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.
  • Wintergreen Fund, Inc. to liquidate
    Certainly that describes the fund's portfolio now. Looking at its performance graph (e.g. in the latest [Dec 2018] annual report), one can see it diverge sharply from the S&P 500 starting around 2012-2013. It also significantly underperformed its category starting around 2012, with the exception of 2016.
    The fund has been investing in Consolidated Tomoka since 2006. Going along with your comment about Berkowitz, Wintergreen held a significant portion of Consolidated Tomoka (over 5%) since day one. But it didn't represent an excessively large portion of the fund until the last 2-3 years. So while this stock holding does help explain more recent problems (thanks!), there's more to the story than one stock and a manager's obsession with it.
    At the end of 2013 CTO represented about 2.6% of Wintergreen. The fund's top holdings were Jardines (7%), Swatch (7%), and Berkshire Hathaway, with a good amount of tobacco thrown in (BAT and Reynolds, over 10% combined).
    At the end of 2014, tobacco moved up, with Reynolds in top spot (7.3%) but also BAT (6.8%) and Altria (4.7%). Consolidated Tomoka appears in the top ten at 4.7%, primarily through appreciation (50%+) but also because of some AUM shrinkage (15%). The fund continued to hold the same number of shares as it had since 2012; they represented 21% of CTO. (The 2014 annual report has a discussion of this holding.)
    By the end of 2015, Consolidated Tomoka had grown enough to have become the fund's second largest holding (9.3%). Again, with no additional stock purchases, and with tobacco still the dominant holding - Reynolds (12.4%), BAT (8.5%), Altria (6.3%). CTO's performance (down around 6%) was in line with the fund's 2015 performance (down7%). The rise to 2nd largest holding was thus due to the fact that people were pulling money out of the fund and Winters didn't sell off CTO pro-rata. AUM dropped over 50%.
    So arguably it wasn't until 2016 that CTO began to dominate the fund. But Winters also continued favoring tobacco during this period. By the end of 2016, CTO constituted 13.9% of the fund, while tobacco kept pace, with Reynolds now at 19.5%, BAT at 9.4%, and Altria at 7%. Tobacco stocks now accounted for three of the four largest holdings. CTO was essentially flat on the year, while the fund itself performed well relative to its peers, gaining 6.67%.
    Once again, the increased fraction of the fund that CTO represented was a result of people pulling money out of the fund (AUM down nearly 1/3) and Winters hanging on to CTO, and onto the tobacco stocks. Note also that real estate didn't grow much as a fraction of the fund in 2016 (just to 13.9% up from 13.5%), because Winters gave up on his other real estate holding, Sun Hung Kai.
    By the end of 2017, CTO was the fund's largest holding, at 20.4%. BAT (now owning Reynolds) was 16.1%, and Altria 5.7%. That was a result of CTO appreciating 20% and AUM shrinking 20%. Again, no change in the number of shares owned by the fund.
    Finally, by the end of 2018, CTO represents 42.6% of the company (despite underperforming in 2018), BAT is still the second largest holding, but that's just 5.9% of the fund. Tobacco and every other stock have become nearly immaterial.
  • AQR’s Asness: No Simple Explanation For Quant Failure In 2018
    FYI: Quantitative investment strategies suffered poor performance last year, but there isn’t one intuitive way to pinpoint exactly why it happened, said Cliff Asness, managing principal and chief investment officer at AQR Capital Management.
    It’s easier to explain why one individual component of a multifactor strategy underperformed, such as why the value factor lagged, he said. But explaining total performance in down years is difficult, especially over the short to medium term.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://www.fa-mag.com/news/aqr-s-asness--no-simple-explanation-for-quant-failure-in-2018-44771.html?print
  • Wintergreen Fund, Inc. to liquidate
    “In contrast, Wintergreen's shows this narrow slice solidly across the growth column. He's been investing in growth stocks since at least 2014”
    Thanks @msf - Sounds like you nailed it. And I hate it when managers deviate from their (stated / normal / assumed ) approach in pursuit of better gains. I guess I’m confused as to whether Winters conveyed his emphasis on growth to his investors?
    Hope Winters can find work somewhere else. (I still think he sounds like a nice guy.)
  • Wintergreen Fund, Inc. to liquidate

    To me this has as much to do with the fickleness of investment trends as anything else. We have very short memories and tend to think things will always remain as they are. It’s possible Winters had it right, but was out of step with the current indexing / momentum driven investment climate. Who knows? I don’t pretend to. But don't dismiss Winters as an investing lightweight. The picture is a bit more complex than it might appear on surface.
    OTOH, the Mutual Series funds have continued to do moderately well with their old familiar deep value/vulture style. So perhaps it just required a bit of evolution over time, and Winters went off track.
    MUTHX, M* writes: "Cheap stocks and merger-arbitrage plays typically constitute 80% to 90% of assets, while the remainder is in distressed debt and cash."
    MQIFX, M* writes: "Its strategy is similar to that of other Franklin Mutual Series offerings, but it holds far more debt than its siblings. Cheap stocks and merger-arbitrage plays typically comprise 55%-75% of the fund's assets, while the remainder of the portfolio is invested in distressed debt and cash."
    These sound very much like Michael Price's Mutual Series funds. Their style box shows what you'd expect, offset well into the value column. In contrast, Wintergreen's shows this narrow slice solidly across the growth column. He's been investing in growth stocks since at least 2014 (that's as far back as M* shows style boxes on a fund's portfolio page).
  • Sell In May?
    Hi Guys,
    Myths are resilient. They seem to be believed even when accumulating evidence doesn’t justify them. Such is the case with the sell in May flawed wisdom. Simply put, it is wrong. When investing, the historical database supports a buy and hold strategy. Here is a Link that documents that conclusion:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickferri/2013/04/08/busting-the-sell-in-may-and-go-away-myth/#58a398878808
    From that article: “ The clear winner in this three horse race was a buy and hold investment strategy”. Indeed, myths are resilient, but the data shows the hard truth. So, stay the course!
    Best Regards
  • Fidelity Launches Fidelity Women’s Leadership Fund: (FWOMX)
    FYI: Fidelity Investments®, one of the industry’s most diversified financial services organizations with more than $7.4 trillion in client assets1, today announced the launch of Fidelity Women’s Leadership Fund (FWOMX). The actively managed mutual fund is available with both retail and advisor share classes, with no investment minimums.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190508005124/en/Fidelity-Investments®-Launches-Fidelity-Women’s-Leadership-Fund
  • Opinion: How to trade stocks as Trump threatens China with new tariffs
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-to-trade-stocks-as-trump-threatens-china-with-new-tariffs-2019-05-06
    Opinion: How to trade stocks as Trump threatens China with new tariffs
    By Nigam Arora
    Published: May 7, 2019 10:04 a.m. ET
    Share
    The S&P 500 Index has five new support zones
    Reuters
    President Donald Trump
    A question for investors today is how they want to react to President Trump threatening to put more tariffs on Chinese goods.
    Let’s explore the issue with the help of a chart.
    Chart
    Please click here for an annotated chart of ETF S&P 500 ETF SPY, -0.35% which represents the S&P 500 Index SPX, -1.65% Please note the following:
    • The Chinese are notorious for dragging out negotiations to get the best deal. Irrespective of your political leanings, Trump’s latest move seems to be in the long-term best interest of the U.S. and the stock market.
    • The short term for the stock market is a different story.
    • The chart shows five support zones. These support zones are based on a number of factors that have proven to be accurate in the past including how algorithms tend to trade as well as money flows.
    • The chart shows the target zone for a potentially explosive rally on a short squeeze. If it turns out that there is a good trade deal soon, those who are short-selling now will be forced to cover at much higher prices.
    • Expect stocks that are dependent on China to be affected more. These include Apple AAPL, -0.33% Starbucks SBUX, -0.13% Nike NKE, -1.23% and Yum China YUMC, -0.62% Expect less impact on Google GOOG, -1.29% GOOGL, -1.22% Amazon AMZN, -0.39% and Facebook FB, -0.25% Microsoft MSFT, -0.35% and semiconductor stocks such as Intel INTC, -0.04% AMD AMD, -0.98% and Micron Technology MU, -1.07% may be adversely affected.
    • Expect Chinese stocks such as Alibaba BABA, -0.57% and JD.com JD, -1.00% to be adversely affected.
  • What We’ve Learned About Target-Date Funds, 10 Years Later
    Both series of T. Rowe Price funds, "Target Date" and "Retirement", have glide paths. If you want static allocation ("target risk") funds, those would be Price's "Personal Strategy" funds.
    Here are the glide paths for the Target Date funds and the Retirement funds. The former are more conservative.
    Target Date glide path:
    image
    Retirement glide path:
    image
    The Personal Strategy funds are:
    Income (PRSIX) - 40% equity (55% bond/cash, 5% alternative)
    Balanced (TRPBX) - 60% equity (35% bond/cash, 5% alternative)
    Growth (TRSGX) - 80% equity (16% bond/cash, 4% alternative)
    This series is not to be confused with older allocation funds like TRP Balanced (RPBAX), with its somewhat more mundane allocation of 65% stock, 35% bond.
  • The Benefits of 'Market-Sensitive' Portfolio
    https://www.nasdaq.com/article/the-benefits-of-marketsensitive-portfolios-cm1143292
    The Benefits of 'Market-Sensitive' Portfolios
    Leland Hevner, May 06, 2019, 02:59:51 PM EDT
    By Leland B. Hevner
    President, National Association of Online Investors (NAOI)
    In this article I discuss how a new investment type developed by the NAOI called Dynamic Investments makes portfolios “market-sensitive”. I then discuss the benefits of this development.
  • Here's John, Hussman That Is
    FYI: While stocks staged a remarkable comeback from Monday’s deep decline, they still closed in the red. A day later, and the sellers are back at it.
    Long-suffering market bears, like John Hussman, have to be savoring this kind of action. After all, when things turn south, Hussman’s fortunes turn north.
    In fact, riding the cred he earned from calling prior market collapses, his assets under management swelled to almost $7 billion. Now, however, after years of underperformance, that figure stands at a fraction of what it once was.
    Hussman’s flagship $312-million Strategic Growth Fund HSGFX, +0.17% , which focuses on “the protection of capital during unfavorable market conditions,” has had a rough go of it during this relentless bull market, shedding almost 9% a year, on average, since 2014, according to Morningstar.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ho-hum-a-65-market-plunge-would-be-run-of-the-mill-fund-manager-says-2019-05-07/print
  • Robo or your half
    @Derf, no mutual funds, all ETFs. They use mostly their own. Out of 20 ETFs in the portfolio, 14 of them are Schwab. There are a couple others, Vanguard, ishares , Vaneck.
    I don't plan to make any changes right now. I've held it for about 3 years now. I plan to reconsider the robo when interest rates start to climb and the Fed starts to raise rates again. That would be because of the large, low interest cash position they hold. Who wants to hold 12% of their portfolio in cash making < 1/2 % when CDs will be climbing to 3, 4, 5% ?
    Anyway, I think it's a decent option to consider for the hands off approach, especially for those who just can't help tinkering with their portfolios. But, there are other options too.
    Oh, forgot to mention, a benefit to the Schwab Intelligent Portfolio is a very low cost personal advisory service. I haven't done that yet, but I might.
  • ORNAX - load at Fidelity but waived at Merrill Edge
    The Rochester family of bond funds are extremely high octane. When things work out, the funds can be fantastic; when they don't, the funds will go down in flames. Even by HY standards, they're quite aggressive.
    If you want to know who was deep into Puerto Rican bonds, look no further. They're all managed "the Rochester way".
    In 2006, this fund, then known as Oppenheimer Rochester National Municipals was flying high as the top selling muni fund. By 2009 it had crashed and burned. In 2014 it settled a suit alleging that the fund had misrepresented its risks. It wasn't until last October that settlement payments were made:
    http://securities.stanford.edu/filings-case.html?id=104270
    Apparently this action (or perhaps others) were enough to convince Oppenheimer to change the fund's risk disclosures on July 29, 2013 and to change the name of the fund itself from National Muni to High Yield Muni on Nov 27, 2013 (per prospectus of the same date).
    While much of this is somewhat old history, I don't know how much has changed. Certainly Oppenheimer made many changes on June 29th of last year, dropping "Rochester" from the name of several muni funds. More importantly, it dropped five of the six managers from ORNAX.
    Of course since then, Mass Mutual has sold Oppenheimer Funds to Invesco. Maybe these earlier moves were just preparation, or maybe they're more. Certainly the ORNAX manager overhaul goes beyond window dressing.
    All that said, one can't deny its high (albeit erratic) performance. I hope it works for you.
  • Robo or your half
    @MikeM: Thank you for filling in the blanks for me concerning robo & personal account.
    Your second thought on using TRP retirement fund, or in my case VG, may be the way to go. Three pot it ,Retirement 1/3- 2025 1/3 & 2030 the final 1/3
    If I'm reading you right , you'd have 1/2 in TRP & run the other 1/2 yourself ?
    Does Schwab use their funds in robo account ?
    Good investing to all, Derf
  • How Schwab Ate Wall Street
    "the Charles Schwab Corp. SCHW -1.60% chief executive"
    @Ted: Nice work! You cant even be bothered to properly edit a sentence that you are plagiarizing without proper reference as to the source. How very professional.
  • Robo or your half
    Hi @Derf. I think you mentioned before you might invest in robo. Here's a few numbers from my experience that might help you. Just to qualify, the robo is about 62% diversified equity, about 22% bonds, 12% cash and 4% in gold.. My self managed moves around a little because I play with stocks. I would say on average it has been maybe 40% equity and the rest in fixed income and cash, mostly cash in form of CDs. Oh, have a little gold there also. So where I'm going with that info is the portfolios are certainly not apples to apples. But here's some #s:
    4th Q of 2018, robo -5.5%, self -6.7%
    YTD 2019, robo +8.5%, self +7.2% (as of 5/1)
    Long term not sure what I will do. You (or I) may be better off, instead of a robo, just using a TRP retirement fund. I believe the 60:40 TRP fund has better results YTD than my robo. Slightly bigger drop in the 4th Q. The cash portion of the robo absolutely weighs on return when markets are moving up. But that's how Shwab makes it's money on the "free" robo.
    Good luck to you.
  • MFO Ratings Updated Through April 2019
    Latest MFO Fund Family Scorecard gives AQR a "Lower" grade. Of AQR's 39 funds, 26 trail their peers since launch through April 2019 based on absolute return.
    image
    Fortunately, most of AQR's AUM is in just five funds: Managed Futures Strategy (AQMIX), Style Premia Alternative (QSPIX), Large Cap Defensive Style (AUEIX), Long-Short Equity (QLEIX) and Large Cap Multi-Style (QCELX), which have all bested their peers since launch.
    image
    But it's been a tough past year for two of these: Style Premia Alternative (QSPIX) and Long-Short Equity (QLEIX), each down 13-14%, particularly since alternatives tend to target investors with more moderate risk tolerance.
    image