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.
  • The Closing Bell: Tech, Energy Stocks Lift Wall Street
    10 views, several of which were yours, in three hours, with no comments at all. So you needed to cheat to kick it into "Comments+" to hopefully give yourself a little more attention. Sad.
  • The Closing Bell: Tech, Energy Stocks Lift Wall Street
    FYI: U.S. stocks rose Tuesday, with the Dow climbing by triple digits, as the technology sector extended gains. Shares had been wobbly earlier as unresolved trade issues continued to dog the market.
    The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 114 points as Apple and Exxon Mobil outperformed. The Dow also got a boost from Nike shares. The S&P 500 gained 0.39 percent as tech shares climbed. Energy shares also boosted the S&P 500. The Nasdaq Composite advanced 0..63 percent as shares of some of the largest tech companies rose.
    Of the eleven S&P 500 Sectors seven were up ,with Consumer Staples, Healthcare, Industrials, and Utilities in red territory.
    Regards,
    Ted
    Bloomberg:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-10/asia-futures-point-to-mixed-open-pound-advances-markets-wrap?srnd=premium
    Bloomberg Evening Briefing:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-11/your-evening-briefing
    Barron's: After The Bell:
    https://www.barrons.com/articles/dow-gains-114-points-as-trade-worries-fade-1536699943
    WSJ:
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/global-stocks-pause-as-investors-parse-trade-developments-1536653626
    Reuters:
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/tech-energy-stocks-lift-wall-street-idUSKCN1LR1C7
    IBD:
    https://www.investors.com/market-trend/stock-market-today/nasdaq-up-stock-market-breadth-fang-stock/
    MarketWatch:
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stock-futures-stumble-as-investors-turn-cautious-amid-september-blues-2018-09-11/print
    CNBC:
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/11/us-markets-geopolitical-developments-and-data-on-the-agenda.html
    Europe:
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/europe-stocks-struggle-with-ftse-100-dragged-by-pound-strength-2018-09-11/print
    Asia:
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/nikkei-jumps-but-other-asian-markets-remain-sluggish-2018-09-10/print
    Bonds:
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/11/us-bonds-and-fixed-income-economic-data-in-focus.html
    Currencies:
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/11/forex-markets-euro-british-pound-brexit-in-focus.html
    Oil:
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/11/oil-markets-us-sanctions-on-iran-global-oil-supply-in-focus.html
    Gold
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/11/gold-markets-dollar-china-us-trade-fed-interest-rate-policy-in-focus-.html
    WSJ: Markets At A Glance:
    http://markets.wsj.com/us
    Major ETFs % Change:
    https://www.barchart.com/etfs-funds/etf-monitor
    SPDR's Sector Tracker:
    http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker
    SPDR's Bloomberg Sector Performance Pie Chart:
    https://www.bloomberg.com/markets/sectors
    Current Futures: Positive
    https://finviz.com/futures.ashx
  • Why The 4% Retirement Rule Is Just A Starting Point
    Hi Joe. I built a very similar spreadsheet, probably about 15-18 years ago, and have upgraded it over the years with a bunch of what-if statements, like what if I pulled from the nest egg and bought an annuity in such and such year, what if I take my pension as a lump sum or in monthly life-long payments to compare scenarios for when to retire, what if inflation is 2%, 4% or more in different decades, ect, ect... 3 different compare tables showing the value of your nest egg in 3 comparable charts. You guys are right on this. Doing it yourself and understand each calculation is a huge benefit, if not greater reassurance in it's ability to predict.
    Not bragging, but most people cannot do the same with Excel. That is why I think the Monte Carlo simulation is a great tool for most people, not as an exact answer but a ball park. That's all I was trying to say.
    Take away MJG's annoyingness, (which we agree on, hmm, spell check says annoyingness is not a word) in my opinion people could and should be using something, and if you aren't a spreadsheet builder yourself I'm not sure there is anything better than Monte Carlo to get a ball park for probability to sustain.
    Thanks for the feedback msf and old_joe.
  • RSQ International Equity Fund to liquidate
    @MFO Members: Bad Performance !
    Regards,
    Ted
    1-Day: 97 Percentile
    1-Wk. 85 "
    1-Mo. 98 "
    3-Mo. 96 "
    YTD. 99 "
    1-Yr. 98 "
    3-Yr. 100 "
  • RSQ International Equity Fund to liquidate
    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/890540/000139834418013451/fp0035807_497.htm
    497 1 fp0035807_497.htm
    THE ADVISORS’ INNER CIRCLE FUND II (the “Trust”)
    RSQ International Equity Fund (the “Fund”)
    Supplement dated September 11, 2018 to the
    Prospectus dated March 1, 2018 (the “Prospectus”) and
    the Statement of Additional Information, dated March 1, 2018 (the “SAI”)
    This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Prospectus and SAI, and should be read in conjunction with the Prospectus and SAI.
    The Board of Trustees of the Trust, at the recommendation of R Squared Capital Management L.P. (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser of the Fund, has approved a plan of liquidation providing for the liquidation of the Fund’s assets and the distribution of the net proceeds pro rata to the Fund’s shareholders. In connection therewith, the Fund is closed to new investments. The Fund is expected to cease operations and liquidate on or about October 26, 2018 (the “Liquidation Date”).
    Prior to the Liquidation Date, shareholders may redeem (sell) their shares in the manner described in the “How to Sell Your Fund Shares” section of each Prospectus. For those Fund shareholders that do not redeem (sell) their shares prior to the Liquidation Date, the Fund will distribute to each such shareholder, on or promptly after the Liquidation Date, a liquidating cash distribution equal in value to the shareholder’s interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Liquidation Date.
    In anticipation of the liquidation of the Fund, the Adviser may manage the Fund in a manner intended to facilitate its orderly liquidation, such as by holding cash or making investments in other highly liquid assets. As a result, during this time, all or a portion of the Fund may not be invested in a manner consistent with its stated investment strategies, which may prevent the Fund from achieving its investment objective.
    The liquidation distribution amounts will include any accrued income and capital gains, will be treated as a payment in exchange for shares and will generally be a taxable event for shareholders investing through taxable accounts. You should consult your personal tax advisor concerning your particular tax situation. Shareholders remaining in the Fund on the Liquidation Date will not be charged any transaction fees by the Fund. However, the net asset value of the Fund on the Liquidation Date will reflect costs of liquidating the Fund.
    PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.
    RSQ-SK-004-0100
  • Does it make sense to short us stocks
    @msf: This is back in 1992 when Fidelity Select Funds traded every hour. Since then The Food and Agriculture is now the Consumers Staples Fund, and American Gold was long ago liquidated. Today their Select Funds operate just like any other open-end fund, trading once a day.
    Regards,
    Ted
  • Why The 4% Retirement Rule Is Just A Starting Point
    @MikeM - Hi there Mike- I think that msf has pretty well covered the general response to your questions. Because Monte Carlo simulation was not widely available during our working years, I designed (took me a while, I'll tell you) a "predictive" spreadsheet which I integrated into the general financial spreadsheet which I had used for some years (and still use) to keep track of our various investments.
    The "predictive" section took account of all resources which would be available to my wife and I after retirement: pensions, SS, Medicare, and income or value increase in investments of equity vehicles, bond vehicles, and real estate. Likewise we had excellent data which had been accumulated over a number of years with respect to anticipated expenses, broadly classified as "basic" (unavoidable), discretionary, and emergency.
    Each of those variables was referenced to large tables which were set up to independently run compounded values over 35 years. Independent inputs for variables included inflation rate, rate of return on equities, bonds and cash (CDs and savings) accounts, and a "financial disaster" input which introduced a general meltdown variable selectable for any given year in the 35 year stretch.
    By varying each of those inputs in any desired combination it was possible to see the cascading effect of various disaster scenarios occurring at different selected times. For example, I generally ran cash and bond income at 2% below the inflation rate, which was also a selected variable, and equity income at 2% above. Very conservative. Being a pessimist by nature, I generally ran setups which would cover every bad thing happening that I could imagine.
    As it happened, I wasn't too far off in the predictive timing for disaster. Destruction of financial resources will be most influential the earlier that they happen in retirement, as they can set back the entire cumulative compounding effects quite seriously. Indeed, Murphy struck, in 2007/2008, just after retirement.
    Nevertheless, the tables worked out pretty well. By pulling down our discretionary expenses (another independent variable input) we survived the chaos in good shape, and were able to carry on with no huge impact to our retirement mode.
    Edit/add: I should also mention that we were deliberately in good shape with respect to loans and finance charges: 30 year mortgage @8% had been paid off ten years early, never any credit card or other interest expenses. (Once the mail was late with a credit card payment and it cost something like $4.21. My wife still mentions that occasionally.)
    MGJ dismissed this whole effort rather casually with a reference to the "limitations" of a spreadsheet for these purposes, and endless exaltations and paeans as to the superiority and invincibility of Monte Carlo. He's welcome to his opinion: just take it with a large grain of whatever. He seems to be one of those folks who believe that whatever they do is the right and only way, that anything else is highly suspect or at best barely acceptable, and thoroughly enjoy telling you so. I'm sure that you know the type.
    Regards
    OJ
  • Does it make sense to short us stocks
    Sigh. "The Fidelity Select Portfolios that are available for short selling include American Gold, Biotechnology, Precious Metals and Minerals and Food and Agriculture."
    https://www.nytimes.com/1992/05/17/business/mutual-funds-the-risky-business-of-selling-short.html
  • Why The 4% Retirement Rule Is Just A Starting Point
    @MikeM - It sounds like you're saying that you use these simplistic Monte Carlo simulation tools because "they sure as heck are better than hope and a prayer", and not because they are superior tools.
    What Bengen did, you or anyone else acquainted with spreadsheets could also do. Plus, you'd get a better understanding of what that model represents and what the numbers mean.
    What inputs did you use to run your simulations (mean returns, inflation, etc.)? Why did you pick those figures? How much confidence do you have in them? What cutoff did you use for an acceptable success score?
    Did your choice of cutoff incorporate the fact that in the real world (unlike in the simplistic Monte Carlo models), returns have fat tails? That suggests taking with a grain of salt MJG's statement that "most [outcomes] haven't any chance or low odds of them ever happening."
    Are these tools you're lauding simple to use? Sure. You can let them default instead of grappling with the questions I asked above. Are they easy to use well and interpret accurately? I'm not so sure. They're great for learning through trial and error. Not so hot for predicting.
    Blanchett and Pfau (whom I cited with approval) agree with you that these simulations are better than nothing: "if the calculated success rate is low, say 15-25%, we know that a client plan generating these numbers is in danger and that the advisor and client should immediately consider plan revisions. Likewise, if the calculated probability of success is high, say 80% or greater, we know that the plan is on the right track and that the client can proceed as indicated."
    MJG says these are superior tools. I say, and apparently you say, that they're okay for hitting the side of a barn. Still they seem no better, and for some reasons possibly worse, than using that spreadsheet I mentioned above.
    If you want other ideas, just read the comments section of the AAII article. You don't even need to read the article itself (though it's well worth the time); Bengen offered additional thoughts in the comments section, including thoughts about other tools.
  • Is it time to jump back into emerging markets
    Some of the other I noted previous. Full faith and credit, the ability and/or presumed ability to pay down or pay off a loan/debt, eh? Not unlike the ability of an individual to pay down their debt to retain a "credit rating" of value.
  • Does it make sense to short us stocks
    https://www.investopedia.com/news/does-it-make-sense-short-us-stocks/?utm_source=chart-advisor&utm_campaign=bouncex&utm_term=14414525&utm_content=09/10/2018&utm_medium=email
    For us, the big question going into the weekend was whether or not the most recent leg higher in U.S. stocks is the beginning of something bigger, a breakout of epic proportions, or just a major whipsaw that will lead to further selling into September and October, two of the most historically volatile months of the year.
  • More changes at Artisan
    Here's the official announcement from Artisan: https://www.artisanpartners.com/individual-investors/news-insights/news/press-releases/2018/changes-to-the-global-value-team.html
    I have been thinking about reducing my holding in ARTKX, but will start doing so now. Their fee is high despite increasing assets. No complaints about their past performance, but with the IPO and now this management change, it no longer seems like the same fund going forward.
  • Is it time to jump back into emerging markets
    LOL - You had me believing Sir. :)
    Naw - No good ideas where to invest your gains from weed at this time. I was going to suggest (only in jest) maybe “roll” it into a few bottles of JW Black. Sells for $40 here in Michigan. $200 would net ya 5 of them.
    I think it’s a good blend. Haven’t found any single malts in that price range I like all that much. Dewars has a blend out they call “12-Year” that’s also very good. It’s $40 now, but picked up a couple for $30 when they cut the price briefly over the summer. Interestingly, their White Label is also a 12-year - but not as good (or expensive).
    Great deal on that single malt. Yep - You shoulda “backed up the truck” to their door on that one. :). Out here, if you watch the prices closely, they’ll sometimes drop them for a few weeks and than jack them back up again. Chivas does that once in a while too - not a bad flavor.
  • Is it time to jump back into emerging markets
    "So a 3-4% hit to one asset means little to me."
    @hank: Exactamundo. Now the good news! Ahead $178 on MJ! In less than two weeks! Why didn't somebody tell me about this before?? More fun than the slots and you don't even have to pull the handle! :) :)
    Dunno ?? (I’m a non-user.) But I would like to know what kind of whisky Elon was drinking along with the pot. Hopefully, a decent ($40+) Scotch. That I can appreciate.
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/07/elon-musk-smokes-weed-on-joe-rogan-podcast.html
    -
    P.S. @Old Joe - More fun than Monte Carlo ... ?
  • Is it time to jump back into emerging markets
    Chart compares for 10yr yield, $US, IEF, EEM and EMB for the past 2 years.
    I thought I had retained a write about the market flip at the end of January........can't find.
    However, I continue to be inclined that the late January global equity markets actions have more to do with "other", and not so much a stronger dollar and higher gov't. bonds issues here. Other being continuing twitches about trade and tariffs; as well as a little here and a little there......Turkey, Argentina, etc.
    A risk off for some areas continues for the markets since Jan. 26 or so. The downside took place then and remains in place for numerous sectors, having not attained and/or recovered to a previous higher price level.
    Pillow time.................
    Catch
  • Is it time to jump back into emerging markets
    "So a 3-4% hit to one asset means little to me."
    @hank: Exactamundo. Now the good news! Ahead $178 on MJ! In less than two weeks! Why didn't somebody tell me about this before?? More fun than the slots and you don't even have to pull the handle! :) :)
  • Why The 4% Retirement Rule Is Just A Starting Point
    You're missing a number of points and writing what it seems you want to be true: that the 4% figure "is based on multiple studies that included using Monte Carlo analyses". It wasn't.
    If what you meant to say is that subsequent Monte Carlo simulations validated this figure, then there's a different problem with the narrative. Because that would also validate the use of historical data - something you say has an intrinsic shortcoming.
    Of course the odds are virtually nil that the next thirty years will match a previous thirty year period. Just as the odds are virtually nil that the next thirty years will match a performance pulled out of a hat (aka a Monte Carlo iteration). This is a red herring.
    In the typical Monte Carlo simulation, patterns are abstracted away. You seem to regard this as a virtue, writing disapprovingly that historical returns are used "sometimes in the precise order in which these returns were registered." (Orderings weren't preserved merely "sometimes" but always when Bengen came up with his 4% figure. See his original paper.)
    Again I suggest reading the AAII piece. You'll find a concrete example of how ignoring some patterns can affect results. Bengen notes there that if one rebalances much less frequently than yearly, " you can actually add about a quarter of a percentage point to your withdrawal rate" He attributes this to persistence of performance. That's a kind of pattern that simplistic Monte Carlo simulations abstract away.
    "Monte Carlo simulations continue to grow in popularity." When all else fails, cite popularity for validation. I'm sure VHS's popularity meant that it was the superior technology, that the more popular Windows is better than Mac, etc.
    There really was some interesting stuff that you didn't discuss. Like how "there is an inverse relationship between the long-term valuation of the stock market and how much retirees can withdraw without running out of money."
    How does that historical data fit into your Monte Carlo simulations? How do you map CAPE into means and standard deviations for large cap stocks, small cap stocks, and bonds? Those are the inputs for the simulators you're linking to.
    image
    I think Monte Carlo engines are fine tools. Just so long as they're not simplistic, matched to the right task, and employed by knowledgeable users. Used as you suggest, they have lots of issues.
    There are no constraints to Monte Carlo simulation, only constraints users create in a model (or constraints that users are forced to deal with when using someone else’s model). Non-normal asset-class returns and autocorrelations can be incorporated into Monte Carlo simulations, albeit with proper care.
    David Blanchett and Wade Pfau,The Power and Limitations of Monte Carlo Simulations, 2014.
    https://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2014/08/26/the-power-and-limitations-of-monte-carlo-simulations