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.
  • M*: Q&A With Brett Sumsion, CO-Manager, Fidelity Freedom Funds: Less Value In Utilities, REITs Today
    FYI: Fidelity's Brett Sumsion has trimmed positions in higher-yielding sectors recently as the rest of the market gets more excited about them.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://news.morningstar.com/Cover/videoCenter.aspx?id=805582
    M*: Fidelity Freedom Target-Date Fund Series Report:
    http://news.morningstar.com/pdfs/STUSA04OLH.pdf
  • Meb Faber: The Dividend Growth Myth
    FYI: A few weeks ago, I was sipping coffee, thumbing through Barron’s as I do every weekend. It’s a way in which I keep a pulse on what’s going on in our space.
    Though I never consciously pay attention to ads, on that particular morning, one caught my eye – a big full pager from Schwab, below. They were trumpeting their low-cost trading commissions in the ongoing fee compression in the investment management space. (Since this ad, Schwab and others have since continued to lower costs, with Schwab now down to $4.95!)
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://mebfaber.com/2017/04/26/dividend-growth-myth/
  • What Kiplinger’s Has In Common With Online Porn
    FYI: Every year, Kiplinger’s publishes their favorite mutual funds. It’s a lot like online porn. Nine years ago, the magazine published The 25 Best Mutual Funds—2008. Let’s have a look at the damage it might have caused.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://assetbuilder.com/knowledge-center/articles/what-kiplingers-has-in-common-with-online-porn
  • M*: A Buffett-Like Small-Company Fund On Our Radar
    Hi David, Any explanation for the low insider ownership (from SAI dated 8/2016) by the fund managers? Wynegar $50,000-100,000 and Johnson $100,000-500,000. Thanks.
  • Consuelo Mack's WealthTrack: Guest: David Wallack, Manager, T. Rowe Price Mid-Cap Value Fund
    Great Interview...thanks @Ted.
    Many investment quotes...here are a couple:
    "Losing half your money today requires you to double your money in the future (just to get back to even.)"

    "I credit my incredible success in the market to selling too soon (out of the market)."

    Market Insider also had a recent interview with Mr Wallack:
    markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/david-wallack-interview-trowe-price-2017-4-1001951624
    Some additional quotes:
    "...keeping your money is in some ways more important than making it."
    "(On the selection of stocks)...It's where are the interesting companies and how much money do I lose if I'm wrong relative to how much money do I make if I'm right?"
    Though his fund is closed, mirroring some of these holdings in your own personal stock account might be a worthy consideration.
    Here the top 25 Holdings (you can manipulate a portion of the full list by clicking on the different heading):
    portfolios.morningstar.com/fund/holdings?t=TRMCX&region=usa&culture=en-US
  • Q&A With Matt Fruhen, Manager, Fidelity Large-Cap Stock Fund: Still Value In Energy: Video
    I'm gonna approach this value play a little differently.
    Fossil fuels, as a raw material (input cost), is necessary for many outputs. From the production of fertilizers to the making of plastics and paints...think Chemical products, instead of merely fuel for driving turbines and engines.
    Take a look at FSCHX as a "Chemical Energy" play. Also, when fuel costs for transportation is in the lower price range, Airlines, Truckers, Rail and Port Shippers reduce operating expenses due to lower energy costs which improves their bottom line as companies. Take a look at FSRFX.
    In a world of low interest rates (usually this means low inflation), and low energy costs help stimulate overall economic, which bodes well for the entire stock market. Energy is 6.5% of the S&P 500 (VOO), 25% of Gas Index (GASFX), and FLCSX (mentioned by @Ted) is 12% Energy. A pure energy play would be VGENX (VDE).
    As an investor in the Energy sector, I have noticed that the sector has been more sensitive to the impact of inflation and deflation when the overall economy ebbs and flows . At some point when the economy heats up too much high energy demand will combine with supply constraints causing higher energy costs. These higher costs in the short run pass through to investors. In the long run, they slow economic growth and put a drag on the stock market.
    I like to think of an investment in Energy as an inflation hedge for an investor in the early stages of higher inflation.
  • M*: 10 Funds That Beat the Market Over 15 Years
    Also, don't some mfunds try and curtail such trading? Maybe the intervals you cite are long enough not to trigger a response.
    In my retirement accounts, if you sell any shares of a fund, you cannot buy back again until 15/30 days. TRP also has such restrictions. So what? You can buy other funds.
    Sell Target Date 2060, Buy Target Date 2050.
    Sell S&P index, but midcap index.
    Hardly an issue for me.
  • M*: 10 Funds That Beat the Market Over 15 Years
    Hi @VintageFreak
    DODGX break even point, per this chart, includes all distributions. Dec. 28, 2007-Jan. 2013.

    http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?DODGX&l=2260&r=3531&O=011000
    Err...I wasn't trying to be lazy and put you to work. Please accept my apologies.
    Since funds make distributions and they are reflected in the NAV, they artificially depress the NAV. So likely the "portfolio value" of the original $100, might have become $100 again a little earlier than what one can see in the chart. I was trying to ask if there was an easy way to find out.
    Thanks again for taking the trouble :)
  • Top 20 Mutual Fund Companies By Assets: Graphic
    As the chart shows ...
    BINGO!
    Thanks OJ. That's the part of the picture I was missing. Didn't see those labels along the chart's edges (which don't show up very well on a 5 year old iPad). Was wondering how they arrived at the conclusion that 2 particular fund houses were "the best." Perfectly clear now.
    I've heard only positive things about American Funds. In fact, I referenced a very positive Barron's write up on American Funds perhaps 2-3 months back in one of my posts (but couldn't dig it up tonight).
    Busy packing for a few quality days down in the Keys next week. Biggest fear now is that I'll get in some kind of altercation with a flight attendant and end up leading-off the evening news. :)
    Regards
  • Top 20 Mutual Fund Companies By Assets: Graphic
    That's a pretty cool chart! I sometimes worry because TRP (where I invest) seems to be perpetually cranking out new funds - some very similar in nature. But looking at these "balloons" I think I understand why. They're struggling to stay large (and competitive) among some real giants.
    Maybe I missed something. But to state "The best firms ... are American and Dodge and Cox" strikes me as somewhat presumptuous. For sure, D&C (where I have a little) has a lot to recommend it. They have some of the lowest ERs among the active managers. They're a privately held held firm. And have a great long-term record.
    The one thing I'd caution against is that tit-for-tat I think you'll find their equity and balanced funds are a bit more volatile than those of many peers. Don't know if this is (1) just part of their investment culture or (2) whether perhaps the mamouth size of their funds necessitates they stay pretty much fully invested in larger cap stocks and assume a longer-term time horizon. Probably both.
    @bee - If you missed it, there's some discussion of DODGX in @Ted's: "M*: 10 Funds That Beat the Market Over 15 Years" thread.
    Regards
  • M*: 10 Funds That Beat the Market Over 15 Years
    "Perhaps then we can ask the question, if one sold DODGX when value fell to $90, and then bought it back after it crossed $100 again, ... "
    That's a surefire way to lose money. You're selling on dips, and buying back when the price is higher than when you sold. For the money you got by selling your shares at $90, you get fewer shares back when you repurchase at $100.
    I can make this concrete. I'm glad you mentioned 2000-2002. (All data from Yahoo finance.)
    The first time in that time frame that the fund price dipped to $90 or below was 2/25/2000, at $89.44. (It had last been over $100 on 1/19/2000.) The lowest it got after that before going back over $100 was $89.36 on 3/7/2000. It reached $100 on 5/12/2000 ($100.09). Selling at virtually the bottom and buying back at $100 would have cost about 11%. Not to mention the missed dividend. (DODGX pays quarterly dividends, or at least it does now.)
    The next time it dipped to $90 or below was 9/20/2001, at $87.95. The lowest it got after that was the next day, at $86.51. It went back over $100 on 11/26/2001, at $100.34. Selling low ($86.51) and buying high ($100.34) would have cost around 14%, again plus quarterly dividends forgone.
    The final time it dipped to $90 or below might make you feel a little better. It dropped to $89.22 on 7/16/2002. It got as low as $75.03 on 10/9/2002, before passing $100 again on 6/12/2003 ($100.15). By being out of the market, you would have avoided some discomfort at watching your shares drop another 16%. Ultimately though, you'd still have paid $100.15 to buy back shares that you sold at $89.22.
    A more effective strategy is to use trailing stops, which may be what you had in mind. I think you're trying to clip off the worst of the loss (by selling when it seems the fund is on its way down), and conversely, to pick up most of the gain (by selling when it looks like the fund is on its way to recovering). Trailing stops help you do that.
    You want to reenter once the fund starts moving up, say from that low of $75.03 to a price "just" 10% higher, rather than wait for it to blow past the price you sold it at only to repurchase at a higher price.
    An issue with this strategy is that corrections (10% moves) are more common than bear markets (20% moves). So if you sell when the fund drops 10%, you'll likely be selling into a correction, not a bear. In those cases, the fund won't drop 20%. Let's say the fund drops 15%. When it then gains 10% and you repurchase, its price will still be higher than the price you sold it at.
    With 10% trailing stops, the only time you come out ahead (and it could be far ahead) would be in bear markets.
    Peace of mind comes at a price. I prefer the strategy that BobC and others have suggested - keeping enough in cash and short term bonds to wait out market gyrations.
  • M*: 10 Funds That Beat the Market Over 15 Years
    @VF:
    DODGX - Value of $100 on January 1, 2008
    December 31, 2008 - $56.69 (loss of 43.31%)
    December 31, 2009 - $74.41 (gain of 31.27%)
    December 31, 2010 - $84.44 (gain of 13.48%)
    December 31, 2011 - $81.00 (loss of 4.08%)
    December 31, 2012 - $98.83 (gain of 22.01%)
    December 31, 2013 - $138.34 (gain of 40.55%)
    You'd still be slightly behind 5 years after investing the initial amount. This assumes no custodial fees were paid from your invested amount over those years. Had you paid such fees out of invested money, you'd be further behind. Waiting one additional year would have paid-off. The fund jumped 40.55% in 2013.
  • M*: 10 Funds That Beat the Market Over 15 Years
    @hank. If you can tell how long it was before $56.69 became $100 again? Might be instructive.
    Perhaps then we can ask the question, if one sold DODGX when value fell to $90, and then bought it back after it crossed $100 again, ...
    I think you get my drift. Funds don't keep falling from $100 to $90, up again to $100, back down to $90, again and again and again. The risk of "not being invested" is way overblown by the financial industry because it risks their revenue stream from our assets.
    Fool me once, shame on you (2000-2002). Fool me twice (2007-2009) shame on Me. Fool me thrice (? - ?), shame on Who?
    My ANALysis told me I should be 66% invested few weeks back. I kept selling my 401k assets down, AS LONG AS the funds I was invested had their NAVs decreasing. I made it down to 80% invested, never made it down to 66%. Those funds I didn't sell actually helped my portfolio performance as should be expected. Now my ANALysis tells me to be 100% invested, I'm creeping back in AS LONG AS the funds I'm invested in have their NAVs rising.
    This is the definition of common sense. My name is VF and I approve this message.
  • Would it be too much to ask...Requesting Mutual Fund Provide Dividend Alert
    On the day that a mutual fund pays out a dividend, would it be too much to ask that a small "d" be place beside the apparent share price adjustment. For example today PTIAX (Bond Mutual Fund) had an "apparent" loss of (-.49%).
    So, instead of this being a almost .5% loss for the day it is instead a .5% dividend.
    Here's Yahoo's (totally useless) Feed:
    image
    Yahoo. chart is even more useless. At least M* charts are adjusted for dividends (performance chart vs price chart):
    Here the difference...
    Yahoo's YTD month price chart (notice the drop in price each month due to dividend pay out):
    image
    Now here is M* performance chart that includes the dividend as a component of performance (more accurate graph):
    image
    I have "bought enough donuts" in my day to know that today 11 cent loss on Yahoo's site is most likely a monthly distribution of dividend and the "apparent" loss in share price will soon be made up in additional shares or as an extra dividend in my account.
    Why doesn't YahooFinance adapt performance charts or simply add an asterisk "*" or a letter "d" to the data so hypochondriacs like myself can redirect our misplaced anxiety to buying donuts?
  • questions ahead of Morningstar
    Hi @David,
    Recently, @Catch22 made a post that something is just quite not right in the Mroningstar Xray tool. I have provided a link to his post along with the comments of others including myself.
    http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/32653/double-check-me-on-this-statistic-will-yooz-thanks#latest
    Perhaps, if the opportunity presents itself you can note this concern to the Morningstar folks.
    Thanks.
    Old_Skeet
    Trailing note: Correcting post as noted by Catch 22's below comment. My bad @Crash.
  • M*: 10 Funds That Beat the Market Over 15 Years
    Nice list. Great funds for long-term patient investors. But not for the squeamish for whom even a 10% pullback arouses fear or loathing.
    Before you send money, be aware that $100 invested in DODGX at the beginning of 2008 was worth $56.69 at year's end. During that period it seemed everybody and his brother were bailing from D&C's funds and writing them off as permanent failures. Even if you bailed mid-way through the year, you'd likely have experienced a 20-25% near-term loss.
    Not to knock D&C. I like them. Currently, at the high market valuations most of my $$ there resides in their two income funds. If stocks decide to go on sale again in my lifetime, some of that money will be shifted back into their fine equity funds. Agree with OJ's take on team management. Not sure if D&C employs that approach to the same extent American does - but it's one reason I like their funds.
  • M*: 10 Funds That Beat the Market Over 15 Years
    Morningstar introduced medal (and neutral and negative) ratings in 2011. So asking what medal, if any, a fund had 15 years ago is meaningless. The predecessor to medals was analyst pick or pan.
    I haven't found an analyst pick list going back quite that far, but here's one from a decade ago (2007). The site appears to have more recent ones as well.
    http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/morningstar/advisor_2007fall/index.php?startid=82
    Here's the search that will get you these books. Just change the year (2007) in the URL to the year (between 2007 and 2012) that you're interested in. Then look at the contents of the "book" for Mutual Fund Analyst Picks to get you to the right page.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=Morningstar+analyst+picks+2007+site:nxtbook.com