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.
  • FPA Crescent Fund Annual Report - December 31, 2015
    "At first glance, it appears that we’ve declined as much as the market — down 11.71% since May 2015’s market peak against the S&P 500’s 11.30% decline — but that’s looking at the market only through the lens of the S&P 500. However, roughly half of our equity holdings (totaling almost a third of the Fund’s equity exposure) are not included in the S&P 500 index. Our quest for value has increasingly taken us overseas and our portfolio is more global than it has been in the past. We therefore consider the MSCI ACWI a pertinent alternative benchmark."
    What?
    "We look pretty good compared to a global all-equity benchmark"?
    Uhhh ... the fund is 37% cash and 8.5% international stocks. That's way less global than either its Morningstar benchmark or Morningstar peer group.
    Underperformance doesn't bother me. Obfuscation does.
    David
  • Larry Swedroe: Does GMO Add Value For Investors?
    'Let the jury consider their verdict,' the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.
    'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first - verdict afterwards.'
    'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'
    'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.
    Mr. Swedroe is a marketer. His title, Director of Research, strikes me as modestly misleading since we often associate that title with someone leading the stock-by-stock, market-by-market analytics effort. BAM's official description of his role is this: "Larry regularly reviews the findings published in dozens of peer-reviewed financial journals, evaluates the outcomes and uses the result to inform the firm’s formal investment strategy recommendations." What does that mean? The most recent research I read concluded that frequent portfolio disclosure depresses performance by facilitating front-running of the fund. Okay, and therefore ... ? Several recent studies found that most active funds don't outperform their benchmark's raw returns. Uh-huh. "Finding successful funds ex-ante is extremely difficult." Someone got published for that nugget. At base, Larry's conclusion was reached a long time ago, BAM is deeply invested in it, and I'm not sure what he's actually contributing. The nature of peer-reviewed articles is that they aren't timely, so it's unlikely that the answer to the question "what on earth are the Chinese doing?" will be found there.
    On the risk-adjustment stuff, I looked at GMO's five largest funds.
    Benchmark-Free Allocation (GMBFX) is largest and it's beaten its peers since inception with dramatically higher returns (about 300 bps/year) and lower risk (a downside deviation of 4.4 versus 7.2 for its peers). It's Sharpe ratio is 0.99 versus 0.43 for the peers.
    International Equity (GMOIX) is second largest and it's beaten its peers since inception with modestly higher returns (about 120 bps) and lower risk (DSDEV 11.2 vs 12.5), resulting in a higher Sharpe (0.24 versus 0.16).
    Quality (GQEFX) is third, a Great Owl (i.e., a consistent winner), with higher returns (40 bps), lower DSDEv (7.8 versus 10.3) and higher Sharpe (0.44 versus 0.32).
    Emerging Markets (GMOEX) is fourth. It has better performance (180 bps), very slightly higher volatility (16.9 versus 16.8) and a higher Sharpe (0.14 versus 0.06).
    US Equity Allocation (GMUEX) is fifth. Better performance (90 bps), lower vol (9.8 versus 10.6) and higher Sharpe (0.51 versus 0.42).
    If you play with the comparison groups or the time frames, you can substantially change the results. That said, most of these funds lead most of their peers, mostly with lower volatility, over most full market cycles.
    David
  • Larry Swedroe: Does GMO Add Value For Investors?
    @MJG: your points on n-factor models are well taken. It would be interesting to compare fit statistics and information criteria for each of the models for each of the funds to better determine if funds' all have the same underlying factor structure. Which model is correct? Is the correct model the "correct" all the time? Leave that as it is for another time. There's also a methodological issue in terms of getting the random variable distributions of the observed indicators correct. Without that, the factor analysis results are apt to be biased, and statistical inferences on parameters from the factor solution are apt to be incorrect. Same, of course, goes for a t-test, etc. Would the biases be consistent across funds/comparisons? Hard to say. But, leave that as it is. There is also the question of how appropriate linear or fully parametric models (such as factor analysis) are for something as opaque as financial markets and asset performances. Perhaps a parametric model should explicitly account for trending (is "momentum" sufficient) in a different manner. Again, leave that as it is.
    Because, what I really want to know is -- in terms of actual, realized, dollar value returns -- what is GMO's performance when we factor in their contribution to risk reduction. I would think that is what GMO with their "2-sigma" logic, etc., is trying to do: not just pick attractive and/or undervalued assets per se, but avoid market bubbles. This is how I often hear Grantham speaking of GMO's mission. Here I think a different accounting for volatility is important before dismissing what GMO does or doesn't do. And it doesn't have to be all that complicated, but simply comparing means to means doesn't account for this aspect of what GMO attempts to do (perhaps adding "momentum" to a factor analysis does capture this in some tangential way; I don't think so, but its possible). I would think an analyst such as Larry savvy enough to wax poetic about factor analysis would know this. For example, it is quite possible for Fund A to have a lower mean annualized return than Fund B, but outperform Fund B, if it has lower volatility. As Buffett says: "Rule #1 is to not lose money; Rule #2 is to not forget Rule #1". Who cares if the market index has a higher average return but takes costly bites out of your principle along the way? That's really the point of my critique. If GMO lagged the market average by 0.5% but reduced investors' exposure to the 2001 or 2008 downturns, they would have added significant value that would likely not be captured in simple mean comparisons or (as I understand it) an n-factor model.
  • FPA Crescent Fund Annual Report - December 31, 2015
    The report looks at several topics including the performance of the fund in 2015 and their current view towards the high yield bond market. (I hope the link works for anyone who is interested....I accessed it via a brokerage account after being notified the report was available.)
    See: https://materials.proxyvote.com/Approved/MC2221/20160204/AR_272169.PDF
  • Updated Chartwell Investment Partners, LLC filing of the Berywn Funds (filed 2/22/16)
    As best I can tell, it looks like boilerplate, routine stuff.
    Just more detail, including:
    " NO FRONT-END, DEFERRED SALES LOAD OR REDEMPTION FEE WILL BE CHARGED AS A RESULT OF THE EXCHANGE."
    One of Chartwell's funds has classes that include 5.75% sales load and no-load.
    And this caveat, if shareholders say "no.":
    "If any of the Reorganizations is not approved (...blah, blah,...)
    then the Board will consider what further actions to take with respect to the Acquired Fund(s) that will not be reorganized, which may include liquidation of such Acquired Fund(s)."
    Also, I see that the initial/subsequent purchases change to $1000/$100
  • DoubleLine's Gundlach Says Firm Bought Some Equities Two Weeks Ago
    Here is link to an article on February 8 where Gundlach predicted a collapse in the junk bond market.

    So far he has been completely wrong. Junk bonds had another strong day today.
    I'll believe junkster's opinion over Gundlach any day of the week.
    Thanks G, albeit wouldn't go that far. Junk bonds bottomed on 2/11 a pivotal day for a lot of markets YTD (see MFO link below) Since the generational bottom in December 2008 I have never found Mr Gundlach very prescient on junk bonds. There have been few times when he was outright bullish on junk. He seems to have had a bias against them for most of the past 7 years. And among the experts out there, I actually think he is among the few that has a clue when it comes to the markets in general. I like him!
    It has been a nice rally in junk since the recent bottom and after today many of the open end will be positive YTD. I have no idea if Gundlach will be proven correct in junk this time around. While the experts practice their vodoo forecasting and predicting, the market will tell its own story best by its price action. Junk and oil have been joined at the hip the past two years or so. If oil is to go back down to its lows would *think* so will junk. But then I never have been much of a *thinker*
    http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/25925/was-yesterday-it#latest
  • GLFOX - Lazard Global Listed Infrastructure Open, @Bee and others
    GLFOX has a low beta, high alpha historical record. Not that it will continue this way but in comparison to TOLSX it has weathered this last storm quite well.
    Here it is charted with TOLSX and your IDE:
    image
  • RS Partners Fund reopening to new investors
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/814232/000119312516481083/d149076d497.htm
    497 1 d149076d497.htm RS INVESTMENT TRUST
    RS Investment Trust
    Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
    File Nos. 033-16439 and 811-05159
    RS INVESTMENT TRUST
    Amended and Restated Supplement to the Prospectus (Class A, C, K, Y shares),
    dated May 1, 2015
    RS Partners Fund
    RS Partners Fund will open to new investors on March 1, 2016. All references to the limitations on the offer, exchange or sale of shares of RS Partners Fund in the prospectus are removed effective March 1, 2016. The Trust or RS Investments reserve the right to impose limitations on the sale of shares of RS Partners Fund at any time without notice...
    (other changes/information are posted in the hyperlink)
  • GLFOX - Lazard Global Listed Infrastructure Open, @Bee and others
    Below link is Fidelity site fund composition overview..........note: only 34 holdings per most recent report.
    We are not invested in this fund.
    https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/52106N442?type=sq-NavBar
  • Artisan Small Cap Value (ARTVX) merging into Mid Cap Value (ARTQX)
    In the 21st century Artisan Funds has assumed the unenviable mantle of Royce Funds:
    1. Too many funds, most of which are unnecessary.
    2. Too expensive - expense ratios consistently above their category averages.
    3. Too unfocused - performance of funds has become decidedly mediocre.
    The time to move on and wean one's portfolio of Artisan Funds was several years ago.
  • DoubleLine's Gundlach Says Firm Bought Some Equities Two Weeks Ago
    FYI: (It would be nice to know which ones ?)
    Jeffrey Gundlach, the co-founder and chief executive officer of DoubleLine Capital, said on Friday that his firm purchased some U.S. stocks two weeks ago after their rocky start in January.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.reuters.com/article/doubleline-gundlach-idUSL2N1651GF
  • Is the following web site a good one for back testing a portfolio?
    @bnath001: Here is a MFO Feburary 2014 discussion on portfoliovisualizer.com, started by MJG, that should give you some insights.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/11407/an-exciting-portfolio-backtesting-website
  • Artisan Small Cap Value (ARTVX) merging into Mid Cap Value (ARTQX)
    The team should be more focused now, IMO. The small cap strategy was taking up a majority of the team's time as it housed probably half of the names covered by the team across the U.S. value suite, but was very limited in terms of total assets managed by the team. Spending 50% of your time on less than 10% of your business isn't ideal... With the same size team (I know Scott is on his way out, but this has been known for awhile) now covering a smaller universe, I'd hope this leads to improved research on the rest of what they cover.
  • Larry Swedroe: Does GMO Add Value For Investors?
    FYI: Larry's series evaluating the performance of the market’s most prominent actively managed mutual fund families continues today with an in-depth analysis of the offerings from Boston-based Grantham Mayo van Otterloo (GMO).
    Regards,
    Ted
    (Click On PDF Upper Left For Easier Reading):
    http://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2016/02/25/does-gmo-add-value-for-investors
    M*: GMO Funds:
    http://quicktake.morningstar.com/fundfamily/gmo/0C00001YRE/fund-list.aspx
  • The Closing Bell: U.S. Stocks Rise For Second Day Led By Banks, Consumer Staples
    Thanks Ted. Not as unusual as I suspected. But the 1-2 year periods of correlation referenced in the article I would still consider to be "temporary aberrations."
    (I tend to think big.) :)
    Regards
  • JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund to liquidate
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1217286/000119312516478119/d149787d497.htm
    497 1 d149787d497.htm JPMORGAN TRUST I
    J.P. MORGAN INTERNATIONAL EQUITY FUNDS
    JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund
    (All Share Classes)
    (a series of JPMorgan Trust I)
    Supplement dated February 25, 2016
    To the Prospectuses, Summary Prospectuses and Statement
    of Additional Information dated March 1, 2015, as supplemented
    NOTICE OF LIQUIDATION OF THE JPMORGAN ASIA PACIFIC FUND. The Board of Trustees of the JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund (the “Fund”) has approved the liquidation and dissolution of the Fund on or about April 6, 2016 (the “Liquidation Date”). Effective immediately, the Fund may depart from its stated investment objective and strategies as it increases its cash holdings in preparation for its liquidation. Unless you have an individual retirement account (“IRA”) where the State Street Bank and Trust (“SSBT”) serves as the custodian, on the Liquidation Date, the Fund shall distribute pro rata to its shareholders of record all of the assets of the Fund in complete cancellation and redemption of all of the outstanding shares of beneficial interest, except for cash, bank deposits or cash equivalents in an estimated amount necessary to (i) discharge any unpaid liabilities and obligations of the Fund on the Fund’s books on the Liquidation Date, including, but not limited to, income dividends and capital gains distributions, if any, payable through the Liquidation Date, and (ii) pay such contingent liabilities as the officers of the Fund deem appropriate subject to ratification by the Board. Capital gain distributions, if any, may be paid on or prior to the Liquidation Date. If you have a Fund direct IRA account where SSBT serves as custodian, your shares will be exchanged for the corresponding class of shares of the JPMorgan Liquid Assets Money Market Fund as specified below, unless you provide alternative direction prior to the Liquidation Date. For all other IRA accounts, the proceeds will be invested based upon guidelines of the applicable Plan administrator.
    Share Class of JPMorgan Asia Pacific Fund Share Class of JPMorgan Liquid AssetsMoney Market Fund
    Class A Shares Morgan Shares
    Class C Shares Morgan Shares
    Select Class Morgan Shares
    Upon liquidation, shareholders may purchase any class of another J.P. Morgan Fund for which they are eligible with the proceeds of the liquidating distribution. Shareholders holding Class A Shares or Select Class Shares will be permitted to use their proceeds from the liquidation to purchase Class A Shares of another J.P. Morgan Fund at net asset value within 90 days of the liquidating distribution. They may also purchase other share classes for which they are eligible. If Shareholders of Class C Shares purchase Class C Shares of another J.P. Morgan Fund within 90 days of the liquidating distribution, no contingent deferred sales charge will be imposed on those new Class C Shares.
    FOR EXISTING SHAREHOLDERS OF RECORD OF THE FUND AS OF FEBRUARY 29, 2016, ADDITIONAL PURCHASES OF FUND SHARES WILL BE ACCEPTED UP TO AND INCLUDING MARCH 15, 2016 AFTER WHICH NO NEW PURCHASES WILL BE ACCEPTED. FOR ALL OTHER INVESTORS, PURCHASES OF FUND SHARES WILL NO LONGER BE ACCEPTED EFFECTIVE MARCH 1, 2016.
    INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
    WITH THE PROSPECTUS, SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND
    STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE