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.
  • John Waggoner: Some American Funds Offer Up To 18 Share Classes Overkill? David Snowball Comments
    @bee: I think such a federal retirement system for all who toil in the public sector would only be possible in a highly-centralized economy. I'm thinking of European countries in which the state is the employer of train drivers, school teachers, and functionaries. In France, for example, the public sector accounts for about 25% of the economy. Over here, we can't even get agreement on a national identity card let alone a single-payer health system. FWIIW, I'm a retiree from a public university with my retirement plans in TIAA-CREF.
  • Vanguard Convertible Securities Fund opening to institutional investors directly with Vanguard
    Since we are on that topic, here's Vanguard's Wellington Fund:
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/105563/000093247116013013/ps21022013.htm
    497 1 ps21022013.htm SUPPLEMENT TO WELLINGTON
    Vanguard Wellington™ Fund
    Supplement to the Prospectus and Summary 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.
    The Fund may modify these transaction policies at any time and without prior notice to shareholders. You may call Vanguard for more detailed information about the Fund’s transaction policies. Participants in employer-sponsored plans may call Vanguard Participant Services at 800-523-1188. Investors in nonretirement accounts and IRAs may call Vanguard’s Investor Information Department at 800-662-7447.
  • Vanguard Convertible Securities Fund opening to institutional investors directly with Vanguard
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/791107/000093247116013031/ps82042013.htm
    497 1 ps82042013.htm PARTIAL CLOSED SUPPLEMENT
    Vanguard Convertible Securities Fund
    Supplement to the Prospectus and the Summary Prospectus
    Important Change to Vanguard Convertible Securities Fund
    Vanguard Convertible Securities Fund is now open to new accounts for institutional clients who invest directly with Vanguard.
    The Fund will remain closed to prospective financial advisory and intermediary clients (other than clients who invest through a Vanguard brokerage account) until further notice, and there is no specific time frame for when the Fund will reopen for new account registrations by these clients.
    During the Fund’s closed period, current shareholders may continue to purchase, exchange, or redeem shares of the Fund online, by telephone, or by mail. Participants in certain qualified retirement plans may continue to invest in accordance with the terms of their plans.
    The Fund may modify these transaction policies at any time and without prior notice to shareholders. You may call Vanguard for more detailed information about the Fund’s transaction policies. Participants in employer-sponsored plans may call Vanguard Participant Services at 800-523-1188. Investors in nonretirement accounts and IRAs may call Vanguard’s Investor Information Department at 800-662-7447. Institutional investors may call Vanguard’s Institutional Division at 888-809-8102 or may call their relationship managers directly.
    © 2013 The Vanguard Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
    Vanguard Marketing Corporation, Distributor. PS 82 042013
  • bear market lows, bull market highs and the current market
    @David_Snowball, Speaking of Leuthold , I'm curious to see if you made the decision to move money from FPACX to LCORX. After reading your thoughts and looking into the fund, I decided to go with LCORX as a more conservative hold in my portfolio. Looks like by the end of 2015, they were down to about 40% net equity holdings. Just wondering what you ended up doing.
  • Chuck Jaffe's Money Life Show: Guest Bernie Horn, Manager, Polairs Global Value Fund
    For what interest it holds, Mr. Horn came across as one of the most deeply thoughtful guys we've interviewed. The audio of our 2015 conference call with him is on our Featured Fund page for Polaris.
    David
  • Boston Trust Small Cap and the Walden Small Cap Innovations Funds reopen
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/882748/000110465916107932/a16-7423_1497.htm
    497 1 a16-7423_1497.htm 497
    The Boston Trust & Walden Funds
    One Beacon Street
    Boston, MA 02108
    Boston Trust Small Cap Fund
    Walden Small Cap Innovations Fund
    Supplement dated March 28, 2016 to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”)
    each dated August 1, 2015
    Effective April 1, 2016, the Boston Trust Small Cap Fund and the Walden Small Cap Innovations Fund will no longer be closed to new investors. Accordingly, all references to the Funds being “closed to new investors” in the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information are deleted in their entirety.
    Please retain this supplement for future reference.
    This Supplement, and the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), each dated August 1, 2015, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. The Prospectuses and SAI have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference, and can be obtained without charge by calling 1-800-282-8782, extension 7050.
  • Templeton's Hasenstab Shuns Argentina For Mexico, Brazil
    FYI: At least one large fund manager is not buying into Argentina's turnaround story and believes the country's first international bond in over 15 years may not offer as much value as local debt in Mexico and Brazil.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.reuters.com/article/latam-bonds-franklin-rsc-idUSL2N16W04W
    M* Snapshot TPINX:
    http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/TPINX/quote.html
    Lipper Snapshot TPINX:
    http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Fund/TPINX
    TPINX Is Ranked #17 In The (WB) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
    http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/world-bond/templeton-global-bond-fund/tpinx
  • How Does DFA Compare To Vanguard ?
    Altruist Financial Advisors seems to have some curious notions regarding Vanguard:
    "For those who do not have access to DFA, we suggest they limit their bond holdings to domestic bond funds." A blanket rejection of VTIBX without even mentioning it.
    (That fund was started in 2013, and the page has information from at least 2014, so this is not a matter of the fund not existing at the time of the writing.)
    " However, the existence of an ETF share class makes [VTMGX] quite a bit more capital-gains tax-efficient than it would otherwise be."
    Vanguard has always stated that the tax value of ETFs (at least for cap-weighted index funds) is overrated (i.e. they are not "quite a bit more capital-gains tax-efficient'). The data bear this out not only generally but specifically for this fund.
    The fund was created in 2014 as the result of a merger between Vanguard's tax-managed foreign developed markets fund and its "regular" fund. See:
    http://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/12700/what-happened-to-vdmix
    So I went back to look at cap gains distributions for the "regular" fund VDMIX (no ETF share class, not tax-managed):
    Per share cap gains distributions (from the 2013 prospectus:
    2013: - (six months ended April 30)
    2012: - (full year)
    2011: -
    2010: -
    2009: -
    2008: $0.005
    To put that last figure in perspective, total distributions/share were $0.387.
  • bear market lows, bull market highs and the current market
    Hi, guys.
    In a slightly-grumbly post last week, in which I described the current market as "senseless" and allowed that I was reluctant to judge sensible managers for their failure to thrive in its midst, I made the observation that the February bear low was still higher than most bull market highs. Setting aside the question of whether it's reasonable to disregard what might be several years of underperformance (it works for me as long as the full cycle performance is what I signed up for, but I recognize that other folks have shorter time horizons and more intricate sell disciplines), there was also a question about whether the "higher than bear lows" claim was correct.
    Several fund managers I'd spoken to last week made that observation in passing. Here's the Leuthold description of current valuations, from their March 2016 Perception for the Professional:
    While the past several month's reversion in [valuation] measures has certainly wrung some of the risk out of the market ... the potential downside risks remain substantial. We compared current readings on all four valuation measures [p/e on TTM earnings, p/e on 5-yr normalized earnings, p/cash flow, median price-to-book, all for S&P 500 stocks] to the average recorded at the last four bull market highs, and found that - despite the setback of the last nine months - the median stock still trades at a valuation about 1% above the levels seen at the typical cyclical bull market high. If the bear market reasserts itself ... potential downside is estimated at -29%.
    The Total Stock Market is up about 2% since then.
    To be clear: I'm not apocalyptic, I'm just wired to be cautious. More importantly, I detest making factual claims (as I did in my original post) without being able to point to the specific evidence behind the claim.
    For what that's worth,
    David
  • Larry Swedroe: Success Or Failure: The Evidence From Style-Rotating Funds
    I use a timing model found within my portfolio itself that keys me when to load value over growth and when to switch and to load growth. I only do this with a small amount of the portfolio due to the many strategies that I may have engaged from time-to-time. I have found through the years this to be one of the better strategies and a most effective one. Just this past month, most of the large cap value funds which I own and are found in my domestic equity sleeve located in the growth and income area of the portfolio out performed it's growth counter part (large/mid cap sleeve) which is found in the growth area of the portfolio by about 10%.
    During the recent selling stampede which took place during the first couple months of 2016 I bought in the value area of the portfolio and once equities recovered I then rebalanced and reduced my equity weighting in the growth area by selling two positions that were held in the ballast/spiff sleeve thus keeping my overall equity allocation at it's target weighting of about 50%.
    Again, for those that have had their doubts about my sleeve system, I have found my portfolio fund management sleeve system to be beneficial in making investment and strategy adjustments within my portfolio. However, I respect your right to continue to voice your doubts as I feel my system is geered for the more accomplished investor and might not be right for everyone. In addition, to use the system effectively one needs to be somewhat a student of the capital markets and follow their movement as well as that of the portfolio itself. Please note I am not a professional investor, or trader, but simply a retail investor that sought out ways to improve my returns over both the near term as well as the long term that would come through better positioning with a moving asset allocation of sorts.
    For those that might not be familiar with my system I have provided a blurb about it below along with the portfolio's current configuration as of March 22, 2016.
    Old_Skeet's Fund Sleeve Management System (03/22/2016)
    Here is a brief description of my sleeve system which I organized to help better manage the investments that were held in five accounts along with my current positioning. The accounts consist of a taxable account, a self directed ira account, a 401k account, a profit sharing account and a health savings account plus two bank accounts. With this I came up with four investment areas. They are a cash area which consist of two sleeves … an investment cash sleeve and a demand cash sleeve. The next area is the income area which consists of two sleeves. … a fixed income sleeve and a hybrid income sleeve. Then there is the growth & income area which has more risk associated with it than the income area and it consist of four sleeves … a global equity sleeve, a global hybrid sleeve, a domestic equity sleeve and a domestic hybrid sleeve. An finally there is the growth area, where the most risk in the portfolio is found and it consist of five sleeves … a global sleeve, a large/mid cap sleeve, a small/mid cap sleeve, a specialty & theme sleeve and a ballast & spiff investment sleeve. Each sleeve consists of three to six funds (in most cases) with the size and the weight of each sleeve can easily be adjusted, from time-to-time, by adjusting the number of funds and amounts held. By using the sleeve system one can get a better picture of their overall investment picture and weightings by sleeve and area. In addition, I have found it beneficial to xray each fund, each sleeve, each investment area, and the portfolio as a whole quarterly. Again, weightings can be adjusted form time-to-time as to how I might be reading the markets and wish to weight accordingly. All funds pay their distributions to the cash area of the portfolio with the exception being those in my 401k, profit sharing, and health savings accounts where reinvestment occurs. With the other accounts paying to the cash area builds the cash area of the portfolio to meet the portfolio’s monthly cash disbursement amount with the residual being left for new investment opportunity. In addition, most all buy/sell trades settle from or to the cash area with some nav exchanges between funds taking place.
    Here is how I have my asset allocation broken out in percent ranges, by area. My current target allocations are cash 20%, income 30%, growth & income 35%, and growth 15%. I do an Instant Xray analysis on the portfolio quarterly (sometimes monthly) and make asset weighting adjustments as I feel warranted based upon my assessment of the market, my risk tolerance, cash needs, etc. Presently, I am about 20% in the cash area, 30% in the income area, 35% in the growth & income area and 15% in the growth area.
    Cash Area (Weighting Range 15% to 25% with target being 20%)
    Demand Cash Sleeve… (Cash Distribution Accrual & Future Investment Accrual)
    Investment Cash Sleeve … (Savings & Time Deposits)
    Income Area (Weighting Range 25% to 35% with target being 30%)
    Fixed Income Sleeve: GIFAX, LALDX, THIFX, LBNDX, NEFZX & TSIAX
    Hybrid Income Sleeve: CAPAX, CTFAX, FKINX, ISFAX, JNBAX & PGBAX
    Growth & Income Area (Weighting Range 30% to 40% with target being 35%)
    Global Equity Sleeve: CWGIX, DEQAX & EADIX
    Global Hybrid Sleeve: BAICX, CAIBX & TIBAX
    Domestic Equity Sleeve: ANCFX, FDSAX, INUTX, NBHAX, SPQAX & SVAAX
    Domestic Hybrid Sleeve: ABALX, AMECX, DDIAX, FRINX, HWIAX & LABFX
    Growth Area (Weighting Range 10% to 20% with target being 15%)
    Global Sleeve: ANWPX, PGROX & THOAX
    Large/Mid Cap Sleeve: AGTHX, IACLX & SPECX
    Small/Mid Cap Sleeve: AJVAX, PCVAX & PMDAX
    Specialty & Theme Sleeve: LPEFX, PGUAX, TOLLX, NEWFX & THDAX
    Ballast & Spiffs: FISCX
    Total Number of Mutual Fund Positions = 45
  • The Problem With Private-Equity Funds for The Masses
    I use LPEFX to gain exposure to private equity; and, I hold this fund in the specialty / theme sleeve found in growth area of my portfolio. My historical annualized return since I purchased the fund in September of 2011 has been about 12.50% and my total return in the fund has been better than 70%. For me, it is a keeper plus it sports an income yield of about 4.5% on amount invested. Over time, I plan to keep adding to the position.
  • Comatose Money Market Funds Have Finally Begun To Wake Up
    FYI: The recent rise in the stock market has attracted a lot of attention — and it’s easy to see why. From the market bottom on Feb. 11 through Monday, U.S. stocks, as measured by the definitive Wilshire 5000 index, rose a bit more than 13 percent, or about $2.8 trillion.
    A pretty nice five-week increase, isn’t it? No wonder so many people are talking about it.
    But there’s another investment that has also turned positive — but has attracted far less attention.
    I’m talking about taxable money market mutual funds. Yes, money funds.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/comatose-money-market-funds-have-finally-begun-to-wake-up/2016/03/21/0f20531c-ef76-11e5-89c3-a647fcce95e0_story.html
    Highest Yielding Money Market Funds:
    http://cranedata.com/
  • Need your thoughts on Large Cap Growth Fund

    Maybe Bridgeway 35? BRLIX is the symbol, I think.
  • Chuck Jaffe: How A Big Bet On One Bad Stock Broke A Legendary Mutual Fund
    bee, it seems to me that SEQUX will be collecting $46 million in annual fees when and if their AUM goes down to $4.6 billion (and the ER is 1%). According to fundmojo.com, AUM as of 02/2016 was $6.04 billion, and AUM as of 05/2015 (the oldest date listed) was $9.04 billion. I believe that AUM decreased because of the drop in share price and shareholder withdrawals.
  • Chuck Jaffe: How A Big Bet On One Bad Stock Broke A Legendary Mutual Fund
    @bee & MFO Members: In addition to bee's math, on this date,3/26/15, one year ago SEQUX was selling for $252.00 per share.
    Regards,
    Ted
  • Chuck Jaffe: How A Big Bet On One Bad Stock Broke A Legendary Mutual Fund
    Please check my math:
    With $5.5 Billion AUM, SEQUX with its 1% ER nets $55 million in annual fees. These annual fees are obviously impacted by recent poor fund performance, but in a year when shareholders absorb a 25% share price loss, management will still collect close to $46 million in fees (based on 25% less assets under management due to a 25% drop in the fund's share price).
    Share holders selling out of this fund would cause a 100% management fee loss and might be about the only way to properly voice their disapproval of management decision making.
  • Chuck Jaffe: How A Big Bet On One Bad Stock Broke A Legendary Mutual Fund
    FYI: (This is a follow-up to the follow-up to the follow-up, I think Chuck's a little late to the party !)
    In the stock market, there are bad times — and then there is what the Sequoia Fund is going through.
    Bad doesn’t even begin to describe the situation for Sequoia SEQUX, -0.64% one of the most legendary mutual funds, which has seen its reputation torched by a bad bet on a controversial stock. The fund’s fall from grace culminated in the resignation of a co-manager after a 45-year career with Sequoia’s management company
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-a-big-bet-on-one-bad-stock-broke-a-legendary-mutual-fund-2016-03-26/print
    Sequoia's One Year Performance As 3/24/16: Source M*
    1-Day (-0.64)
    1-Wk. -(0.13)
    1-Mo. -(7/19)
    3-Mo. -(14.13)
    YTD -(11.55)
    1-Yr. -(24.03)