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.
  • Expect An ‘Avalanche’ Of Selling When This Market Breaks, Says “Dr Doom”
    Whatever he drinks, he needs to switch brands. Might help. :)
    But I think it's useful to listen to all the various voices out there. Listened to David Roche last evening (on CNBC West) who comes across in much the same vein as Faber.https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/investment-veteran-david-roche-keen-on-gold-in-preparing-for-risks-with-trump/article33916816/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&;
  • Expect An ‘Avalanche’ Of Selling When This Market Breaks, Says “Dr Doom”

    Thx. Not even 50:50. So in other words, flipping a coin could give you a better percentage of accurate market prognostication over time.
    @rforno & MFO Members: Marc Faber calls from 2000-2012, 45%, below average, accuracy.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://www.cxoadvisory.com/2875/individual-gurus/marc-faber/
  • Bogle Investment Management Small Cap Growth Fund investor share class conversion and other changes
    Wow. How could something with fees well over 1.2% have John Bogle's name attached to it??
  • Bogle Investment Management Small Cap Growth Fund investor share class conversion and other changes
    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/831114/000089418917001011/rbb-bogle_497e.htm
    497 1 rbb-bogle_497e.htm SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
    THE RBB FUND, INC.
    Bogle Investment Management Small Cap Growth Fund
    Institutional Class (BOGIX)
    Investor Class (BOGLX)
    Supplement dated February 27, 2017
    to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) each dated
    December 31, 2016
    Based on the recommendation of Bogle Investment Management, L.P. (the “Adviser”), the Board of Directors of The RBB Fund, Inc. has approved closing the Investor Class Shares of the Bogle Investment Management Small Cap Growth Fund (the “Fund”) and converting Investor Class Shares of the Fund to Institutional Class Shares of the Fund.
    Effective at the close of the New York Stock Exchange on April 28, 2017 (the “Conversion Date”), the outstanding Investor Class Shares of the Fund will be converted into full and/or fractional Institutional Class Shares of the Fund (the “Conversion”). Immediately after and as a result of the Conversion, each holder of Investor Class Shares of the Fund shall be the owner of Institutional Class Shares of the Fund with an aggregate net asset value equal to the aggregate net asset value of the Investor Class Shares held by such holder immediately prior to the Conversion. The Conversion will be effected without the imposition of any sales charge or any other charge.
    Prior to the Conversion, shareholders of Investor Class Shares may redeem their investments as described in the Fund’s Prospectus. Depending on the tax status of the shareholder and whether or not the account is invested through a tax-deferred arrangement, such as a 401(k) plan account, such redemption may be a taxable event resulting in taxable income to the shareholder. Please consult your own tax advisor on this issue.
    Following the Conversion, the minimum initial investment for Institutional Class Shares of the Fund will be lowered to $10,000 ($2,000 for IRA accounts) and additional investments may be made at any time with a minimum investment of $250 ($100 minimum for IRA accounts). These minimums for initial and subsequent investments are the same as those currently applicable to the Fund’s Investor Class Shares. As such, the initial and subsequent investment minimums currently applicable to holders of the Fund’s Investor Class Shares will not change as a result of the Conversion.
    The Adviser has contractually agreed to waive management fees and reimburse expenses to the extent that Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses (excluding acquired fund fees and expenses, brokerage commissions, extraordinary items, interest or taxes) exceed 1.25% of the Fund’s average daily net assets (the “Expense Cap”). The Investor Class Expense Cap was reduced from 1.35% to 1.25% of the Fund’s average daily net assets as of December 31, 2016. As such, the fee limit currently applicable to holders of the Fund’s Investor Class Shares will not change as a result of the Conversion. This contractual limitation arrangement is in effect through December 31, 2017.
    After the Conversion has been completed, Investor Class Shares will no longer be available for sale. The Conversion is expected to be tax-free, meaning that the Fund’s Investor Class shareholders will become Institutional Class shareholders without realizing any gain or loss for federal tax purposes.
    Thank you for your investment. If you have any questions, please call the Fund toll-free at 1-877-264-5346.
    * * * * *
    Please retain this supplement for your reference.
  • Josh Brown: Proudly Permabullish
    The thing these kinds of essays fail to acknowledge is how short in terms of human history 100 years is.
    Yes and just look at Japan's stock index it still has not gotten back to 39,000.
  • Josh Brown: Proudly Permabullish
    The thing these kinds of essays fail to acknowledge is how short in terms of human history 100 years is. And there is nothing scientific to this historical experience that one can extrapolate necessarily into the future indefinitely. All one can say is in the past hundred years, it has generally been a good idea to be bullish on U.S. stocks. Is that any proof that it will be good to be bullish for the next 100? The implicit assumption really amounts to a feeling--patriotism, a belief in American exceptionalism--not a scientifically verifiable fact. Will America continue to represent the highest level of "productivity, innovation and economic dynamism" that will drive the stock market here higher? Or are we part of a larger pattern of economic development you see historically with emerging nations? Were not Britain, Spain, Portugal once like America in previous eras in their economic dynamism until America became the dominant force in the 20th century? Perhaps the 21st century will still belong to us. Or perhaps it will belong to China or some other nation state. The answer can only be understood in retrospect.
  • Josh Brown: Proudly Permabullish
    FYI: It’s become fashionable in the age of social media to derisively sneer at our fellow investors who are too optimistic and refer to them as “permabulls.” This sort of thing earns us intellectual style points – points which can be accumulated and redeemed to be spent precisely nowhere.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://thereformedbroker.com/2017/02/25/proudly-permabullish/
  • Best and Worst Funds Discovered Here At MFO
    ARIVX wasn't closed due to lack of assets. Eric C. decided it was in the best interests of all to close the fund as he could not find attractive investments and didn't want to charge an ER just for holding cash.
    I wonder if they could have handled it differently. Could they have changed the E.R. to 0.1% when the cash exceeded 66%? Just thinking out loud.
  • Expect An ‘Avalanche’ Of Selling When This Market Breaks, Says “Dr Doom”
    FYI: The apocalypse is coming for this stock market and when it does, the selling will resemble an “avalanche.”
    That’s the latest dire prediction of Dr Doom, aka Marc Faber, the editor of “The Gloom, Boom & Doom report,” who advised investors to put less in U.S. stocks on Monday.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/expect-an-avalanche-of-selling-when-this-market-breaks-says-marc-faber-2017-02-27/print
  • The Breakfast Briefing: Dow Futures Inch Lower After Record Run For Blue-Chip Stocks
    The Markets and More ... Monday February 27, 2017
    Good morning @Ted and others.
    Thought I'd piggyback Ted's opener (when I can write) since both are much along the same theme.
    In checking the markets this morning as I write Asia-Pacific is down across the board while Europe trades mixed with Germany, Italy and the U K trading up. In the States stocks look to be down along with government bonds. The leading commodities this morning are lean hogs, lumber and gasoline.
    http://markets.wsj.com/usoverview
    http://finviz.com/futures.ashx
    Old_Skeet's market barometer now reads 131 well into the overbought area for the S&P 500 Index. All the data feeds except the earnings feed indicate the Index is overbought. Since, the market appears extended I look for a near term pullback and/or some sideways range bound movement. This past week the defensive sectors of utilities, health care, consumer staples and real estate lead.
    http://www.morningstar.com/market-valuation/market-fair-value-graph.aspx
    So, what is driving this market? Most likely its earnings with a slew of companies reporting today.
    https://biz.yahoo.com/research/earncal/today.html
    http://fundamentalis.com/?p=6722
    This Weeks Signal ... Small Caps
    http://www.decisionmoose.com/Moosignal.html
    StockTrader ... The Week That Was ... and, The Week Ahead
    https://www.stocktrader.com/2017/02/26/weekly-market-recap-feb-26-2017/
    Have a great day ... and, most of all I wish everyone "Good Investing."
    Old_Skeet
  • Chuck Jaffe: Wall St. Legend Says Investors Should Ignore Politics
    @msf I agree it is virtually impossible to do business or invest without entering some of these ethical/political grey areas. It is part of life and it would be hard to function on a practical level otherwise, so yes we can try and must sometimes separate these political and financial goals to function. But there is inevitably a point for many people where the political/ethical intersects with investment goals to such a degree that action for a person of conscience is necessary. It is the reason socially responsible investing exists.
    What the particular ethical line is beyond which is unacceptable is of course up to each individual's taste and conscience. But for an investor to say such ethical lines don't exist for them and that they are thus "apolitical" is actually I think misguided. That person is actually endorsing a harsh libertarian ideology, an extreme political stance that believes that profit takes precedence over everything else.
    Among the embedded political views in the profit above everything else investment philosophy you can deduce the following:
    1. Low to no taxes--corporate and capital gains especially--as getting rid of these increases investor profits.
    2. No government regulations of business except for those that protect property rights as this increases corporate profits.
    3. Anti-labor. No minimum wage, no labor safety requirements, no unions as all of these reduce profits.
    4. No consumer protection--as class action lawsuits and federal regs to protect consumers reduce profits.
    While an investor may disagree with these ideas in their separate political silo as you say, they are implicitly endorsing them by investing in companies and with money managers that are actively seeking these goals. There is a kind of hypocrisy to this, and many people have pointed this out with regard to Warren Buffett. But we live in a world where to function one must be hypocritical sometimes. It is a matter of degrees. But the extremist politically is the libertarian investor who claims those degrees don't matter or don't exist.
  • Buffett Says $100 Billion Wasted Trying To Beat The Market
    "The bundle of hedge funds had compound annual returns of 2.2 percent in the nine years through 2016, compared with 7.1 percent for the index fund. The billionaire estimated that about 60 percent of the gains that the hedge funds produced during that period were eaten up by management fees."
    Here's the arithmetic:
    5.25% gross for the hedge funds.
    2+20 in fees = 2% + 1.05% = 3.05% fees
    5.25% - 3.05% = 2.2% net.
    3.05% fees/5.25% gross is approximately 60%
    If hedge fund managers underperformed the market (before fees), and index funds merely matched the market (before fees), then everyone else outperformed the market on average. That means individual investors and active mutual funds on (dollar-weighted) average beat the index funds.
    This is just Sharpe's argument that you can't beat the market. In order for someone to outperform, there has to be someone who was underperforming. Fortunately, active investors had a bunch of losers they could take advantage of over the past nine years. Hedge funds.
  • Chuck Jaffe: Wall St. Legend Says Investors Should Ignore Politics
    @LewisBraham To a large degree, I agree with you. I do not want to be investing in companies that do bad things. Someone wrote, in another thread, that what Wells Fargo did was not out of the ordinary. (Everyone does it, so it's okay.) If this is indeed business as usual, then all businesses need to be prosecuted. I do not support ill-gotten gains.
    (Withholding information can be addressed under products liability laws, e.g. defective products under the theory of failure to warn.)
    But IMHO there's a difference between investing in what is legal and working toward changing those laws. I may advocate a $15 min wage, but I do not decline to do business with or invest in companies that don't meet that standard. Like Buffett, I may support politicians who would increase my taxes but I don't pay more in taxes than the current code requires me to pay.
    I still feel that one can separate one's actions from one's advocacy.
    Regarding hiring: Say I was opposed to virtually all government regulation (too oppressive), and I needed to contract a writer for a primer on "what is a stock". Should I refuse to consider hiring you, not because you would incorporate your views into that writing (I assume you would do an objective, professional job), but because you might spend some of your earnings supporting positions I disagreed with? That approach would make it hard to hire anyone.
    If my assumption is wrong, and you're going to let your views affect your work, then clearly I should reconsider.
  • Chuck Jaffe: Wall St. Legend Says Investors Should Ignore Politics
    Nice try @Ted.
    Want to throw another one up there for Lewis to swing at?
    :)
    I'll be honest. Up until now I've always practiced what O’Shaughnessy preaches and have striven to separate politics and macroeconomics in general from investment decision making - preferring instead to focus on relative valuation of asset classes. But it's getting harder. I'm more and more inclined to believe this time is different. ... I speak as one who has loved and followed political discourse since I was 14 years old and who was subscribing to U.S. News & World Report at that age. Read the damn thing cover to cover twice every week so as not to miss a single word. Goldwater, "Tricky Dick", LBJ and the rest. But, I've never been so concerned as now. I know I'm not alone. There's some very well educated knowledgable folks on the board. Agree with Ted's overall gist that the board is becoming too political. I'll see what I can do to help turn it in a different direction.
  • Chuck Jaffe: Wall St. Legend Says Investors Should Ignore Politics
    One can separate political views (and contributions) from investment practices. Over the past several years, what has served as a benchmark for me in measuring how much politics has swayed money managers is how loudly they decried the deficit after 2008.
    For example: "With current government deficits and debt running amok expecting inflation rates to remain low is wishful thinking—indeed, given current trends, it is more likely that inflation will be significantly higher over the next ten to 20 years than it was from 1970 until now."
    Running amok? Wasn't that a Star Trek episode?
    That market commentary by a Mr. Jim O’Shaughnessy was dated September 2010. Things change. No reason to be concerned now about a projected $10T deficit over the next decade (just released by the CBO). Especially in an economy finally nearing full capacity.
  • The Callan Periodic Table of Investment Returns: (1997–2016)
    @Old_Skeet I have 10% devoted to EM through sfgix and Mathews Asia Growth and Income. I have 10% devoted to SC/Midcap mostly through TSP S fund. Not going to make big changes. I just might start adding more to scv and em outside of work accounts (ira/roth ira). DCA into IRAs so no big moves in a richly valued market. Thanks.
  • Best and Worst Funds Discovered Here At MFO
    EXTAX (Manning & Napier Tax Managed) was first suggested by board members and also favorably mentioned by Professor Snowball perhaps 8-9 years ago. ... (Apparently that fund no longer exists).
    If it got your attention just 8-9 years ago, you may have wondered about the ticker. Manning & Napier funds were called Exeter funds until Sept. 26, 2006.
    EXTAX was just (this month) liquidated. From the prospectus supplement:
    The Board of Directors of the Manning & Napier Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) has voted to terminate the offering of shares of the Tax Managed Series (the “Series”) ... Accordingly, ...The Series will redeem all of its outstanding shares on or about February 1, 2017
    (I'm confident Shadow posted this at the time; now it was just easier to fetch the filing directly.)