It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Hi catch,Hi @fundalarm
I was reading through this thread again and looked again at PIMIX and its current holdings as of its last posting. This and its cousin, PONDX have a much different mix of holdings from the previous several years. The overwhelming majority of prior holdings were directed at the mortgage sector, both agency and non.
Disclosure: We hold PIMIX at this time; although it has had a rough start for this year, but rewarding for the past several years. I fully trust both managers and their skills with a multi-sector bond fund and the flexibility available to them.
Hi @fundalarm
I was reading through this thread again and looked again at PIMIX and its current holdings as of its last posting. This and its cousin, PONDX have a much different mix of holdings from the previous several years. The overwhelming majority of prior holdings were directed at the mortgage sector, both agency and non.
Disclosure: We hold PIMIX at this time; although it has had a rough start for this year, but rewarding for the past several years. I fully trust both managers and their skills with a multi-sector bond fund and the flexibility available to them.
And yes, high yield has been happier again these past several trading days. I can not confirm; but suspect some of the positive direction is related to more positive action in the energy sector and their junk bonds. I also feel that if crude prices remain below $60/barrel and especially around the $50 area for the next year or so, that there be both high yield defaults in this area; as well as stronger players in this area (fracking) to start to buy the companies that are on the edge, a consolidation.
Take care of you and yours,
Catch
@JC, is it not that their principles are more or less 'go anywhere' / opportunistic?
On first glance these funds look very similar. I went to the prospectus of each fund.
There are a few details like the allocation percentages that are different. The issue with comparing these funds is that they are like oil on water. RSIVX is currently holding a lot of corporate instruments. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/76882K751?type=o-NavBar
PONDX is spread out over the spectrum. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/72201F458?type=o-NavBar
Pimco is well known for buying derivative instruments which would increase volatility.
The category "Multisector Bond" is general. But, I am splitting hairs here. Yes it could be said that these funds are similar. The background heritage and investing style of the fund companies themselves might be the biggest difference here and one that should be noted as I did with the derivatives issue.
On first glance these funds look very similar. I went to the prospectus of each fund.@JC, is it not that their principles are more or less 'go anywhere' / opportunistic?
I simply added all that was BBB and above.Ukraine only about 6% of holdings. Over 95% of portfolio are investment grade. Might hurt a bit but far from a catastrophe. Hasenstab will come through just fine.
I just looked at the portfolio on Morningstar and it looks like only a little more than 81% is in investment grade bonds. I looked at TPINX, Templeton Global Bond A. The Global Total Return Fund is only a little more than 65% investment grade. Please correct me if I've got this wrong. I view investment grade as BBB and above.I use TGBAX
ron, my comment was with respect to yours which said "Over 95% of portfolio are investment grade"
That doesn't coincide with the info I looked up in M*. Don't know where you are getting the info that over 95% of the portfolio is investment grade. Looks to me like about 81% and 65% for the two funds, per above. Perhaps you were referring to something
different
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved.
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved. Powered by Vanilla