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.
  • Snowball's great commentary
    So for a declining cash nut (being used for a year or two's living expenses) of $100k, the improvement over keeping it in bank savings is just a few hundred dollars. Tough times for safe investing, for sure.
  • Any thoughts on High Yield Muni Funds?
    https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/puerto-ricos-house-approves-moratorium-052018350.html
    I just saw this. I think this is priced into the market. And I think ETFs like HYD and mf like NHMAX do not have any Puerto Rico exposure.
  • Any thoughts on High Yield Muni Funds?
    Aren't you a little late to the party? They have been on a tear since January 2014. That is when they were a buying opportunity and returned in the mid to high teens. The trend continued into 2015 and remains intact YTD. If you think Treasury yields will stay low or go lower junk munis will be fine. They may even be fine if Treasury yields rise a bit here. I have about 35% in NHMRX in an overall scattered (for me) nest egg of junk corps, emerging markets debt, and bank loan. Since I have never met a rich technician I don't have much use for most technical indicators. But on a short term basis, the 14 day RSI on the junk munis (and for that matter the bank loans) is severely overbought. If oil is to continue it's move up and equities hit new all time highs I would think that junk corps and emerging market debt would be the place to be.
  • Snowball's great commentary
    Good clear questions. Let's see if I can provide equally clear answers ...
    1. Here's a three part answer:
    a) Core funds (see also answer #3 below for explanation of core accounts):
    • Vanguard gives no choice, there's only Vanguard Fed MMF (VMFXX)
    • Fidelity. Pick the highest yielding one. They're all government paper, so I don't see a great virtue in getting a pure-treasury one (unless state taxes come into play).
      • Grandfathered core funds: FDRXX was converted to a government fund[video link]; not available as a core fund for new accounts. 6x the yield of Fidelity's other options (0.06% vs. 0.01%).
      • Non-grandfathered core funds: Pick SPAAX (non-Treasury) over FZFXX (Treasury). Both yield 0.01%, but there's still a microscopic difference; last divs were $0.000008592 vs. $0.000008494.
    b) Non-core funds:
    • Vanguard: You've got a choice of two: Fed MMF (see above), and Treasury MMFVUSXX. As explained above, I'd go with non-Treasury (slightly higher yield, virtually no risk).
    • Fidelity: Cash Reserves FDRXX; as above, 6x the yield of other options.
    c) Link to outside banks:
    Internet banks yield around 1% with no redemption fees, and my experience with EFT transfers to Fidelity (at least with some banks) is that I have access in 24-48 hours, which may or may not be sufficient. Note that bank savings (and MM) accounts come with a legal requirement (Fed Regulation D) that they can hold your money for up to seven days. This rule has been around for decades.
    2. Money in a brokerage account (from sale of securities or anything else) first goes to your core account (see #3), so in this sense, the possibility of the cash "automatically" going into a non-government fund or similar is nonexistent.
    That aside, I think you're too concerned about what will happen with prime funds. Stock prices (crashing or otherwise) don't directly affect a company's ability to service its debt. If the company is sound, cash flow positive, it will be servicing its bonds regardless of what the company is worth.
    What happened with Reserve Primary Fund (breaking a buck) was a confluence of several factors, plus mass panic (bank run):
    - The fund was aggressively managed for yield and loaded up on Lehman Bros. paper, creating a single point of failure. Fidelity and especially Vanguard funds are conservatively managed.
    - The Reserve (the fund company behind Reserve Primary) did not have assets to prop up its MMFs (since these were its whole business).
    Many fund families have provided financial support to prevent their funds from breaking a buck. (NYTimes: "[In 2008 alone] big banks and fund management companies have pledged more than $10 billion to rescue affiliated money funds that were caught holding mortgage market securities that were deteriorating rapidly in value.")
    Fidelity and Vanguard certainly have the resources and motivation to do so if it comes to that.
    - Institutions started pulling money out of Reserve Primary as soon as they got a whiff of trouble, and others followed. This exacerbated the situation. The Treasury stepped in an guaranteed existing cash in MMFs (but not new cash) to stanch flows at other funds,; in 1929 FDR imposed a four day bank holiday.
    Liquidity constraints (redemption fees and redemption gating) are now in place to serve the same purpose of preserving order and liquidity. Fidelity's video on fees and gates.
    3. A core/settlement/transaction account is the place through which all your money flows. Think of it as your checking account at a brokerage. That core account may have a sweep feature, where spare cash is "swept" nightly into one or more other accounts. That could be simply for greater protection (e.g. Fidelity's sweeps into banks yield just 0.01%, even less than some of their core MMFs), or it could be for yield. The receiving account could be one or more banks, or a different MMF.
    For example, Schwab has a sweep option to move cash into MMFs. It is eliminating this option as of June 1. Your cash (i.e. your core account) will now remain as a general liability of the brokerage (Schwab One Interest, SIPC coverage), or get swept into banks. Fidelity's equivalent to Schwab One Interest is called Fidelity Cash FCASH.
    Fidelity's CMA brokerage account (here's the account agreement) will not sweep money into bank accounts if you reside outside the country. For these accounts, the cash remains a general liability of Fidelity. Similarly, some other types of accounts such as inherited IRAs cannot sweep into banks (but do provide core MMF options).
    Lots of possibilities and combinations. The basic distinction remains - core is "checking", sweep is "automatic shadow account'.
    I'd also mentioned a sweep-like feature that Fidelity provides. It will use your "position" (non-core) MMFs as sources of money for expenses (check writing, purchasing securities, etc.). Same idea as banks using savings accounts as a "checking plus" feature. So there's a sweep, but it's only one way. Here's Fidelity's video on how this works.
    4) No conspiracy theories allowed :-) The recent changes don't have any obvious effect on Treasury MMFs, so whatever they were yielding before is what they'll yield going forward. MMFs tend to charge management fees around 30-40 basis points, which is why these MMFs yield nothing. (The fund companies have been waiving fees to keep the net yields above zero.)
    If anything, the fund companies have been fighting the new regulations (as they typically fight any regulation, not appreciating that sometimes eating your vegetables is good for you). There was strong lobbying against these changes.
    5) Interesting question. I haven't looked into it.
  • Vanguard Admiral Class
    @ MFO Members: Are you aware there is a vehicle within Vanguard to convert Vanguard Investors Shares to Admiral Shares with certain qualifications.
    Regards,
    Ted
    Wondering How To Convert To Admiral Shares?:
    https://personal.vanguard.com/us/insights/article/admiral-questions-112013
  • Vanguard Admiral Class
    Through my 401k I have access to the Institutional shares at even lower expense ratios. Check out government employees who use Blackrock's index funds in their TSP accounts. Also they have similarly low ER.
  • Snowball's great commentary
    Well written well organized simple explanation of the money market changes coming in 10/2016. Depending on your risk level the sweet spot IMHO is to choose the highest yielding government only fund. Otherwise you are open to risking a 2% fee of your total MM balances.
    https://personal.vanguard.com/pdf/VGMMR.pdf
  • David Snowball's April Commentary
    Hmm. I too assumed it must be plain hard, but when I just compared IWM with FLPSX and FCNTX over 1/3/5/10/15y, plus start 02 and 08, it sure looks like a piece of cake.
  • T Rowe Price Health Sciences Fund
    Mike_Martino: PRHSX is a keeper, keeper, keepper! A little background on the new manager Ziad Bakri.
    Regards,
    Ted
    T.Rowe Price Health Sciences' new manager will be Ziad Bakri, who on April 1 will join the fund as comanager. On July 1, Bakri, a medical doctor who has been a healthcare analyst at T. Rowe Price since 2011 and previously was a biotech analyst at Cowen and Co., will become the fund's sole manager. The firm also announced that it plans to hire additional team members on its healthcare research team, including a biotech analyst.
  • T Rowe Price Health Sciences Fund
    Mike: Here's a Barron's article from a year ago that offers insight into this PM. As an owner of PRHSX, I'm confident in the abilities he brings to the portfolio. JMHO.
    http://www.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424053111904703704579507953523415572
  • DoubleLine Global Infrastructure Fund
    Thx, heezsafe for the useful info and your work on this. And your spot on re difference between this DL product vs. GLFOX, which I happen to own, as do others here. The N class BTW is BILTX.
    Concerning the fund macro, here is how the separate account strategy was constituted at the end of the 4th qtr. 2015 based on the pitch book and portfolio strategy I was able to obtain. It may offer some idea of how the OEF might be invested --FWIW.
    Portfolio Strategy
    36% project bonds
    28% structured products
    23% corp. bonds
    8% loans
    5% cash.
    Portfolio Sectors
    Electric Utilities & Power 29%
    Transportation Equipment 22%
    Renewables 14%
    Transportation 9%
    Energy 8% (E&P - Upstream Assets 23%; Pipelines - Midstream Assets 77%)
    Hospitals 7%
    Water Utilities 4%
    Telecommunications 4%
    Credit Quality
    Investment Grade 84%
    High Yield 11 %
    Cash 5%
    Geographic Region
    North America 73%
    Latin America 18%
    Western Europe 2%
    Middle East & Africa 2%
    Cash 5%
    (The geographic allocations are significantly different than that of GLFOX.)
    Keep us posted with any info you come across.
  • Snowball's great commentary
    Thanks. Combining both threads.....
    1. Which Money Market would you recommend if I choose to have a fund a)with no liquidity constraints and b)that is not required to float for both Fidelity and Vanguard?
    I assume FDRXX for Fidelity ? For example, does Vanguard Fed MM yielding 0.30% meet both of those requirements? It is not classified as prime in the link you provided.
    2. My thoughts are that if these two requirements are NOT met, that during market melt downs it is probable (for anyone selling stocks) the proceeds from the stock sale in a retail brokerage account will be placed into a MMF whereby a dollar put into that MMF might only give you back .96c. IOW's stock market distress would equal MMF distress and possibly too late to convert without taking a loss in the MMF (the investor knows at the point of sale of the stock that his MMF is in trouble too). Double whammy.
    3. What is difference between a core account and a sweep account?
    4. Usually these type changes are profitable for some unknown party with strong lobbying support. How could there be no MMF available that meets the two requirements in my #1 above that would not yield closer to the current 3 month Treasury at .29% if that treasury is supposedly the safest investment known to mankind?
    This assumes your answer to #1 provides no other option other than FDRXX at 0.03%.
    5. I would assume all 401k accounts with an Income Fund MMF option will need to add those two requirements as an option for ultra conservative investors? Some 401k's held Reserve Fund in 2008-09 as their supposedly safe Income Fund option when they broke the buck. Reserve ended up eating the loss but for some time it was undecided which party was going to take the loss. Bad business.
  • Vanguard Admiral Class
    Some time ago, it seemed that Vanguard stopped offering Admiral shares through all brokerages. Since then, Admiral shares have started reappearing at some brokerages, e.g. TDAmeritrade.Scottrade.
    Keep in mind that some Vanguard funds may be closed unless purchased directly through Vanguard, e.g. Wellington.
  • DoubleLine Global Infrastructure Fund
    @bee no, this will be an infrastructure debt fund, not a stock eq. fund. Not comparable but might (might) make for a "nice pairing." :)
    @openice Thanks for keeping eye out. DoubleLine did a post-filing amendment to their original SEC application, basically moving the proposed date at which the prospectus would be activated out to March 30, so I've been watching for it and no news on the DL sites yet. Maybe it's not such a bad thing they're making us wait? You just know they've been running it in separate accounts for about a year, so why the tease? I'm most interested in seeing the macro of the fund (esp. credit distribution, US vs. non-US) and not so much a holdings list.
    Looks like M* has things all set up and ready to roll for the fund. BILDX is symbol for the I shares; Damien Contes and Andrew Hsu listed as co-managers, with an inception date of 4/1/16. Pretty reasonable e.r. of circa 0.65 for BILDX and 0.90 for the N shares when they're offered (difference being the beloved 12b-1).
  • Snowball's great commentary
    Sorry, bad HTML - try this:
    http://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/26328/money-market-funds
    The relevant section (emphasis added):
    These are all "prime" funds, meaning that come October they will have to impose liquidity constraints. In times of stress they may impose a redemption fee, hold your money up to 10 business days, or some combination of those.
    Fidelity's old prime fund, Cash Reserves (FDRXX) has been promoted (or downgraded, depending on your point of view) to a government fund. No liquidity constraints, but no yield either (0.03%).
  • DoubleLine Global Infrastructure Fund
    For those interested, the fund launched today but only with seed money, and so it's not yet open to anyone. For several weeks, Bloomberg has BILDX as one of its symbols, which may be the institutional class (?). The pre-market NAV today was $10.00. Also, I've noted that a number of the new DL offerings are not always open for "some time" and then after the NAV has gone up!
    BILDX is an interesting symbol for an infrastructure fund! Let's hope it can build some of our net worth!
  • AMG SouthernSun Small Cap Fund to reopen to new investors
    I've owned this fund for several years - you have to have a strong stomach for it since it's a concentrated fund and has huge up and down swings - it'll go a year or two as the top ranked fund in its category, then it'll have a year or two where it's the worst. It was ranked 96th in 2014 and 98th in 2015; year to date 2016 it is 1st - go figure!
  • David Snowball's April Commentary
    Some mutual funds have done well in the 90's, but it's been just plain hard outperforming the Russell 2000 index ( IWM = ETF equiv. ). Maybe it's because they get too big, their management style stops working, or the market "complexion" has changed over the last 15 years ? Try plugging symbols mentioned in commentary here ( https://portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio#analysisResults ) and select the Russell 2000 as "benchmark". I like to use 2002 and 2008 as dumb luck / Murphy;s law starting points ...
    even BRK-A loses out.