@David_Snowball
Hi David.
Thank you for sharing as always.
Your list of top managers largely and understandably looks like the cream of the crop from the funds in your portfolio as per most recent post. (I am less of a bond fund investor: Mr. Sherman is ‘David K. Sherman’ managing RPHYX, right?). And since I actually prefer low-profile managers, are the Leuthold and T Rowe Price people: Scott Opsal (+ m.b. Chun Wang) and Charles Shriver (+ m.b. Stefan Hubrich / Richard De Los Reyes)? Are there others at those co's I have missed?
Overall, your manager selections make perfect sense to me in all instances, but one. And I either trust these same managers with my investments (Seafarer, Grandeur, Artesian and now, Palm Valley) or would certainly consider doing so under the right circumstances, again – except for one. Oddly enough, this ‘one’ is your top fund holding: FPA Crescent (FPACX).
I used to have a position in FPACX long ago, but sold out for alternatives, because – to my eyes – this is a good example of where a fund and a manager ranking might diverge: i.e., a good fund with an average manager. Clearly, I am missing something, since you both value Mr. Romick highly and also have a better understanding of mutual fund dynamics.
You have previously mentioned that FPACX has ~ matched S&P 500 with about half the downside. That is a significant achievement and a strong relative metric when comparing funds – though not necessarily managers – as S&P 500 is unmanaged (sans relatively rare changes to the index). Also, S&P 500 is Large Cap while FPACX is MA/AL per MStar, so it does not seem to make for an entirely apples-to-apples comparison.
So, the questions I asked myself were:
1. How much value did Mr. Romick create for shareholders within the strategy where he operates: MA/AL (unless you believe FPACX is misclassified)? And
2. Are there managers within that strategy who have created significantly better long-term value so they might be called ‘great’ and, by extension, other manager – whose performance was meaningfully lesser – would be ‘average’ or below? (This also avoids the active manager vs passive index issues.)
Re 1, I looked at FPACX 10-year record on MStar – not as long as 30 years but might be sufficient to test across market conditions. There, FPACX has 10 y Alpha of 1.14, Beta of 1.14 coincidentally, max DD of -20.51%, and Sharpe ratio of 0.52 vs MStar MA/AL index w max DD -22.30% and Sharpe ratio of 0.61. This, and I could be very wrong, would seem to imply that active management of FPACX resulted in the fund fairly closely tracking the index and was able to generate a modest 1.14% excess return vs index at the cost of lower Sharpe ratio. To me, these numbers imply that active management of FPACX delivered average value for a good fund (i.e., a fund that managed to do marginally better than a well-performing index, which returns a poor manager / placeholder might implicitly or explicitly emulate).
Re 2, There are several options here, but I will use the one that has already been brought up: PRWCX. I think the comparison is fair since FPACX has spent most of the last 10 years in the same MA category as PRWCX. And it is a well-known fund not on your portfolio list, so you have – so to speak – chosen Mr. Romick’s fund management over Mr. Giroux’s. I do not believe, perhaps wrongly, that it is due to fund size as FPACX is not "small" and PRWCX has grown this "big" only in the last few years. As for active management metrics: per MStar PRWCX has 10 y Alpha of 4.55, Beta of 1.01, Sharpe ratio of 0.88, and max DD of -16.53%. That is, using a roughly similar pool of strategies and within the same timeframe, Giroux produces ~ 4x higher excess return, with better risk-return profile, lower downside if you happen to need the assets at just the wrong moment, and – depending on how you interpret data – does so in an arguably more predictable way. That sounds ‘great’ to me. So, why Mr. Romick and not Mr. Giroux?
To be honest, I was so baffled that I’d signed up for MFO Premium – one good thing to come out of this – and looked for clues there. The only thing I could find when running a comparison on MFO Premium was maxDD of -36.63% for PRWCX vs -28.83% for FPACX in 200902. Btw, things looked even grimmer @ MStar w max DD of at least -40.11% vs -30.80%, respectively, in the same timeframe. (Does MFO calculate max DD differently?) However, the time to convergence within 5% was quite short ~ 1 mo. So, does 5% extra DD over one month deprecate all other evidence that Mr. Giroux is a significantly better manager? Seemed doubtful to me. Finally, this comparison might not even be relevant as, in the words of Mr. Giroux, this was a BFS era, before Farris Shuggi […] it changed the way I managed CAF which happened in late 2009. In that sense, Mr. Giroux capabilities have undergone a (positive) qualitative change and, when comparing Mr. Giroux to Mr. Romick management skills since 2010, the superiority of the former appears to leave no doubt. So, I am still puzzled...
Of course, none of this is meant as a critique in any way – except, perhaps, of my own decision to sell out of FPACX – but I remember using similar logic to drive my own choice then and am, more than anything, trying to see what I might have missed. (Especially, since the rest of your fund manager appraisals resonate so well with my own.)

...Logged-in, tonight. Boom! A -$50 deficit was showing in the joint brokerage acct. It must surely correspond to the $50 transfer/extortion fee charged to me by TRP. I have not even TOUCHED the Schwab accounts yet. I got onto the chat-box. The agent offered immediately to initiate the process to refund the $50.00. Nothing else required. I won't hold my breath, but she gave every assurance. The change will show up on Monday, she volunteered to say..... NICE.
@yugo EDIT TO ADD: the $50 refund appeared just a few hours later. Way to go! So much better service, compared with TRP these days...
EDIT X2: the reason the UN-TOUCHED Schwab account showed that -$50 deficit was because when the transfer was made, there was zero in my cash/sweep MM fund at TRP. So, TRP charged the Schwab account. (How on earth?) I just got the explanation in a message from Schwab. They just crossed it out, and we move on.
But this also tells me that the local guy at Schwab who advised me to empty-out that MM fund before the transfer happened ought to have told me differently. He's caring, but less than communicative. NO WORD on wife's transfer from BRUFX. Just a lot of waiting. I understand BRUFX is a 1-man show these days....

When did VSMIX close? If you have the weblink readily available to you, please share. M* does not show it is closed.

Officially, it closes 03/29/24 but the markets are closed then for Good Friday.
One can still mail them a check which they promise to accept if postmarked 03/29 or an advisor might be able to place a direct order, if they are open then.
Here is the link:
https://www.invesco.com/us-rest/contentdetail?contentId=9add3438-7a6b-4945-b2f5-7aa23303e3db&dnsName=us&title=invesco-small-cap-value-fund-to-close-to-new-investors

Because of its methodology, MOAT ends up selling constituents too soon or hang on to value traps longer than necessary. YTD, MOAT is the worse performing of any fund I have in my watchlist. As much as I like the moat theme, it is unlikely I am going to add anymore to MOAT (5% allocation); so it increases or decreases in allocation by its performance in the portfolio. I am guessing if I were to buy one of the new ones, it is going to be MGRO which I am guessing is likely going to be larger cap than MOAT. And the buy will be in an IRA to trade it if necessary.

The difference between the value funds in my accounts and PVCMX might be the commitment to the value stocks identified. I don't see how a value oriented stock fund can make much progress if it is unwilling to back its best stock picks past 17% of holdings.
I recently realized VSMIX was available in most of our accounts. We now have toeholds, or better. They commit.

I had also taken a small position in VSMIX before closing, but I do not think a direct comparison with PVCMX was meaningful. Invesco Small Cap Value Fund (VSCAX/VSMIX) had three really good years. Even during this exceptional period they've managed a max DD of -20%, while I do not remember Cinnamond getting substantially below -20% in his entire career across 4 funds. (I do not have great fund data at that resolution, though, so please do not hesitate to correct me if this is wrong.)
If we take a more extensive view, things at VSCAX/VSMIX start looking downright dismal: max DD of -45%/-48% and alpha of -0.16/-4.74 at 5/10 y respectively. So, investing in VSCAX/VSMIX one hopes to make money now and not need them when another < -40% DD hits. I am more comfortable taking 5-10 y results and being reasonably sure that I'll have no less than 80% of max whenever I need the funds. To each his own...

I've not been a fan since losing money investing in ARIVX (I think that was Cinnamond's first solo adventure with his "disciplined" style).

I won't try to defend Mr. Cinnamond's record or explain why I find his approach compelling - I've done this on a different thread - and I can sympathize with the feelings one gets from a losing investment that sometimes takes year not to pay off. But to correct something you have said for others: ARIVX was Cinnamond's third fund as a manager and, I believe, second as a lead after ICMAX.
In my experience (and I've invested in three Cinnamond funds), his funds tend to go through a long period of flat performance, followed by fairly rapid appreciation bursts, followed by another period of flat performance. All of this can be readily understood within the technicalities of his style. So, when one is unfortunate to invest towards the end of the run, losses - though rather modest losses - would follow should one sell out before the next run or if Cinnamond decides to liquidate the fund (as he - rather objectionably, imo - did with ARIVX).
To be fair, if you wait for and hold on through the run, the returns might be quite impressive. I've invested early in ARIVX and did make money on it. Similarly, ICMAX returned ~ 100% over Cinnamond's tenure there (roughly, 2006 - 2011) while SP500 barely broke even during that time.

@Crash- I just noticed- Over 58 THOUSAND views... One THOUSAND comments... One YEAR near the top of the page...
Great job, Crash! You deserve some sort of MFO award. Ol' Ted would be green with envy.
Congrats-
OJ

Appreciate it, @Old_Joe. It seemed like the thing to do: to provide a thread to serve as a clearinghouse for all of our best ideas. Happy Easter to all.

Not yet enough AUM or trading volume to dip our toes in but holdings and other information is available. Since they are only a day old, not all stock services may recognize the tickers yet.
If one is inclined to actively manage MOAT, these two (MGRO and MVAL) give one additional tools. Note that MOAT has approx 55 holdings whereas the new ones have approx 40 holdings and as such the new funds are more concentrated (& focused).
Also, info at this link is useful to have some discussion about these new moat ETFs.
https://www.vaneck.com/us/en/blogs/moat-investing/mval-etf-and-mgro-etf-question-answer/

Stable-Value (SV) Rates, 4/1/24
TIAA Traditional Annuity (Accumulation) Rates
No changes.
Restricted RC 5.50%, RA 5.25%
Flexible RCP 4.75%, SRA 4.50%, Newer IRAs 4.75%
(TIAA Declaration Year 3/1 - 2/28)
TSP G Fund hasn't updated yet (previous 4.375%).
Edit/Add, 4/1/24. April rate is 4.25%.
Options outside of workplace retirement plans include m-mkt funds, bank m-mkt accounts (FDIC insured), T-Bills, short-term brokered CDs.
#StableValue #401k #403b #TIAA #TSP
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1413/thread

@Crash- I just noticed- Over 58 THOUSAND views... One THOUSAND comments... One YEAR near the top of the page...
Great job, Crash! You deserve some sort of MFO award. Ol' Ted would be green with envy.
Congrats-
OJ

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1768447/000168386324002101/f38160d1.htm
497 1 f38160d1.htm SAI HOMESTEAD FUNDS TRUST - MARCH 2024
Filed pursuant to 497(e)
File Nos. 333-229995 and 811-23429
Homestead Funds Trust
(The “Trust”)
Rural America Growth & Income Fund,
a series of the Trust
Supplement Dated March 28, 2024
to the Statement of Additional Information dated May 1, 2023
IMPORTANT NOTICE
The Board of Trustees of the Trust (the “Board”), based upon the recommendation of Homestead Advisers Corp., the Trust’s investment adviser (the “Adviser”), has determined to liquidate and terminate the Rural America Growth & Income Fund (the “Fund”). Due to the small amount of assets in the Fund and the expectation that the Fund’s assets will not grow sufficiently in the foreseeable future, the Adviser believes that the Fund cannot continue to conduct its operations in an economically viable manner and that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders to liquidate and terminate the Fund. After considering all the information presented to the Board, the Board concluded that it would be in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders to liquidate and terminate the Fund. To facilitate the orderly closure of the Fund, the Board has adopted a Plan of Liquidation and Termination for the Fund (the “Plan”). Shareholders who do not sell their shares of the Fund before the liquidation date set forth in the Plan, currently expected to be the close of business on June 12, 2024, will receive a liquidating distribution in cash equal to the amount of the net asset value of their shares. Thereafter, the Fund will be liquidated and dissolved, and all references to the Fund herein shall be removed.
Effective as of the close of business on April 30, 2024, the Fund is closed and will not accept any purchase orders. In connection with the termination of the Fund and as the Adviser deems appropriate, the Fund will begin the process of liquidating its portfolio securities and shareholders should be aware that the Fund will not be pursuing its stated investment objective or engaging in any business activities except for the purpose of winding up its affairs.
Prior to the close of business on June 10, 2024, shareholders of the Fund may exchange shares of the Fund for shares of the same class of any of the other Homestead Funds.
For taxable shareholders, the liquidating distribution will generally be treated as a redemption of shares and such shareholders may recognize a gain or loss for federal income tax purposes. Shareholders should consult with their tax advisors for information regarding all tax consequences applicable to investments in the Fund.
For more information, please call Homestead Funds at 800-258-3030.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

Fund Allocations (Cumulative), 2/29/24
Notable shifts into stocks. The changes for OEFs + ETFs were based on a total AUM of about $33.80 trillion in the previous month, so +/- 1% change was about +/- $338.0 billion. Also note that these changes were from both fund inflows/outflows & price changes. #ICI #Funds #OEFs #ETFs
OEFs & ETFs: Stocks 59.97%, Hybrids 4.60%, Bonds 18.05%, M-Mkt 17.38%
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1412/thread

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1314414/000158064224001866/astor-macro_497.htm
497 1 astor-macro_497.htm 497
Astor Macro Alternative Fund
Class A Shares ASTMX
Class C Shares ASTGX
Class I Shares GBLMX
(a series of Northern Lights Fund Trust)
Supplement dated March 28, 2024 to
the Prospectus and Statement of Information dated November 17, 2023
The Board of Trustees of Northern Lights Fund Trust (the “Board”) has determined based on the recommendation of the investment adviser of the Astor Macro Alternative Fund (the “Fund”), that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund cease operations. The Board has determined to close the Fund and redeem all outstanding shares on April 29, 2024.
Effective at the close of business March 28, 2024, the Fund will not accept any purchases and will no longer pursue its stated investment objectives. The Fund may begin liquidating its portfolio and may invest in cash equivalents such as money market funds until all shares have been redeemed. Any capital gains will be distributed as soon as practicable to shareholders. Shares of the Fund are otherwise not available for purchase.
Prior to April 29, 2024, you may redeem your shares, including reinvested distributions, in accordance with the “How to Redeem Shares” section in the Prospectus. Unless your investment in the Fund is through a tax-deferred retirement account, a redemption is subject to tax on any taxable gains. Please refer to the “Tax Status, Dividends and Distributions” section in the Prospectus for general information. You may wish to consult your tax advisor about your particular situation.
ANY SHAREHOLDERS WHO HAVE NOT REDEEMED THEIR SHARES OF THE FUND PRIOR TO APRIL 29, 2024 WILL HAVE THEIR SHARES AUTOMATICALLY REDEEMED AS OF THAT DATE, AND PROCEEDS WILL BE SENT TO THE ADDRESS OF RECORD. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR NEED ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR DIRECTLY OR THE FUND AT 1-877-738-0333.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTORS
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of a redemption of Fund shares. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) Custodian Account (Tax-Sheltered account) or a Keogh Account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of retirement plan within sixty (60) days in order to avoid disqualification of your plan and the severe tax consequences that it can bring. If you are the trustee of a Qualified Retirement Plan, you may reinvest the money in any way permitted by the plan and trust agreement.
This Supplement and the existing Prospectus dated November 17, 2023, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. Both the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information dated November 17, 2023, have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference and can be obtained without charge by calling the Fund at 1-877-738-0333.

Bankman Fried gets 25 years
Judge didnt buy his argument everybody has been made whole.

To achieve "absolute return" PVCMX relies on discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis. I learned that on their home page.
Turns out that DCF is the formula behind absolute value investing.
Does any other fund employ DCF analysis? MOAT does, for one:

the MOAT ETF can choose to invest in a select group of about 145 companies with economic moats identified by Morningstar analysts. These companies are narrowed down based on intrinsic value, which is calculated using a long-term discounted cash flow model.

If PVCMX helps people sleep better at night, I'm all for it. It just seems to me that the peace of mind it affords has more to do with asset allocation than stock analysis.

In the last 15 years now, US LC are dominant, why investors MUST diversify more and/or invest in lagging categories and keep missing performance and in many cases have higher risk/volatility?
US LC is the easiest, most common investment category, this is not a small unknown unique one.
BTW, if you have any good analysis where to invest please share it.

AAII Sentiment Survey, 3/27/24
BULLISH remained the top sentiment (50.0%; high) & bearish remained the bottom sentiment (22.4%, low); neutral remained the middle sentiment (27.6%, below average); Bull-Bear Spread was +27.6% (approaching mid-Dec high). Investor concerns: Elections, budget, inflation, economy, the Fed, dollar, Russia-Ukraine (109+ weeks), Israel-Hamas (24+ weeks), geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks, bonds, oil, gold, dollar ALL unusually up. Frothy areas include meme stocks, SPAC M&A, IPOs, ODTE options, cryptos, gold (but not gold-miners). #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1410/thread

If you're thinking of redemption gates, the SEC is eliminating that. If your concern is liquidity (redemption) fees, the SEC is imposing a mandatory liquidity fee on institutional MMFs (other than government funds) if daily redemptions exceed 5% of assets. Finally, non-government MMFs can at their discretion impose a redemption fee if they deem it in the best interest of the fund (fat chance).
https://www.sec.gov/files/33-11211-fact-sheet.pdf
So ISTM that SEC-imposed redemption restrictions are a non-issue. In practice, these restrictions were never a real concern. MMFs managers were so focused on not triggering a restriction that they managed their funds too conservatively. That was part of the SEC's rationale in getting rid of these restrictions.
If you're really time-sensitive, then you'll want to use funds that settle same day. The settlement date for some (not all) of the MMFs at Merrill can be found under Cash Management Solutions if you have a Merrill login.
https://olui2.fs.ml.com/Mutualfunds/MFBDCashManagement.aspx
Of note is that Merrill requires sell orders to be submitted well before 4PM for most of these funds, even if they don't settle until the next day. Merrill also notes that some of these funds price multiple times daily but that if you go through Merrill you'll only get the day end price. If intraday access to your cash is important to you, you'll likely have to invest in these MMFs directly with the distributor.

The Week in Charts (03/22/24)
The most important charts and themes in markets, including...
00:00 Intro
00:10 Topics
00:50 The Fed's 2% Inflation Farce
09:59 Japan Ends Negative Rate Era
13:42 One of the Best Starts to a Year
20:12 The Reddit IPO
22:58 Bitcoin Pullback
25:00 Apple Monopoly?
26:53 Most Unaffordable Housing Market in History
29:09 Increase in New Listings
Video
Blog

I invest where markets tell me.
1995-2000 US LC 100% indexes
2000-2010 Value, SC, international mainly in 3 funds FAIRX,OAKBX, SGIIX
Since 2010 mainly US LC+ PIMIX until 2018. Then mainly bond funds.
[snip]

Must you post these same comments numerous times on multiple boards?
No self-respecting Fund Daddy would ever do this.
You need a new schtick FD!