Hi rjb112 and others,
Today is Sunday November 30th around 8:45 AM EST as I write.
I composed an email and sent it to Elizabeth Weilburg of Morningstar "M*" and advised her of continued pricing concerns that had been expressed earlier to M*. In my email, I provided the link to the MFO site thread that would provide current details and documentation on this continued issue of slow pricing of certain mutual funds.
In addition, I'd like to thank rjb112 for providing the supporting screen shots which provided visuals in support of my statement. It is appreciated.
Sould I receive a response to my email I let all know.
Old_Skeet
.............................................................................................................................................
Additional Note: It is now about 9:40 AM EST on Sunday November 30th as I write this note; and, it seems the visuals provided by rjb112 that I referenced in my email to Ms. Weilburg and in the above comment, for some unknown reason, to me, have now been removed.
Leaves me to wonder why one would do this?
.............................................................................................................................................
Interestingly, it is now about 10:20 AM EST Sunday and the visuals have now returned. Hopefully, they will remain.
Old_Skeet

@Scott. Do you have a link to the webcast? I could not find it. Thanks.

http://psav.mediasite.com/mediasite/Play/38bd46228861499a9c64cad3f28138d91d
"FIDO shows PRHSX (TROWE) as "closed" to new investors even though it is "open" at TROWE. Any insight or suggestions?"
Listed as closed to new at Ameritrade, but was still able to buy it.
"what about healthcare REITs?"
I don't own any but VTR has always been one that I've considered high quality. The idea of a lab REIT is interesting in theory, but I haven't seen any that have done well - BMR got wrecked in 2008, as did ARE.

FYI: Successful investing during retirement often means learning how to play defense without giving up on offense.
Regards,
Ted
http://online.wsj.com/articles/how-retirees-can-manage-market-risk-1417309973?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird

@linter: Your combination provides the following exposure: 50% HC, 22% Tech, and 13% Industrials. You may want to consider an equal mix of PRHSX and POAGX, which would be my preference. But if you want a higher octane, then you may consider a mix of PRHSX 5%, FBIOX 5% and POAGX 10%. In our portfolio, we own 10% positions in both PRHSX and POAGX.
Kevin

Sorry for being a dissenter, but does anybody really need an EM HC fund -- translation: regional, sector ?? Smells like too much slicing and dicing to me. If this is a slice-dice need, then I would focus less on where a stock is domiciled and more on where a stock derives its revenue, and one may want to consider an ETF like PPH, which holds significant positions in stocks that derive appreciable sales from emerging market countries as detailed here:
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/03/16/5-big-pharma-stocks-with-the-strongest-ties-to-eme.aspx
Kevin

Howdy @mcmarasco
The below linked chart lets you look at about 3 years of numbers. You may move the days slider to the left or right for a different day span.
Review will likely find that most of the broadbased healthcare funds tend to move/track the biotech area. 'Course, all funds will have some variation as to the percentage of exposure to any of the health care sectors within that fund.
We added to the healthcare area in October when the market moved down a bit.
Others have noted, and I agree that it is an investment area that should sustain itself. Of course, this sector could cycle downward somewhat with a stronger selloff of broad equity areas.
Which decent funds your have access to, may be of some consequence; be they active managed or etfs.
M* health funds category list
bio etf & 3 active managed funds chart
Regards,
Catch

i have 5% in PRHSX and 10% in POAGX. besides those two and all the similar funds, are there any other ways to buy healthcare, just to diversify a little w/ in the sector? what about healthcare REITs? any thoughts on those? or maybe GILD, to go purer and take a flier on one of the biotech powerhouses?

Hi Matt,
I work in the HC industry, and I am very positive on this sector in the short- and long-term, and I really don't think that it is too late to initiate a HC position. We currently have a 10% position in PRHSX, and own even more HC through our position in POAGX.
Kevin

@mcmarasco, If you own the S&P 500, you already have about 12% of your assets in healthcare. Putting 5% into a pure healthcare play is not a bad idea. Biotech has a big future but it will be volatile.
If you are worried about the bull getting long in the tooth, you could DCA into healthcare and biotech and/or wait for a pullback to add funds.

@Carefree: Say what you may, David Iden is very consistent. The fund ranks in the 100 percentile for all periods in it's short life.
Regards,
Ted
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/performance-return.action?t=KGGAX&region=usa&culture=en-US

Hi Carefree,
David Iben is a very smart investor, but that doesn't mean that you need to give him your money to manage. He is obviously taking concentrated bets on beaten down sectors that continue to be beaten down more (aka, value trap). And the chart for his fund -- using the 20/50/100EMAs -- looks ugly and is not improving. I would definitely consider this fund a sell and avoid. If one wants to bottom fish and has extreme patience and tolerance for pain, then I would take a look at RSX. But otherwise, I would recommend looking at more attractive global equity funds like DODWX, THOIX and VMVFX/VMNVX.
Kevin

@rjb112
Re: the SGGDX graphic.
Nice work. Thank you for the effort.
Perhaps M* is still monitoring this thread.
Catch

It is now Saturday November 29th at about 9:00 AM EST as I write. I have two funds (JCRAX & SGGDX) that are currently reflecting Wednesday November 26, 2014 nav end of day pricing in Morningstar's fund quote sheet. This carries over into their portfolio manager system.
Seems Morningstar still have issues as Yahoo Finance and the respective fund families are reporting the correct nav end of day pricing as of Friday November 28th.
Old_Skeet

@Old_Skeet: In case you want to call them and show the documentation:

@LewisBraham,
I agree completely and funny enough we were discussing the same about healthcare not too long ago.
mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/50872/#Comment_50872
Obviously Emerging Global Advisors wasn't able to generate interest in their fund but did they or anyone else offer any reasons why no one is interested? Is it a question of marketing (because I'd never heard of Emerging Global Advisors) or a true lack of interest on the part of investors? You're article seems to suggest the latter but I also don't think there's much of the former. Considering the returns you cited over the past 10 years, both are a surprise to me.

I actually looked for the health care fund the other day to consider investing in, only to realize that the fund company had dropped a lot of their EM funds. Oh well. Long ABT as a boring EM healthcare play.

Turnover ratio is one of those statistics that should be colored coded in my opinion. According to the website Investopedia:
"Mutual fund turnover is calculated as the value of all transactions (buying, selling) divided by two, then divided by a fund's total holdings. In simpler terms, mutual fund turnover typically measures the replacement of holdings in a mutual fund, and is commonly presented to investors as a percentage over a one year period. If a fund has 100% turnover, the fund replaces all of its holdings over a 12-month period."
So turnover isn't just the selling out of holdings, but also the adding of holdings. Is it not plausible that a mutual fund that doubles its size (AUM) and then puts that new money to work by only adding shares (holdings) would have an annual "turnover ratio" of 50%? This scenario seem very positive and I color it green. OAKMX AUM hasn't double in size this year, but has seen almost a 50% increase ($12B to $17B):

Rummaging through OAKMX's M* data (which only list the top 25 stocks of a fund) I noticed that only one stock, (HD (Home Depot), has been held for at least 10 years. HD was first bought by OAKMX in 2002.
OAKMX holds 52 stocks (a fairly concentrated fund... see OAKLX if you want the Ultra - Nygren concentrated fund)
Of OAKMX's top 25 holdings listed on M*:
- Six are new as of this year
- Three more have been held for less than 2 years
- 14 stock have been held less 3 years or less
- 24 have been held less than ten years
- Nygren has increased shares to 23 of his funds top 25 holdings
Of these increases, Nygren made bigger bets on:
- Google by 24%
- Diageo by 20%
- AIG by 18%
- Qualcomm by 16%
- Saniflo, Apache, Mastercard, and Oracle by 12%
I guess my point is that even a fund with a mere 19% turnover can have an entirely different portfolio of stocks in any 5 year period (19% x 5 years). Conversely, mutual fund turnover ratio can be nothing more than a manager attracting more assets and putting that money to work by buying more shares of the same holdings.
I could be wrong, but much of Nygren's turnover this year seems to be attributed more to buying than selling (increasing the number of shares of holdings). His track record speaks for itself, but his recent share increases seems to speak optimistically of the holdings he presently holds. I color this manager's turnover ratio "green".
Another important note from Investopedia:
"The turnover rate in your mutual fund is really a measure of the frequency of transactions in your funds. In general, investors should analyze the turnover rate in conjunction with several considerations in determining whether or not to purchase a particular mutual fund. The fund turnover rate is not a silver bullet for your investment portfolio; it should be used as a complimentary decision-making tool. Other indicators, such as expense ratios, load/no-load, management tenure, investment philosophy and performance are (at least) as important as the turnover rate in helping you make the right investment decisions. "
Here are the holdings Nygren has added to:

@Accipiter you are brilliant and I am very lucky :)
https://google.com/search?q=Estimated+Distributions+2014+Grandeur+Peak
https://google.com/search?q=Estimated+Distributions+2014+Kopernik

Hi Hank. $2.90 not high by NY standards. Lowest I've seen around here is ~$3.05.
I was temped to get back into PRNEX about a month ago. Obviously glad I didn't. I'll just let the oil wars with the Saudis and Russian sanctions and North American oil ventures play out until I see some uptrend. No sense trying to catch a falling knife.
And miners? Haven't touched them in over 3 years and never will gamble like that again. Yeah, some year they'll go up 80%, but maybe 1 out of 100 people can time that right and make money at it... and that isn't me. Actually, fund managers playing the value game with PM miners is the reason I left ARIVX a couple years ago. A loosing game IM<HO.

@LewisBraham,
I agree completely and funny enough we were discussing the same about healthcare not too long ago.
mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/50872/#Comment_50872
Obviously Emerging Global Advisors wasn't able to generate interest in their fund but did they or anyone else offer any reasons why no one is interested? Is it a question of marketing (because I'd never heard of Emerging Global Advisors) or a true lack of interest on the part of investors? You're article seems to suggest the latter but I also don't think there's much of the former. Considering the returns you cited over the past 10 years, both are a surprise to me.

It is now Saturday November 29th at about 9:00 AM EST as I write. I have two funds (JCRAX & SGGDX) that are currently reflecting Wednesday November 26, 2014 nav end of day pricing in Morningstar's fund quote sheet. This carries over into their portfolio manager system.
Seems Morningstar still have issues as Yahoo Finance and the respective fund families are reporting the correct nav end of day pricing as of Friday November 28th.
I wish they could find and eradicate the germlin that seems to be running loose within their data syatems.
Old_Skeet

FYI: (Click On Article At Top Of Google)
The “bucket” approach to these funds is not the way to go.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&amp;q=emerging+markets+in+detail+++barron's&amp;oq=emerging+markets+in+detail+++barron's&amp;gs_l=serp.3...174131.177089.0.177698.10.10.0.0.0.0.203.947.9j0j1.10.0....0...1c.1.58.serp..8.2.292.767JyQqIXT0