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.
  • Buy Sell Why: ad infinitum.
    @WABAC, Fidelity has a ton of growthy OEFs and ETFs of their own. Even their own core funds can be growthy. Look forward to your pick.
    An Interesting exercise. Four of the candidates ended up being "Great Owls." ILGFX bit the dust first for being quanty, and hugging the index more than the others. It also had the lowest investments by management.
    That left AMAGX, BDAFX, and FUNYX. At the dinky linky is the Portfolio Visualizer backtest.
    The active share for AMAGX and BDAFX is practically equal. AMAGX gets me to the highest allocation to tech. I like the allocation to industrials. It has the lowest allocation to financials, which is OK by me. It also features lower beta and standard deviation while still adding that tech. I like that for the IRA.
    If Fido offered a cheaper version of the Baron Fund it might have been too good to pass up.
  • Schwab Mutual Fund Compare tool- Problems ?
    Is anyone else having problems with Schwab Mutual Fund Compare Screener .
    I am on a MAc 10.15 - its old ... I know . I am having problems getting the compare tool to work - I am wondering if its me.. on A MAc... an older one at that !
  • WSJ: Vanguard’s Die-Hard Customers Have a Message for New CEO: ‘The Service Is Abysmal’
    Bogelheads.org I peeked about the site fast and found this discussion link.
    This tread is named, 'Customer Service Mega Thread' and begins March 29, 2024. Scroll down the page to the blue colored area, second paragraph. This write says a lot.
    I have no desire to read the thread, but some here may have an interest.
    My last Vanguard connection was a 401k plan. The rollover of that plan to a Fidelity IRA was absolutely smooth. A three way phone call and presto, finished in about 20 minutes. I suspect that wouldn't happen today.
  • Buy Sell Why: ad infinitum.
    Added a few shares to both MCD & PEP. Both are near 52-wk lows but could be heard shouting "I'm not dead yet!"
  • New Stock ETFs Offering ‘100%’ Downside Protection Are Coming
    Thanks, @Devo.
    MAXJ remaining cap as of Friday is 8.53, down from Starting Cap of 10.64% (and closed at a premium of 0.24%).
    https://www.blackrock.com/us/individual/products/337965/ishares-large-cap-max-buffer-jun-etf
    Starting NAV is $25. NAV as of 7/5 is $25.14, which is less than 0.6% above the starting NAV. Since inception, the reference Asset (index) increased by about 2% (from 547.2 to 557.8). May [be] it is the change in option prices that is causing the difference in the change in NAV vs change in reference Asset value.
  • Boeing plea.
    Never mind. I mistakenly thought you were referring to their ”Starliner” crew pleading to come home. :)
    Added - Here’s the story:
    NASA insists astronauts are 'not stranded' as 8-day Starliner mission hits one-month mark
  • Investing in CEFs - Tips & views from 3 different sources
    Discounts or not, be wary of the income generated by many CEFs use high degrees of leverage. That 7-12% yield might be great, but everything has a price --- interest rates/leverage costs, fund fees, etc. If a CEF has more than 20, 25% leverage, I would not be interested. And if the fund isn't generating enough income from its holdings and/or appreciated cap gains, it could be paying out 'destructive' return of capital, which means the dividend could be at risk longer term.
    (I only hold 1 equity CEF right now (ASGI) and have a few on watch lists, all of which are unlevered)
  • Investing in CEFs - Tips & views from 3 different sources
    … personally, I'm not sure why the percentage would be different than another stock or fund holding simply because it's a CEF. I tend to limit "risk of ruin" to be a 4-5% allocation per account under normal circumstances …
    Yep. Thanks for the thoughts @PRESSmUP. Very limited experience here with CEFs and individual stocks. But I’ve already sensed the wisdom of what you suggest. I’ve recently backed off from a 10% allocation to a single CEF to 5% each in two different ones. And one of them is quite conservative as CEFs go, playing in the investment grade corporate bond sector.
    Appreciate your digging up the thread. I’d briefly forgotten posting it. :)
  • Investing in CEFs - Tips & views from 3 different sources
    what the maximum % of a portfolio that should be committed to a single CEF might be.
    Anybody have a good answer? 5%? 10%? 0?
    Hank...personally, I'm not sure why the percentage would be different than another stock or fund holding simply because it's a CEF. I tend to limit "risk of ruin" to be a 4-5% allocation per account under normal circumstances. I've exceeded that, but with runaway stocks, not typically with a fund. CEFs predate the advent of mutual funds. I find it odd that folks shy away from a CEF but pile into JEPI with its black box of ELNs.
    With a CEF, you need to be aware of timing, as the RSI and discounts fluctuates with consumer demand. Seeking Alpha is a good resource...particularly if you follow an author who is somewhat discerning.
    The Forbes article mention a CEF worth considering, NEA...again, when the RSI levels out.
  • Do you hold gold mutual funds in your portfolio?
    OP,
    As I mentioned, ...
    Great attempt at pivoting from the cold hard facts of long-term historical performance.
    And, got it.
    Simply ignore the so called "supercycle" in stocks from 1980-2000 and concentrate solely on gold's outperformance of the S&P from 2000-current (the period to conclude that gold definitely deserves a place in an investor's portfolio. Or something like that.
    So then, what's your explanation for the S&P outperforming GLD by a whopping 210%** since GLD's inception on 11/18/04, and how does an investor reconcile that monster difference in total return with the first wild-eyed conclusion ?
    **
    Growth of $10,000
    GLD: $48,539 +385%
    FXAIX: $69,484 +595%
  • "Markets have false sense of security"
    It all depends on your time horizon and how much you need the money.
    Big Tech was flat for a decade after the Dot.com boom but that ignore the 45% or more drop initially. Small caps EM etc did much better
    Earnings estimates for SP500 are dropping explaining the lack of breath.
    diversification doesn't help until it is critical
  • Do you hold gold mutual funds in your portfolio?
    @Edmond: "Go to portfoliovizualizer.com. Run a asset comparison from 2000-current. Gold has actually outperformed the S&P."
    Ugh, well that's a great place to start your (cherry-picked) comparison period, right at the start of "The Lost Decade" for stocks!
    Let's go back a bit further, say to 1990, eh?
    https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/020915/has-gold-been-good-investment-over-long-term.asp
    Excerpt:
    From 1990 to 2020, the price of gold increased by around 360%.
    Over the same period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) gained 991%.

    Not. Even. Close.
    Then there's the most popular gold ETF on the planet, GLD, that is more than 2x the size of the next most popular gold ETF. How has GLD done since its inception on 11/18/04?
    Growth of $10,000
    GLD: $48,539 +385%
    FXAIX: $69,484 +595%
    Again.
    Not. Even. Close.
    @Edmond: "Have to laugh at the silly objections I sometimes read from the gold-haters."
    Chuckle, chuckle backatcha!.
  • Do you hold gold mutual funds in your portfolio?
    Central banks have been buying gold for their reserves more heavily since after the GFC. It may be a small % of their reserves, but that % is rising. Twitter LINK
    image
    Twitter LINK2
    image
  • "Markets have false sense of security"
    Sure, take out the engine of the world, and things will look different.
    Value has been lagging for about 15 years now.
    But one day.... :-)
    I got one word fer yooz: PLASTICS. ...Ooops, wrong movie.
    I got one word fer yooz--- in line with @rforno's remark: BREADTH.
    A healthier Market would show more breadth of profit, in addition to the crazy-nutso, irrational shot upward in the MAG-7.
    But you most often seem to want to talk past what others have to say; so, carry on.
  • Do you hold gold mutual funds in your portfolio?
    OP, as of this writing, gold comprises 5.8% of my financial assets. Most of that is bullion in the form of 1oz Maple Leafs which I self-custody. A lesser portion is in the bullion ETF SGOL, in my IRA. Most of the bullion was acquired in 2000-2003. My investment framework does not consider gold to be an investment, but rather portfolio insurance. We insure our home, our car, our health, and our life. Seems like a no-brainer to insure the portfolio which makes these other assets possible. Unlike those other insurances -- where your premium is paid to an insurance company, gold is still your asset.
    Have to laugh at the silly objections I sometimes read from the gold-haters.
    Go to portfoliovizualizer.com. Run a asset comparison from 2000-current. Gold has actually outperformed the S&P. Its true if you stretch back the time to include the 80s-90's Superbull, the S&P outperforms. But keep in mind, the 'setup' for that 20 year period of outperformance was very cheap equities. We have no such setup for equities here. So the likelihood of a massive outperformance by equities vs gold strikes me as unlikely.
    Some argue 'if you are a good stock trader, why buy gold'. Well, some people seem to inhabit Lake Woebegone, where everyone is 'above average'. I don't live there.Moreover, think back to the great traders of the 1990s. Where are they now? Consider, a lot of people who manage money professionally, are highly overrated, IMO. Consider Bruce Berkowitz (Fairholme). Or more recently, Kathy Woods Retail investors have increasingly moved to indexing because 'trading' is less of an investment strategy, and more of a hobby/recreational activity. Most professionals do not beat their best-fit index over time. Buy an index. And buy some gold.
    I know, I know, Warren Buffet hates gold. You know who likes gold? The Federal Reserve, the BOJ, the ECB, the BOE, the Bank of China, and every other CB. Maybe they are just too dumb to understand that gold is a worthless 'barbarous relic'? More likely, they have an institutional understanding of long-term cycles of what we call 'money', and that gold is, ultimately, the "base money" on which every monetary system is based. Many Asian cultures prominently use gold as a way to store their household wealth. They do this because they know their govts end up ruining their fiat and banking systems. Gold is UNDER-owned bigly in the West, because no living person has experienced what it is like to have a major monetary reset. Maybe we won't experience it -- but taking out some insurance seems prudent to me.
    Bringing it back to a more 'personal' perspective, the bullion which I self-custody is 'private money'. No custodian is telling the govt you have it. No future ex-spouse, can demand a chunk of the asset which she doesn't know about. No future creditor can lay claim to it, unless you volunteer the info.
    My post is long in the tooth. It's late. I'm tired. So I will stop here.
  • January MFO Ratings Posted
    Just posted all ratings to MFO Premium site through May, which includes month to date performance through Friday, 5 July.
    The holiday week was a good one for equities! Weeks To Date (through yesterday), QQQ up 21.5% and SPY 17.4.
    The Mid-Year Review is now Wednesday, 10 July, at 11 a.m. Pacific, where we will discuss latest features, including Flows and ETF Benchmarks (a Deveshism). Please join in by registering here.
  • January MFO Ratings Posted
    Word of caution on CD ... Schwab and Fidelity post highest yielding rates on their CD summary table. Unfortunately, nearly all these are callable. Non-callable seems to be about 0.5% lower. Something to consider, especially with ladders.
    I've recommended that they add a row for highest yielding callable and well as non-callable rates; otherwise, it feels gimmicky and misleading. I'm confident they will take my recommendation to heart.
     
    A good description of what I'm seeing from Fed site:
    "Investors often turn to federally insured certificates of deposit, sold by banks or brokers, when stock markets are volatile. Rising interest rates and stock market drops have made CDs more attractive, especially to older investors. But what many investors don't realize - and some stockbrokers apparently aren't adequately disclosing - is that, unlike traditional CDs, with 'callable' CDs only the issuer, and not the investor, can redeem the CD without a substantial penalty. Callable CDs are being marketed via newspaper ads, telephone solicitations and direct mail."
  • Bloomberg Real Yield
    05 July show seems not to be available?
    Did they have a show yesterday? I do not recall Comcast giving me the recording. May be Bloomy gave some staff a long weekend.
  • Bloomberg Real Yield
    05 July show seems not to be available?