 44% since I bought it around Labor Day last fall. Still exposed a bit through other funds; but pure plays on this stuff (or miners) are bit like snacking on nails. Not for everyone.

hank April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Who's The Bond Champ First Quarter 2016 ? Fuss, Gross, Hasenstab, Gundlach, Gaffney
@Edmond: For the last time ! YTD & First Quarter
Regards,
Ted
Gaffney: EVBAX 4.24%
Fuss: LSBRX 2.73%
Gross: JUCAX 2.18%
Gundlach: DBLTX 1.75%
Ivascyn: PIMIX 1.74%
Hasenstab TPINX -(0.14)%
Regards,
Ted

Ted April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Investor Derby: Gold Won First Quarter, Stocks Win Long Term
The article indicates if one had put the money in REITS, rather than the S&P, one could have done even better.
The problem with these types of articles is there is they are based on a single "end-point". --- With stocks near all-time highs, and gold 4-5 years into its bear market, the case to avoid gold is a easy --- but fallacious argument to make. It could just as well been made in Dec 1999 -- but would have proven a lousy argument to have made over the ensuring decade.

Edmond April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Alternatives to DODIX
I agree that asset bloat is a potential problem, but more to watch out for than a reason to rule out MWTRX now - especially in a tax-sheltered account where switching funds is painless.
As a reference point, posts here have had only positive words about DBLTX (OP holds it, PRESSmUP wound up with it, Samuel spoke of it as a fine fund). It now holds $57.6B, with DoubleLine as a whole taking in $10B in the past quarter (total $95B AUM).
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/26816/gundlach-s-doubleline-capital-grew-to-95-billion-in-march
Which raises another fact. A few years ago, the MetWest team took on managing the TCW funds when MetWest was acquired by TCW. IMHO that was the time to have been concerned about asset bloat at MetWest. Big percentage jump in assets while also having to deal with significant outflows.

msf April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Gundlach's DoubleLine Capital Grew To $95 Billion In March
FYI: Los Angeles-based firm added $10 billion in first quarter.
Total Return Fund increased to $57.6 billion on mortgage bet.
DoubleLine Capital, the Los Angeles-based investment firm headed by Jeffrey Gundlach, increased assets under management to $95 billion at the end of March, according to an e-mail from company analyst Loren Fleckenstein, $10 billion more than the firm reported Dec. 31.
The flagship DoubleLine Total Return Bond Fund, which invests primarily in mortgage-backed securities, climbed to $57.6 billion in assets, and has returned 1.75 percent so far in 2016, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-01/gundlach-s-doubleline-capital-grew-to-95-billion-in-march

Ted April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Investor Derby: Gold Won First Quarter, Stocks Win Long Term
FYI: Another quarter, another lesson in long-term investing.
Economic uncertainty around the world and a brutal start to the year for stocks helped send the price of gold surging to its best quarter in 30 years. But an analysis of 10 common investments by the Associated Press shows that regular investors who put a steady amount of money every month into an account like a 401(k) would have been far better off in stocks or bonds.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bigstory.ap.org/article/9e6749ab7e694bf3b95cb56be104cbe4/investor-derby-gold-won-first-quarter-stocks-win-long-term

Ted April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Alternatives to DODIX
BIV/VBILX/VBIIX also has noticeably more treasury exposure than AGG. It's basically AGG if you restrict in two ways: 1) limit to intermediate term bonds (those with maturities in 5-10 years), and 2) remove securitized bonds (about 1/4 of AGG).
The government and corporate portions increase proportionately, so there is more government bond and more corporate bond exposure. The latter resulting in an increase in credit exposure (relative to the MBS's it is replacing).
However, an MBS will generally yield more than a comparably rated corporate bond. That's because the MBS has extension/prepayment risk (which I view as a variant of interest rate risk). "To quote a Wall Street adage, a mortgage-backed security 'goes up like a two-year bond' when rates fall and 'goes down like a six-year bond' when rates rise." See negative convexity.
So if one swaps MBS for corporate, it is necessary to go down the credit ladder just to maintain yield. To put it another way, just because the credit rating has gone down doesn't mean that the yield has gone up - the rating may have dropped just enough to compensate for the inherently lower-yield of corporates.
The bottom line is that while it is true that there's more credit risk than AGG, without quantifying that difference it isn't clear that this is a factor that's increasing the yield. Even if the credit rating difference is large enough to increase yield, the resulting yield increase isn't as sizeable as the credit difference would seem to make it at first blush.

msf April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Alternatives to DODIX
BIV is not a very credit sensitive fund, but it has noticeably more credit exposure than the Barclays Agg. During the financial crisis the mutual fund lost more than the Agg and fell about as much as DODIX in the Q4 2008. The fund currently has about 39% in Baa bonds v. 26% for the Barclays Agg and has a lower government bond stake.
Maybe we are looking at different websites but *M shows BIV as currently having 57% in AAA rated bonds, 16% with A rating and and 23% in BBB rated bonds. Based on these numbers, the fund does not appear to be credit sensitive overall. The duration is on the high end for an intermediate fund (6.5 years) so I do believe it has more risk on the interest rate side.

willmatt72 April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Alternatives to DODIX
"It's not just what happened lately".
To repeat my point, what happened lately (if there's a sizeable performance difference) distorts comparisons in all time frames. If it's not just what happened lately, let's throw out the past year (4/1/15 - 3/31/16) and run those figures again (e.g. 5 years 4/1/2010 - 3/31/2015):
Cumulative BIV MWTRX
1 year 10.69% 10.54%
3 years 11.25% 11.66%
5 years 13.43% 13.52%
Here's the source: 1 year,
You're kidding right? If I "throw out" the last year of TDVFX I'd have a 5 star fund with an unreal record....instead of one that was down 25% YTD just a few weeks ago. If you "throw out" the last 5 minutes of the NY Football Giants games this season they'd have been the first seed in the playoffs, instead of missing the playoffs and firing their Hall of Fame bound coach. So what? The record is what it is.
wxman123 April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Snowball's great commentary
My take on his commentary:
SEQUX: Just another reason in the long line of reasons for the need to index. Not a popular opinion for stockbrokers or financial advisors or anybody who makes their living advising people. But these are the same people charging 4% commission for a Certificate of Deposit annuity paying 2.5%. I have previously discussed the value of VBINX or similar.
FPACX: I sold it a month ago. Held it for many many years. My reason is different from Mr. Snowball. IMHO, I believe human nature is such that it is difficult to be the best at a profession that requires so much. Eventually your motivation and drive begins to weaken. Asset size doesn't help matters. The funds commentary alerted me to that possibility.
Money Market: Are we saying that Treasury only Money Markets will not break $1.00 NAV? Is there no option left come October that will not break the buck for a brokerage sweep account?

shipwreckedandalone April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Bonds roaring in 2016 and no bear in U.S. equities
Hi @hank,
Thank you for the inquiry.
I have my portfolio along with each sleeve and investment area set up in Morning's portfolio manager. With this, it is easy for me to view daily performance along with weekly, monthly, year-to-date and rolling 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance.
I too, have to wait until the following day to find fund distributions reflected in Morningstar fund reports. In addition, it can take up to three days before the distributions actually show up in my brokerage account.
I hope this information helps.
Old_Skeet

Old_Skeet April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Bespoke’s ETF Asset Class Performance Matrix — Q1 2016
Crude set to lose ytd gains on 1st day of 2nd quarter.
Oil tumbled 4 percent on Friday to open the second quarter, after a Saudi prince reportedly said the kingdom will not freeze production without Iran and other major producers doing so and data showed the global crude glut was likely to grow.
Brent crude fell $1.70, or 4.2 percent, to $39.07 a barrel by 11:29 a.m. ET. It was on track to a similar loss on the week, after ending the first quarter up 6 percent and March 15 percent higher.
U.S. crude fell $1.40 to $36.94 a barrel. It was on track to a 6 percent drop on the week, after a first-quarter gain of 4 percent and March rally of 14 percent.
The dollar's .DXY first rebound in a week after stronger-than-expected U.S. jobs data added pressure on oil,
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil-idUSKCN0WX00R
1st Quarter Wrap
The March rebound has made an impact on longer return windows too. For instance, nearly all corners of global markets are now in the black for year-to-date comparisons through the end of 2016’s first quarter....for the moment the rearview mirror is offering a new excuse to think positively.
1

http://www.capitalspectator.com/major-asset-classes-march-2016-performance-review/
Also; @Junkster's munis remain strong
Nuveen Muni High Inc Opp NMZ
NMZ (Price) 1 mo+1.14 ytd+2.85 1yr+8.13 3yr+8.31
http://performance.morningstar.com/funds/cef/total-returns.action?t=NMZ&region=usa&culture=en_US
SPDR Select Sector Fund - Energy Select Sector Stock Chart
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/xle/stock-chart#ixzz44bC3QaOM
XLE
61.00 -0.92 (-1.49%)
Real-time: 2:00PM EDT 4/01/2016

TSP_Transfer April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Alternatives to DODIX
"It's not just what happened lately".
To repeat my point, what happened lately (if there's a sizeable performance difference) distorts comparisons in all time frames. If it's not just what happened lately, let's throw out the past year (4/1/15 - 3/31/16) and run those figures again (e.g. 5 years 4/1/2010 - 3/31/2015):
```
Cumulative	BIV	MWTRX
1 year		10.69%	10.54%
3 years		11.25%	11.66%
5 years		13.43%	13.52%
```
Here's the source: 1 year, 3 year, 5 year
"OP had a specific request, and quite a valid one IMO"
Yes, a "bond fund that may act as a substitute for DODIX, which is a TF fund at Fidelity". BIV has transaction fees at Fidelity that are even higher than those for DODIX.
"You need something like BIV in your portfolio, perhaps now more than ever."
What does something "like" BIV mean, and why do you need something like that now more than ever?
In the context of the OP's request (with treasuries first on the list), I took note that BIV is heavily weighted in Treasuries. So if by "something like BIV" you mean something loaded with treasuries, why not a treasury (or more broadly, a government) bond fund? That would at least give one the ability to tweak allocations (by adding/selling some of the fund, especially in the tax-sheltered account).
Why now more than ever, when treasuries have had an extremely long run, and BIV has a longer duration than almost any other intermediate bond fund? (Out of 214 distinct intermediate term bond funds for which M* has duration figures, BIV/VBILX/VBIIX has the fourth longest.)
It is true that BIV (because of its large treasuries weighting) did well in 2008. Sovereign debt (such as treasuries) was virtually the only asset class that gained then. Are there other times where that's been true, or is stocking up on treasuries a Maginot line?
msf April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Alternatives to DODIX
MWTRX is one I've considered, but goodness--- the dividends are paltry.
Crash, div may look paltry because it is mostly high quality bonds. 70% rated AAA, 85% of the portfolio is A or above. On the other hand DFLNX is 53% and 67%. If you want more div you take on more risk. Always a trade off.
And total return is the measuring stick here unless you are using the dividends for income. Comparing MWTRX and DLFNX, return is pretty much even for 1, 3 and 5 year returns.

MikeM April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Bespoke’s ETF Asset Class Performance Matrix — Q1 2016
FYI: Below is our asset class performance matrix for Q1 2016 using key ETFs traded on U.S. exchanges. A ridiculously strong March propelled US stocks into the green for the quarter, but just barely so. As shown, the S&P 500 SPY ETF finished Q1 up 0.81% year-to-date. The Dow 30 (DIA) more than doubled that at +1.96%, while the Tech and Biotech heavy Nasdaq 100 (QQQ) finished down 2.4%.
Eight of ten sectors were up in Q1, led by Consumer Staples (XLP), Utilities (XLU), Telecom (IYZ), and Industrials (XLI). The two sectors in the red for the quarter were Financials (XLF) and Health Care (XLV) — both falling nearly 6%.
Outside of the US, Brazil (EWZ) won the quarter with a gain of 27%! Italy (EWI) was the big loser at -11.21%. Looking at commodities, gold and silver rallied 10%+ in Q1, while oil and natural gas finished down 10%+ even though they surged in March. Finally, Treasury ETFs rose nicely in Q1 with the 20+ Year Treasury (TLT) gaining the most at +8.7
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/bespokes-asset-class-performance-matrix-q1-2016/

Ted April 2016 in Fund Discussions
Alternatives to DODIX

Well, the performance of BIV dates back to 2008, it's not just what happened lately. It beat the funds you mentioned over the last 5 yrs. In 2013 when treasuries got killed (TLT down 13.37%) it is true that BIV had its "worst" year ever, it's ONLY down year, and was down a mere 3.58%. I'm not getting paid a commission here, but the facts are the facts. It is somewhat likely that good multi-sector funds will outperform BIV over the longterm, but the OP had a specific request, and quite a valid one IMO. You need something like BIV in your portfolio, perhaps now more than ever.

wxman123 April 2016 in Fund Discussions