What Equity Sectors Are You Considering Overweighting in 2016? I have been reviewing my portfolio's sector weightings as 2015 is coming to a close. Each year I like to pick three sectors that I think might do well in the coming year and that I should strive to overweight within my portfolio by selecting some mutual funds that are overweight these selected sectors. To do this I study what I own and what adjustments might be necessary to achmploish this by using Moringstar's Instant Xray analysis. For the coming year I have chosen to overweight financials, technology and energy.
For me, I have the sectors in the S&P 500 Index divided into seven major and four minor sectors. The minor sectors would be materials, real estate, communication services and utilities. The major sectors would be consumer cyclical, financial, energy, industrials, technology, consumer defensive, and healthcare. I strive to maintain a weighting in the minor sectors of at least five percent each and the major sectors of nine percent each. This leaves about seventeen percent that can be moved around from these base weightings to overweight sectors of my choice and to also allow for some movement from these base weightings.
In addition, form a style cap orientation perspective, I favor about a sixty five percent weighting to large caps, 25% to mid caps and 10% to small caps; and, from a world region perspective, I favor about 60% to the Americas, 25% Greater Europe and 15% to Greater Asia.
With this, I am wondering what others might be thinking of doing within their own portfolio(s) for 2016?
The Breakfast Briefing: What To Expect From Earnings In 2016
Grandeur Peak reduces expenses on two funds I don't think this is actually a reduction. GPEOX currently has an expense ratio of 1.82% (as of August 31, according to Grandeur Peak's website), so setting the cap at 1.95% means there is no change in the expense ratio. Similarly, GPROX's current expense ratio is 1.34%, which is also below the cap of 1.60%.
Are they expecting expenses to go up significantly in the near future, such that they'll hit the cap?
Morningstar $69 One year special Related to X-ray is portfolio tracking. See thread: "
Buy and Sell transactions History".
If all you want is a static watchlist (which is good enough for me, since I don't trade much), then perhaps the limited M* services that T. Rowe Price provides for free suffice. If you want the ability to add transactions, M* provides a porfolio manager (as
contrasted with its watchlist).
It doesn't seem to be easy to find a free service providing IRR (as
opposed to time weighted returns). Perhaps
Icarra? AAII (Oct 201
5)
wrote that M*'s portfolio tracker "is our Editor’s Choice in the portfolio tracking and optimization category."
In 2012, AAII also lauded M*'s services, and in comparing them with two other trackers, Wikinvest (now SigFig) and SmartMoney (Wiki made the top 4 cut in 201
5), noted that M* was the only one of the top 3 (for 2012) to calculate IRR. But for much of the rest, it looks like Wiki/SigFig might work.
vanguard fund distributions That's the page for tax filing information (i.e. not estimates). The Vanguard estimate link for its capital gains dividends was posted in the 201
5 cap gains distributions estimates announcement thread.
It is:
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/insights/article/preliminary-capital-gains-112015You're right that there's been no update, though on that page Vanguard promises to provide final estimates (including income dividend estimates) in early December. The month is still young.
vanguard fund distributions
2015 Capital gains distribution estimates
Morningstar $69 One year special Without premium membership, are you getting
details about duration, or just a magic number?
Here's a good writeup from Vanguard:
Distinguishing Duration from Convexity"[W]e offer this brief paper as a fundamental, rather than a comprehensive, overview of the topic ... Duration ... captures only one aspect of the relationship between bond prices and interest... some bonds, such as callable bonds and mortgage-backed securities, have negative convexity at lower interest rate levels. ...
"During the period from October31, 2007, through March 31, 2010, the duration of the GNMA portfolio— ... was significantly more volatile than that of the Treasury portfolio even though the initial durations were approximately the same. This difference in duration is due in part to the negative convexity of GNMA bonds rate changes."
The M* analyst writeups won't give you all this detail either. But they often highlight significant factors in bond fund portfolios so that you know more of what to expect of the fund's reaction to market changes. The Vanguard piece also helps explain why I'm interested in knowing things like use of interest only bonds and why I repeatedly assert that investing in mortgage bonds in particular is not as simple as looking at duration and yield.
Vanguard Whistleblower Could Get Billions In Tax Dodge Complaint Nice summary.
I've given some thought to the reporter's comment following the piece that in theory an investor could come out ahead tax-wise if Vanguard had to pay taxes. (We're coming up on tax season, what else is one going to think about ... Christmas?) It's unlikely that an investor could benefit, but that is not impossible.
If the Vanguard Group (management company) is required to make a profit, suppose a fund now has to pay the Vanguard Group an extra $100 for profit. The fund will pay expense this out of nonqualified income (if any) that would otherwise have been distributed to investors. (That's the way all fund expenses are handled by all fund companies.)
Say that the Vanguard Group's blended tax rate (for all the profits it now makes) comes out to 20%. (Marginal corporate tax rate is 35%, but few companies actually pay that.)
Say that the investor pays 40% on ordinary income, and 20% on cap gains.
The investor would have paid 40% on that $100 in nonqualified dividends, leaving $60. Instead, the $100 now gets paid to the Vanguard Group. The Vanguard Group pays $20 in taxes and distributes $80 as a qualified dividend to the fund. The fund then distributes the $80 in qualified income to the investor, who pays 20%, and is left with $64. A win!
I had to make a lot of questionable assumptions, especially about tax rates, and I could still barely thread the needle to make the investor come out ahead. But it is theoretically possible.
MLP post
MLP post And ETE down over 57% from its earlier high this year and EPD down 40% on top of the aforementioned KMI 62%. Not affecting my junk munis whatsoever though. I had said that just maybe the so called experts will be proven prescient in their call for a bloodbath in the junk corporate market. I get leery when too many are making the same call though. But the action in corporate junk compared to equities and junk munis, the latter hitting historical highs on a total return basis just this past Wednesday, is downright nasty. The default rate among smaller gas and oil producers just keeps piling up. As mentioned previously, for now would not touch the junk corps with a ten foot pole. Januaries are by far junk's best month historically so anxious to see what that month brings this time around.
