Who do you like for true "value-oriented", bottom-up balanced funds? If you are in FPACX (could not tell if FPA was an abbrev, the way this site mishandles, rightly, abbreviations), then go all in and leave it alone. You are obsessing. Romick is good. Others are good too, and I neglected OAKBX. But I left it, my own ocd, and went with the ones I listed. If you really believe in active mgmnt, then just do it.
>> My casual research indicates that a decent "bottom-up" value manager can do better than an indexed 60/40, 50/50 allocation over time.
Sure, if you can spot one, as with everything here.
John Hussman: The Future Is Now Agree Mark. Extreme myopia is probably an affliction of most of us. As Dickens says (editing liberally here): "... it was clearer than crystal ... that things in general were settled for ever."
Here's what the facts show (if I'm reading them correctly): Over the last decade HSGFX suffered an annualized loss of -1.2%. HSTRX achieved an annualized gain of +4.43%. A 50-50 blend of the two would have earned around +1.62% annualized over that ten-year period (assuming no rebalancing).
Each can make what he wants out of those numbers.
GMO's Jeremy Grantham Remains Bullish On Stocks rjb112--
That's the sell side spin of course. They are hoping you read the headline and not the actual quarterly letter. Typical.
His estimate on overvaluation of the SP500 is 65%. Mine says it is closer to 100% overvalued. That being said I am not 100% in cash here. I like some EM stocks, some European stocks and a few high yield bonds, but nothing comprising the HY index.
If it goes up another 20-30% from here that's all well and good. If it halves from here I am good with that also.
Still ten years left to play the game. Another market cycle at least. There will be opportunities all along the way.
GMO's Jeremy Grantham Remains Bullish On Stocks Thanks Ted.
This is a remarkable article. Deserves attention, thoughtful analysis and discussion on MFO.
Barron's is nuts with respect to the title and subtitle they gave:
"GMO'S Jeremy Grantham Remains Bullish on Stocks"
"The famed investor says the S&P 500 can gain another 20% in coming years despite stretched valuations."
How about this instead:
GMO's Jeremy Grantham Remains Bearish on Stocks' Longer-Term Outlook
GMO's Jeremy Grantham Remains Bullish On Stocks
Legg Mason Shares Fall Most In Three Months As Revenue Misses Forecast
Who do you like for true "value-oriented", bottom-up balanced funds? David -- thanks; will have a look (am already in FPA).
The issue I think I would have in going with the ETFs you note (as I understand them) is that they do not reflect any value considerations with respect to the proportion of the portfolio allocated to bonds/stocks. My casual research indicates that a decent "bottom-up" value manager can do better than an indexed 60/40, 50/50 allocation over time.
Cheers.
Don't Go Away, Just Diversify In May
Who do you like for true "value-oriented", bottom-up balanced funds? GLRBX, FPACX, MAPOX, JABAX, ICMBX. Then PRWCX. Some like BUFBX, others DODBX. I prefer the first five above all and have for many years.
Note thatif you own too many, though, you might as well go with AOR, or AOM, or 50-50 AOA and AOK and rebalance by selling whichever is higher each quarter, another good strategy.
L/S Opportunity LSOFX @Scott " I'm not sure why L/S funds keep being compared to the S&P", because all of the stocks in the portfolio are members of the S&P
500.
Regards,
Ted
T. Rowe Price Adviser Taking Her Own Advice Thanks for the article Ted,
I would go step further and I would try to work in a Roth conversion strategy (before 70.5) using taxable savings and or spousal benefits to pay taxes on the yearly conversions.
With both husband and wife taking full SS benefits at age 70 and then also having to deal with RMD (Required Minimum Distributions) starting at 70.5 I believe more "file, suspend, and take then take spousal benefit" couples should take a hard look at tax strategies starting with Roth conversions.
I have often wondered if the 4% rule of taking distributions has been superseded by RMD. If you are being required to take distributions (so that taxes can be paid starting at age 70.5) why not pay your taxes earlier by implementing Roth conversion strategies?
