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.
  • Tariffs on Screws Are Already Hitting Manufacturers
    So now we get into too much money chasing too few goods available from domestic supply; and that's inflationary.
    Or they can suck it up and pay the higher price for foreign screws; and that is inflationary.
    There's more to the story than screws: Dinky linky.
    The Institute for Supply Management's manufacturing PMI registered a reading of 49.0 in March, down from February's 50.3 reading and below the 49.5 economists polled by Bloomberg had expected. Readings above 50 for this index indicate an expansion in activity, while readings below 50 indicate a contraction.
    The prices paid index surged to 69.4, up from 62.4 the month prior and the highest reading since June 2022, reflecting companies' continued increase in costs. Economists had expected a reading of 64.6.
    Scary graph at the link.
    Higher prices, less demand, fewer jobs. But wait! There's the gig economy. So unemployment won't look quite so bad. The new and improved stagflation lite.
    Don't worry Ma, it's only politics as usual.
  • Private-Equity Wants a Piece of Your 401(k)
    Vanguard already partners with HarbourVest to offer private equity investing for its clients.
    Clients must have $5 million in Vanguard assets, in addition to meeting qualified purchaser
    and accredited investor regulatory standards¹.
    I assume Vanguard seeks a PE strategy accessible to a larger segment of the investor population.
    https://investor.vanguard.com/wealth-management/private-equity
    ¹ Clients must meet the qualified purchaser and accredited investor standards under federal law,
    typically showing that their net worth is over $1 million or their annual income has been more than
    $200,000 in the last two years.
  • Tariffs on Screws Are Already Hitting Manufacturers
    Following are edited excerpts from a recent report in The Wall Street Journal:
    Levies on steel and aluminum are reaching deeper in supply chains and spawning a hunt for domestic producers
    Rising costs for screws are rippling through manufacturing supply chains. President Trump’s tariffs implemented this month on steel and aluminum imports have scrambled the supply chains of companies that make everything from car parts to appliances and football helmets to lawn mowers. The latest tariffs cover a wider range of imports, including the screws, nails and bolts that serve as the connective tissue in manufacturing.
    That has set off a hunt to find domestic supplies of some of manufacturing’s smallest components. Manufacturing executives said the U.S. doesn’t have the plants to churn out the amount of steel wire or screws and other fasteners needed to displace imports. The production capacity we need doesn’t exist here in the U.S.,” said Gene Simpson, president of fastener maker Semblex. “It’s a select group of suppliers.”
    About $178 billion of steel and aluminum products imported by the U.S. last year are now subject to a 25% tariff, according to Jason Miller, a supply-chain management professor at Michigan State University: “It’s a shockingly large number of parts”. American companies also can no longer petition the Commerce Department for tariff exemptions on specific products that aren’t sufficiently available in the U.S. The enlarged tariff pushes up the cost of a 10-cent screw from China to 17 cents for an importer.
    At AlphaUSA, about half the of the materials that the Michigan-based auto-parts manufacturer purchases are fasteners. Many of them are made outside the U.S., particularly in Canada, which is now subject to the 25% duty after being exempted for years. President Chuck Dardas saidt he company’s customers are very religious about their quality standards, and often request specialized parts for assembly lines. Dardas added that many U.S. companies that make fasteners purchase the steel for them from Canada as well.
    Price-sensitive customers
    The situation for the auto industry became more complicated Wednesday, when Trump announced an additional 25% levy on imports of car and auto parts. The effects of the tariffs are expected to be felt quickly, as many suppliers have said they are unable to absorb added costs from new levies. And companies that use screws and other metal parts covered by tariffs say their customers won’t tolerate price increases. Some construction contractors may delay projects until they get a handle on how to blunt the effects of import duties.
    Simpson’s firm Semblex produces fasteners for automobiles, industrial lighting, farm equipment and heavy-duty commercial trucks. To make those fasteners, the company uses specialty steel wire. It imports more than half of the wire it uses, mostly from Canada. As tariffs make imports more expensive, American steel wire producers are raising their prices at the same time. Simpson said cost increases for steel are difficult to quickly pass along to customers, especially in the automotive industry where prices are often locked in monthslong contracts.
  • JAAA price action
    IMHO it's not so much a question of what is "normal". If an investor is not comfortable with occasional short term "abormal" fluctuations, then perhaps the investor should be looking elsewhere.
    JAAA's price range yesterday was 17¢. That's a shade less than its range of 18¢ a mere week and a half prior (March 20th). And eight months ago it experienced back to back fluctuations of 28¢ and 69¢(!) (Aug 2, 5).
    https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/JAAA/history/
    Volatility happens. It doesn't mean that JAAA is not a good investment for the right purpose. And if one wants a AAA CLO fund with less volatility, one might consider (as I've written before) investing in a fund that holds only AAA-rated tranches and isn't leveraged. JAAA has about 1% invested in below AAA securities and is 104% long in fixed income.
    https://cdn.janushenderson.com/webdocs/FactSheet_JAAA_ETF_2024_12_exp_2025_04_v2.pdf
    PAAA's price range yesterday was just 5¢ It's 99.7% AAA, 0.3% cash.
    https://www.pgim.com/investments/etfs/pgim-aaa-clo-etf
    https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/PAAA/
  • Asian Markets: Stocks Sink as Trump’s Tariff Threats Weigh on Confidence
    https://www.reuters.com/world/china-japan-south-korea-will-jointly-respond-us-tariffs-chinese-state-media-says-2025-03-31/
    Bold added.....
    BEIJING, March 31 (Reuters) - China, Japan and South Korea agreed to jointly respond to U.S. tariffs, a social media account affiliated with Chinese state media said on Monday, an assertion Seoul called "somewhat exaggerated", while Tokyo said there was no such discussion.
    The state media comments came after the three countries held their first economic dialogue in five years on Sunday, seeking to facilitate regional trade as the Asian export powers brace against U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs.
    Japan and South Korea are seeking to import semiconductor raw materials from China, and China is also interested in purchasing chip products from Japan and South Korea, the account, Yuyuan Tantian, linked to China Central Television, said in a post on Weibo.
  • M* mucked up with numbers today, end-of-day.
    Just a warning. If you use Portf. Mgr, don't trust it. Check the ACTUAL numbers at your brokerage's website.
    While people love to rag on M*, often it's not the one at fault. Tonight, upon checking the ACTUAL numbers at my brokerage's (Fidelity's) website, I'm finding that Fidelity is to blame.
    For example, as of 11PM Fidelity shows FLPSX having an NAV of $40.31 (as of 3/28/25). M* matches this, showing an NAV of $40.31 (as of Saturday, 3/29/25).
  • Tariffs
    Today's PBS News Hour episode includes a segment about tariffs and their impact on manufacturing.
    University of London trade economist Ha-Joon Chang
    "It is going to take a lot of time, and you don't have that time. You have run down the industrial base over the last four decades. It cannot be built up in two years or whatever tariff policies that you have. In the meantime, things will be very expensive, especially if you are putting tariffs on the main trading partners like Mexico and Canada.
    And can people tolerate any more inflation?"

    Harvard Business School, Professor Willy Shih
    "Let's say you wanted offshore production from the U.S. to China. You had to set up a new factory. You had to hire the work force. You had to train the work force. You had to bring in suppliers. You had to set up your logistics. And what paid for that was, you got lower cost of product."
    "That's going from a high-cost country to a low-cost country. Now, if you want to bring stuff from a low-cost country to a high-cost country, and you have to set up a factory and you have to hire the work force, and you have to train the work force and bring in your suppliers, what's going to pay for it? Your product cost is going to be higher."

    Robert Zoellick, U.S. trade representative under George W. Bush, economic adviser under Bush I
    "So, the problem with Trump's approach is, it combines incoherence and protectionism. And you have to look at both parts. So the protectionism will add costs. And then you also have the retaliation."
    "We tried this in the 1930s. We raised tariffs to an average of 59 percent, and other people hit back. We had a trade surplus, but we also had unemployment at 25 percent. So it's a policy that reverses 70 years of America's international economic leadership."
    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/examining-trumps-claims-that-tariffs-will-revitalize-american-manufacturing
  • Tariffs
    Excerpts from today's WSJ Market Talk:
    "President Trump’s plans to impose 25% tariffs on imported vehicles will hike the average price of cars by as little as $5,000 and as much as $10,000 to $15,000, Wedbush analysts say in a research note. The analysts say the tariffs will wreak havoc on auto supply chains, since even automakers that make cars in the U.S. source around half of their parts from abroad. That means it will take around three years to move 10% of the auto supply chain to the U.S., costing hundreds of billions that will be passed directly to the consumer and push down demand, the analysts say."
    "European equity prices have not fully priced in the risk of tariffs escalation and they therefore risk falling further, UBS strategists say in a note. Stocks in sectors likely to be impacted by tariffs could decline by a further 10% as earnings outlooks are revised lower, the strategists say. 'A lot of this will depend on the price elasticity of demand given the most sensitive stocks tend to be in areas with lower competition.' These include pharmaceuticals and higher-end consumer sectors such as luxury and high-end vehicles, UBS says."
  • NewsMax, Inc. (NMAX)
    It IPOed today and rose 735% from its IPO price.
    If anyone has looked into its S-4, please share the tidbits.
  • Tariffs
    The sad investment and economic realities of the current adm's fiscal polices, the most notable of which is his asinine tariff strategy, are concisely and accurately explained in the OP's linked article. This article is exemplary of hundreds, if not thousands of articles, that have been written over the past 5 months in investment letters, magazines, newspapers, etc.
    I posted several times today on a parallel, appropriately placed tariff thread, about the significant impact his asinine tariff strategy has had on my investment strategy and thinking, and cited it as THEE reason I broke a golden rule of portfolio strategy.
    So there's that.
    On a macro level, anyone not understanding how tariffs may impact investing or the economy, or how tariffs, you know, have been THEE biggest market mover since he started spewing about them months ago, probably shouldn't be taken seriously on an investment forum.
  • This Investing Trend Is Your Friend—Until It Isn’t
    I never used momentum indexes; I only used typical funds but looked at the best risk/reward ones and kept changing according to uptrends, and several parameters.
    How to do that? It's the $64K. I developed my system for years, just as I developed my timing one for retirement. None is mechanical. See (link).
    I have posted for over 15 years on several boards, and I can say that there are maybe 5-7 people who do it well. The rest don't believe it, don't want to put in the effort, or don't care.
  • T Rowe Price ETFs in registration
    TCAL up .92% today vs S&P 500 .55%, interesting. Stock selection/weighting account for the over performance for today at least?
    From my limited understanding is that funds that write call options normally don't keep up with the market.
  • This Investing Trend Is Your Friend—Until It Isn’t
    "If momo doesn't work, how come US LC were great during 1995-2000 + 2010-2024
    while Value, SC, and international were better during 2000-10."

    The author does state that an S&P momentum index beat the S&P 500 and a basket of value stocks.
    He also suggests that it may not be the optimal time to use a momentum strategy
    due to near-term economic headwinds. I don't know whether this suggestion will be proven correct.
  • This Investing Trend Is Your Friend—Until It Isn’t
    ""Momentum makes less sense to a thoughtful, long-term investor."
    MMM...this investor has been using momo successfully since 2000 because it works if you know how to do that, and it's not that easy.
    The other choice is to have some diversification LT with minimal trades, which is pretty good for most.
    Something that is not easy doesn't mean it's undoable. You must have a system that works and keep tweaking it. It doesn't mean it's perfect; just better is enough to get better results.
    If I had stocks, I would have a higher % in Value, Europe, China, and gold.
    If momo doesn't work, how come US LC were great during 1995-2000 + 2010-2024 while Value, SC, and international were better during 2000-10. Each one lasted for years.
    Generally, when US LC do well, it's difficult to beat them per risk-adjusted performance. When they are not, it takes more effort to find other categories and I would advise being more diversified.
    Investors who don't believe it, don't practice it, and don't trade it can't be good traders.
  • Liberation Day! What’s the play?
    I guess that's what makes markets and debates.
    FWIW, some believe we are already in or about to enter a period of stagflation with recession probabilities clearly spiking.
    Components of stagflation and my 2 pennies:
    Slow growth - Financial firms have already cut their YE S&P projections based on slower growth.
    High unemployment - Coming back very soon to a country near us?
    Rising prices - A lot of wood was chopped on this one, but under the tariff czar,
    "It's all over now, baby blue?"
    https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/stagflation-radar-us-economy-no-repeat-70s-2025-03-25/
    BTW, you kind of lost me with, "I have to take the administration’s word on it."
    No capisce.
    No need to debate it any further. We will not know the effects of the tariffs for quite some time yet and will not know what conditions we actually experienced until we look back.
  • Tariffs
    The following comments regarding Trump's tariffs were excerpted from an AP article published on Oct. 27, 2020.
    Although the situation is different this time, historical information is useful in providing some context.
    Please limit comments to how tariffs may impact the economy or investing.
    This thread is not intended for political diatribes - please use Off Topic for that.
    "Trump set his sights on shrinking America’s vast trade deficits, portraying them as evidence
    of economic weakness, misbegotten deals and abusive practices committed by other countries.
    He pledged to boost exports and to curb imports by imposing tariffs — import taxes — on many foreign goods."

    "America’s deficit in goods and services now exceeds what it was under President Barack Obama.
    Steel and aluminum makers have cut jobs despite Trump’s protectionist policies on their behalf.
    His deals made scarcely a ripple in a $20 trillion economy.
    For most Americans, Trump’s drastic trade policy ultimately meant little, good or bad, for their financial health."

    "Yet the belligerent approach has made scant difference in the number he cares about most:
    The overall trade deficit in goods and services.
    It barely dipped last year — by 0.5% to $577 billion, still higher than in any year of the Obama administration.
    This year, the gap has widened nearly 6%, with the coronavirus pandemic having crushed tourism, education
    and other service 'exports.'”

    "Contrary to his assertions, too, Trump’s tariffs have been paid by American importers, not foreign countries.
    And their cost is typically passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices.
    Researchers from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Princeton and Columbia universities
    have estimated that the president’s tariffs cost $831 per U.S. household annually."

    “His administration’s approach has delivered few tangible benefits to the U.S. economy while undercutting
    the multilateral trading system, disrupting long-standing alliances with U.S. trading partners
    and fomenting uncertainty, said Eswar Prasad, a Cornell University economist who formerly
    led the International Monetary Fund’s China division."

    https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-virus-outbreak-global-trade-trade-policy-mexico-39aadae9a6d18de2b91889f1e552b605
  • Liberation Day! What’s the play?
    Roger all that.
    From March 1, 2025:
    https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/01/doge-actions-may-cause-social-security-benefit-interruption-ex-agency-head.html
    Excerpt (BOLD added):
    ...
    “Ultimately, you’re going to see the system collapse and an interruption of benefits,” O’Malley said. “I believe you will see that within the next 30 to 90 days.”
    ...
    For people who are already receiving Social Security benefits, most of that is automated and may not be affected, she said. However, processing new claims — whether it be for retirement or disability benefits — may take longer since those cannot be processed without Social Security employees, Hornick said.
    IF they are affected, pretty sure There Will Be Blood.
    Tick. Tick. Tick.
    EDIT: An apparent afternoon (IMO) dead cat bounce, if it holds, will play nicely into the plans of anyone who is today running from this scary looking freight train.
  • This Investing Trend Is Your Friend—Until It Isn’t
    "Momentum makes less sense to a thoughtful, long-term investor. It also seems reckless. Essentially, you buy more of what just went up. Many successful strategies require both analytical chops and discipline.
    Following the crowd is already human nature and is a feature of bubbles."

    "But it is hard to argue with long-term results: A momentum index maintained by S&P Dow Jones Indices since the summer of 1994 would have turned a $1,000 investment into $28,500 by last summer—71% more than by just owning the S&P 500. It also beat value and high-dividend baskets handily while being less-volatile."
    "That is especially relevant at the moment because tariffs could dent global economic growth while also raising domestic prices.During low growth and rising inflation periods momentum has had annualized returns of negative 13.33% and lots of volatility too, according to a 2024 study by S&P. The risk-adjusted return for a high-dividend basket of stocks, by contrast, has been basically flat under the same conditions."
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/savingandinvesting/this-investing-trend-is-your-friend-until-it-isn-t/ar-AA1BZcW6
  • Liberation Day! What’s the play?
    FWIW, all SELLs (per above posts) have been entered today.
    Reduced stock exposure by ~50%.
    Parking proceeds in VMRXX, FZDXX and will likely BUY a coupla new rungs on 5-yr CDs ladder that virtually guarantees a net positive TR in 2025.
    Kudos to @larryB for this thread.
    (Sadly) Timely and actionable.
    EDIT: NOT saying this strategy is correct for anyone other than me and the missus.
    BUT, our #1 goal this year, after two monster stock gain years under a REAL president, was to NOT allow the buffoon's asinine fiscal policies (read, orange brain farts) to cause us to be anything but net positive for the year on 12/31/25. And that goal has virtually been guaranteed with these moves today. Plus, we will sleep MUCH better thru year-end!