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.
  • What to do?
    You're proving my point - it's all about "what have you done lately".
    Had you looked at the same figures at another point in time, say on SCHD's 10 year anniversary (10/31/2021), SCHD's cumulative performance would have underwhelmed:
    10 year: 309.10% vs 348.91% (FXAIX)
    5 year: 118.00% vs. 137.75%
    3 year: 71.20% vs. 79.20%
    1 year: 44.08% vs. 42.89%
    The fairly recent outperformance should be obvious from my table showing SCHD outperforming FXAIX by a cumulative 20% over the three past calendar years (2020-2022).
    Do you give any consideration to "regression to the mean"? The same table shows FXAIX outperforming SCHD by as much as 10% cumulative in other three year periods. With actively managed funds, there's a lot that can change. But with index funds, a "true buy & hold type" is going to need more than a one year anomaly to "sell & trade":
    2023 YTD: 1.67% (SCHD) vs. 6.71% (FXAIX)
    2022: -3.23% vs. -18.13% <-- 15% spread
    2021: 29.87% vs. 28.69%
    2020: 15.08% vs. 18.40%
    2019: 27.28% vs. 31.47%
    What's the theory for buying SCHD? That any time the market goes down, SCHD will win big? Or that we can expect, or at least hope for, another huge year (relatively speaking) for SCHD in the future? One that will make up for its typical slightly underperforming years?
    At least we can dispense with the former idea - that SCHD outperforms in down markets.
    2018: -5.56% (SCHD), -4.40% (FXAIX)
    2015: -0.31% (SCHD) vs. 1.38% (FXAIX)
    interestingly, FXAIX/IVV is on the honor roll too, and not SCHD
    This is a good example of why I continue to urge people to understand numbers, not just quote them. Honor roll status is based on raw performance relative to category, i.e. top quintile over 1,3,5 year spans. Immediately we see one potential issue - these are funds in different categories.
    At least as important is the fact that FXIAX's performance is being compared with that of (only) other S&P 500 funds. With a 2 basis point ER, it's a sure bet that FXIAX will always be in the top quintile of its narrow category of peers. Instant honor roll.
    SCHD is in Lipper's Equity Income category - a broad category, and SCHD doesn't always come out in the top 20%.
    The fact that FXAIX is a LC Blend fund (M* terminology) while SCHD is LCV goes far to explaining the 2022 split in relative performance. Value simply had a once in a generation (relative) banner year: VVIAX lost 2.08%, while VFIAX lost 18.15%. This 2σ+ fluke is hardly suggestive of future outperformance.
    To reiterate, SCHD is a fine fund. But a better long term fund? I wouldn't place heavy bets on one style of investing - value or otherwise. Sure, use SCHD, but then counter balance it.
  • What to do?
    Over the long term they do slightly better than FXAIX
    Do they do any better, or are you just looking relative to a particular moment in time (i.e. now)? Comparing their three year rolling cumulative returns by calendar years (e.g. Jan 2019-Dec 2021), the figures (from M* charts) are:
         2020-2022  '19-'21	'18-'20	'17-'19	'16-'18	'15-'17	'14-'16	'13-'15	'12-'14	'11-'13
    FXAIX 24.75% 100.32% 48.80% 53.10% 30.38% 38.28% 29.02% 52.54% 74.51% 56.77%
    SCHD 44.56% 90.14% 38.51% 45.45% 32.84% 40.22% 29.53% 48.09% 65.32% 56.42%
    CDC 38.27% 78.90% 27.03% 30.48% 31.78% 38.76% - - - -
    Over its lifetime (July 1, 2014 through Feb 10, 2023), CDC has done slightly worse than FXAIX, returning a cumulative 138.04% vs FXAIX's 143.78%.
    More importantly, all the cumulative figures ending Dec 31, 2022 are significantly skewed by FXAIX's sizeable underperformance in 2022 relative to the other funds: -18.13% vs -3.23% (SCHD) or -7.76% (CDC). (FXAIX has done better so far this year.)
    I'm not knocking any of these funds, and I can certainly see the point in suggesting dividend oriented funds to someone who has been focused on cash returns. It's just that there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.
    For true buy & hold types, the argument for SCHD over SP500 is clear: SCHD has nontrivially outperformed 10/5/3/1y. (A flip occurred 4mos ago.) For those who fancy themselves slightly more conservative or at least 'non-volatilist', a second argument for SCHD is clear. For preservation Lipper gives SCHD 5* and FXAIX/IVV 4*. MFOP gives Great Owl status to both (interestingly, FXAIX/IVV is on the honor roll too, and not SCHD) but shows SCHD's UI to be ~50%-75% of SP500, depending on time period.
  • M* Charts for TIAA/CREF VAs
    Update 2/12/23. New links for TIAA/CREF VA Charts
    https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/932/thread
    CREF VAs have classes R1 [highest ERs], R2, R3 [lowest ERs] since 4/1/15. Old single-class VAs had ERs similar to the new R2 class. TIAA has also populated the old/non-existing histories of newer classes with those for the older single-classes. TIAA T-REA remains a single class VA.
    Links for CREF VAs, R3 classes and T-REA.
    CREF Bond Market R3 QCBMIX
    CREF Equity Index R3 QCEQIX
    CREF Global Equity R3 QCGLIX
    CREF Growth R3 QCGRIX
    CREF ILB R3 QCILIX
    CREF Social Choice R3 QCSCIX
    CREF Stock R3 QCSTIX
    TIAA Real Estate Account (T-REA) QREARX
    The Q-symbols for CREF VA classes differ only in the 5th place: R1 has R, R2 has P, R3 has I. So, the charts for R1 and R2 classes can be created from the corresponding R3 class charts by simply adjusting the Q-symbols in the URL. See the following example for the CREF Stock.
    QCSTRX https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/QCSTRX/chart
    QCSTPX https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/QCSTPX/chart
    QCSTIX https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/QCSTIX/chart
    I have tested these links in M* LOGOFF mode too, so they should work for everybody.
  • Default Denialism is real

    I guess I could try switching to physical NYT and Washington Post but the amount of paper we would have to take to the landfill weekly is overwhelming
    It's not like the old days, when a Sunday paper could clock in at 12 pounds. These days it seems that I can fold the entire Sunday NYTimes.
    https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/heaviest-ever-newspaper
    With the rapid rise in print edition costs (about 25% cumulative over the past two years), I've trimmed back to just the (ever lighter) Sunday paper. It is delivered in two parts (Saturday for fill sections, Sunday for news), so I still get to touch a paper for the whole weekend.
  • Default Denialism is real

    2013 -48.83%
    2014 -15.39%
    2015 -23.14%
    There's a typo. It should be -47.83%.
  • Anybody know when the 2022 (December ‘22) Annual Report for DODBX will be available?
    Your cynicism is not unjustified, though the process of introducing streamlined reports was a bit more neutral than that.
    From the SEC proposal:
    We request comment on the proposed scope of disclosure for the annual report, including the following: ...
    4. A fund may have multiple share classes with differing fee structures. Should these multi-class funds be permitted to reflect only one or a subset of classes, rather than all share classes in a shareholder report so long as a fund produces a shareholder report that relates to each share class? Would such an approach reduce the complexity of the disclosure and provide more-tailored information that is specific to a shareholder’s investment in the fund? Or, conversely, would such a requirement not benefit shareholders? For example, could it reduce shareholders’ ability to compare classes of a fund? Should there be limits on the number or types of classes that a single annual report may cover to reduce potential complexity or length? For example, should we prohibit an annual report transmitted to retail shareholders from including disclosure related to a fund’s institutional class? Are there potential complexities or burdens associated with such an approach? Please explain.
    https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2020/33-10814.pdf
    The comments received by the SEC can be found here:
    https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920.htm
    Few comments addressed the streamlined reports, as the bulk of the proposal deals with changes to the "full" reports. One comment worth noting is from Barbara Roper (at the time, the director of investor protection for the Consumer Federation of America).
    Seeing [multiple share class] information could, for example, cause the investor to question why they are invested in shares that carry higher costs or suffer poorer performance relative to other available share classes.
    ...
    We are therefore at least preliminarily opposed to the idea ...of permitting funds to reflect only a subset of share classes in a shareholder report. Despite our initial skepticism, we believe this approach is worth testing to see whether it results in a better investor experience. If testing demonstrates that limiting the number of share classes reported on in a single report offers benefits that outweigh the potential downsides, the Commission should proceed accordingly. However, ...
    https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920-8204376-227513.pdf
    All I can find in Capital Research and Management's comments regarding the streamlined reports is that it is generally supportive of adopting them:
    We support the Commission proposing a rule that creates a new streamlined shareholder report with key information and provides funds with an alternative way to keep shareholders informed instead of delivering annual prospectus updates to existing shareholders. We believe this approach furthers the Commission’s goal to address the concern that shareholder report and prospectus disclosures may appear redundant or inconsistent to shareholders, as well as the belief that prospectus disclosures in particular may often be less relevant to the informational needs of a shareholder who is simply monitoring his or her fund investments. However...
    https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920-8204356-227509.pdf
  • BONDS, HIATUS ..... March 24, 2023
    @Sven
    This is a chart of the 10 yr yield for the past year. Place/hover the mouse pointer anywhere on the line to display the date and yield for that date. The percent to the right side is the percentage change in the yield from the chart beginning date.
  • Any limits to how far a fund can fall in a single day? Old Thread / New Question / Same Fund
    Interesting question...I do remember BLNDX falling ~ 5% in a day I believe it was autumn of 21'. Kept thinking, nah, it's too early for a distribution etc...it was real...it stung.
    ISTM it all depends on how much you have in that investment and how much/if you are hedged..
    I'd ask what is the largest drawndown in a week...most flushes seem to take place over 3 days...some Friday night are tougher than others if you get the whammo down in your portfolio and have all weekend to fester on it...
    I also remember reading something online where some "limit" what they are willing to risk in the market based on what they earn in 12 or 6 months or 3 months etc...my personal limit is 3 months but likely cause I am so risk adverse?
    Good Luck and Good Health to all,
    Baseball Fan
  • BONDS, HIATUS ..... March 24, 2023
    @hank, Many thanks to your info on what Fed and the market control. I too notice the 10 year treasury yield has moved up from the low 1.3% (1/5/23) to 3.74% (2/10/23), and that is sizable change in short time. High quality IG bond funds I am invested are yielding 4.0% that is encouraging from that of last year.
    For the w/e Feb. 3, LQD was +5.2%, HYG was +4.25% and AGG was +3.17%, YTD. This past week found these 3 cut in half for YTD performance. A serious 'hair cut'.
    @catch22, profit taking - interesting only for a small gain. Bond market this year is quite volatile even in high quality bonds including treasuries and IG bonds. I left the bond sector since fall 2021 and bought back some % this year with the yields being more attractive at about 4%. Still trying to better understand the bond volatility and opportunities to make some gain this year.
  • BONDS, HIATUS ..... March 24, 2023
    Hi @Sven
    Strictly my own opinion, but as the 10 year Treasury still remains a benchmark for many forms of consumer loans, it's yield forms a benchmark for other bond yields, too. Although the yield curve that has been and is in place for some time now, fully perverts the normal historic range of yield spreads with 'somewhat normal economic conditions'; of which is not clear at this time, eh? The economy is in a 'coin toss' right now, at least for the big money and traders. I do my best to understand where the money wants to travel within bonds, not unlike equities.
    As with the list of bond NAV's, there are many different sectors for various needs; not unlike the 11 sectors of the SP-500, and they find there own path for a variety of reasons.
    For this past week, I think we find a pure profit taking event with some bonds.
    For the w/e Feb. 3, LQD was +5.2%, HYG was +4.25% and AGG was +3.17%, YTD. This past week found these 3 cut in half for YTD performance. A serious 'hair cut'.
    Hopefully, others will offer a viewpoint.
    I've placed a link below about the large issuance of bonds early this year that may help define some of this week's sell down.
    Record global bond issuance to start 2023.
  • What to do?
    Over the long term they do slightly better than FXAIX
    Do they do any better, or are you just looking relative to a particular moment in time (i.e. now)? Comparing their three year rolling cumulative returns by calendar years (e.g. Jan 2019-Dec 2021), the figures (from M* charts) are:
         2020-2022  '19-'21	'18-'20	'17-'19	'16-'18	'15-'17	'14-'16	'13-'15	'12-'14	'11-'13
    FXAIX 24.75% 100.32% 48.80% 53.10% 30.38% 38.28% 29.02% 52.54% 74.51% 56.77%
    SCHD 44.56% 90.14% 38.51% 45.45% 32.84% 40.22% 29.53% 48.09% 65.32% 56.42%
    CDC 38.27% 78.90% 27.03% 30.48% 31.78% 38.76% - - - -
    Over its lifetime (July 1, 2014 through Feb 10, 2023), CDC has done slightly worse than FXAIX, returning a cumulative 138.04% vs FXAIX's 143.78%.
    More importantly, all the cumulative figures ending Dec 31, 2022 are significantly skewed by FXAIX's sizeable underperformance in 2022 relative to the other funds: -18.13% vs -3.23% (SCHD) or -7.76% (CDC). (FXAIX has done better so far this year.)
    I'm not knocking any of these funds, and I can certainly see the point in suggesting dividend oriented funds to someone who has been focused on cash returns. It's just that there's a tendency for people to look at "what have you done for me lately" even when trying not to - sometimes it's baked into the numbers.
    For a set and forget fund that covers all bases ("foreign, global, world and U.S", and fixed income) one might consider VGWIX / VGYAX. Not an index fund, but still a low cost fund. Its 35/65 stock/bond mix may also suit someone moving from a cash portfolio. Funds with more traditional blends include VGWLX / VGWAX and CIBFX (though jumbo). A drawback of these funds (notably the Vanguard ones) is a dearth of EM investment. You may consider that a plus (arguably a more conservative approach).
  • BONDS, HIATUS ..... March 24, 2023
    'The MFO Cafe'. Well, it's actually more of a bar and grill place. One of the old places that doesn't have all the 'hard surfaces' of the newer bar and grills with too many tv's and 12 different programs being displayed with 'no' volume. Distractions in full view. At the MFO B&G one may actually have and hear conversation without screaming. The food? A mixed bag, so to speak; but not much of the menu would be considered 'Heart Smart', but the taste of the burgers and fries are amazing; and the food/beverage choices are 'very expansive'. And if one is so inclined, a wash down with an alcohol beverage is available in many descriptions.
    So, I'm glad that so many meet here, at this electronic Cafe. But, it sure makes it tough for one to try to present new information. But, this is a good thing, with all of the related information and discussions.The purpose is being served here.
    --- And the FED bobble-head of the week/day. Guess they just can't resist. But I've become fully tired of the endless banter; and the 'shout-outs' are not productive, IMHO. Do they continue to chatter because they're nervous about their actions?
    --- Well, I keep watching for bonds and equity to have that separation, you know; that negative correlation. Crap, they're traveling together again.
    --- Disinflation v Inflation snippet
    2022 used car/truck prices dropped -15%, but January, 2023 used car/truck prices up +2.5%. Folks might be giving more attention to those 2023 new auto/truck MSRP's or the printing on the window label is larger and more readable; OR they're running lower on money for such an expense and no longer willing to pay up. 'Course some new car/truck financing may be higher, too. Lots of dollars, regardless; for something 'new'; relative to many other needs in life.
    --- +1,932%. Well, not a profit return; but the yield increase of FZDXX and some other MMKT's from about a .22% yield in April of 2022, to date. Yield going a fair amount higher into summer time, IMHO; as the FED will continue the Fed Funds Rate.
    --- Thursday. WASHINGTON, Feb 9 (Reuters) Weekly jobless claims increase 13,000 to 196,000
    Four-week moving average of claims falls 2,500 to 189,250
    Continuing claims rise 38,000 to 1.688 million
    The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment benefits increased more than expected last week, but the underlying trend continued to point to a tight labor market.
    The jobs market has remained resilient despite growing economic headwinds from the Federal Reserve's interest rate increases. While labor market strength keeps the U.S. central policy on its monetary policy tightening path, it also suggests that a much anticipated recession is nowhere near.
    --- U.S.$ UP +.76% for the week.
    *** Bonds of most flavors got the big percent face slap this week. I'm still inclined towards IG bonds for the longer term, being year(s) not months; when the FED rates increases begin to stop and move downward. Duration right now is important for we investors, as the yield's for the short end are 'high'; as noted in the yield curve notations at MFO. At some point, when the economy finds a defined direction; longer duration will find a path. I keep watching for rotations with yields/pricing, as I lean more towards attempting to find the profit from pricing; but right now I'm happy with the +4% yields of a MMKT. This was not the case in April, 2022.
    A good day to you.....
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ---Several selected bond funds returns since October 25, 2022. I'll retain this date, as it is a recent inflection point when bonds began to have positive price moves. We'll need to watch if this was just a 'blip'.
    NOTE: I've kept the prior dated reports in the beginning of this thread; and have added YTD to this data.
    For the WEEK/YTD, NAV price changes, Febuary 6 - Febuary 10, 2023
    ***** This week (Friday), FZDXX, MMKT yield continues to move with Fed funds rate and ended the week at 4.47% . The core Fidelity MMKT's have continued a slow creep upward to 4.18%. The holdings of these different funds account for the variances at this time.
    --- AGG = -1.4% / +1.72% (I-Shares Core bond), a benchmark, (AAA-BBB holdings)
    --- MINT = +.06% / +1% (PIMCO Enhanced short maturity, AAA-BBB rated)
    --- SHY = -.32% / +.27% (UST 1-3 yr bills)
    --- IEI = -.12% / +1.84% (UST 3-7 yr notes/bonds)
    --- IEF = -1.66% / +1.45% (UST 7-10 yr bonds)
    --- TIP = -.49% / +1.16% (UST Tips, 3-10 yrs duration, some 20+ yr duration)
    --- VTIP = -.02% / +.54% (Vanguard Short-Term Infl-Prot Secs ETF)
    --- STPZ = -.08% / +.52% (UST, short duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
    --- LTPZ = -1.5% / +3.18% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds, PIMCO)
    --- TLT = -3.1% / +4.1% (I Shares 20+ Yr UST Bond
    --- EDV = -4.3% / +5.65% (UST Vanguard extended duration bonds)
    --- ZROZ = -4.5 / +5.9% (UST., AAA, long duration zero coupon bonds, PIMCO
    --- TBT = +6.8% / -7.6% (ProShares UltraShort 20+ Year Treasury (about 23 holdings)
    --- TMF = -9.3% / +10% (Direxion Daily 20+ Yr Trsy Bull 3X ETF (about a 3x version of EDV etf)
    *** Additional important bond sectors, for reference:
    --- BAGIX = -1.4% / +1.88% (active managed, plain vanilla, high quality bond fund)
    --- LQD = -2.5% / +2.52% (I Shares IG, corp. bonds)
    --- BKLN = +.0% / +3.67% (Invesco Senior Loan, Corp. rated BB & lower)
    --- HYG = -2.1% / +2.05% (high yield bonds, proxy ETF)
    --- HYD = -.74 %/+3.5% (VanEck HY Muni
    --- MUB = -.68% /+1.75 (I Shares, National Muni Bond)
    --- EMB = -2.8%/+1.86% (I Shares, USD, Emerging Markets Bond)
    --- CWB = -1.24% / +6.14% (SPDR Bloomberg Convertible Securities)
    --- PFF = -1.77% / +8.3% (I Shares, Preferred & Income Securities)
    --- FZDXX = 4.47% yield (7 day), Fidelity Premium MMKT fund
    *** FZDXX yield was .11%, April,2022.
    Comments and corrections, please.
    Remain curious,
    Catch
  • Any limits to how far a fund can fall in a single day? Old Thread / New Question / Same Fund
    Can’t read Morningstar’s “analyst ratings” because I don’t subscribe.
    Try your local library. As I'm typing this, I have the M* analyst (AI) report open from my library.
    Here’s the lead-in from Morningstar’s site …
    ”A middling Parent Pillar rating and a subpar People Pillar limit Invesco Gold & Special Minerals A to a Morningstar Quantitative Rating of Neutral.”
    But when you look at their overall rating for the fund, displayed more prominently at the top of the same page, it shows 5 stars.
    This turkey aside, what is it about Morningstar’s methodology that causes a “middling” fund, in their own words, to receive a 5-star rating?
    As others have commented, star ratings are objective, retrospective. Analyst ratings are subjective, prospective. And worse if done by machine.
    Beyond that, I'm rather skeptical of the value of the parent pillar. That pillar encompasses a variety of attributes, some of which IMHO don't contribute to forecasting accuracy. (I've been meaning to do some more research here and write something up; may still get to it.) Here, the middling rating appears to be because the family's funds are all over the map, not showing many areas of strength.
    The weak people pillar comes in part from the computer's assertion that the sole manager, Li, has not yet shown "themself" good at running this strategy. One wonders what a machine "thinks" it needs to recognize good performance beyond a 5* rating from someone who's managed a fund for a quarter century. A great example of why I pay little attention to M*'s 'Q' ratings.
    ISTM Invesco already had an (inferior) gold fund when they bought out Oppenheimer. Did they essentially “axe” the superior Oppenheimer fund and its management and then apply that name to their own inferior fund - moving the invested assets into it as well?
    Yogi answered this. To complete the details: Invesco merged Invesco Gold & Precious Metals (FGLDX) into Invesco Oppenheimer Gold & Special Minerals Fund (OPGSX), not the other way around, near the end of 2019.
    https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/invesco-announces-changes-to-its-us-etf-and-mutual-fund-product-lines-300974616.html
    fork over additional $$ to see what their analysts really think about a fund.
    Fork over money and you still won't get to see what their analysts think about this fund (or many others). You'll just get to see what their computers "think". For the very little that is often worth.
  • Any limits to how far a fund can fall in a single day? Old Thread / New Question / Same Fund
    ”Same manager since 1997” Thanks for the follow through Yogi. Very interesting.
    Somewhere I heard this fund was more volatile than most but also more profitable. I’ll confess to often reading a forum that’s quite focused on gold / miners. And while I’m strictly an amateur observer there, it appears from what I read that there are stark differences in how different p/c mining companies have fared in recent years. Apparently this relates to the “sporadic” quality of various mines they own. Some have prospered while others have lost tons. Possibly OPGSX is intentionally investing in the under-performers as a longer term play.
    I guess it bothers me that M* allows fund houses to post its “4 and 5 star” ratings (I’d imagine in return for compensation) as testimony / advertisement for their funds on their websites and than undermines that very rating in publishing critical reviews for readers willing to fork over additional $$ to see what their analysts really think about a fund. ISTM they’re making $$ on both ends here.
  • M* Portfolio Will be Around Through 2023
    M* Bill Baranyk has posted on a very long M* thread that the old M* Portfolio will be around at least through 2023.
    "An update on our plans: We will not retire legacy Portfolio Manager in 2023. As we continue to build and release more enhancements to Investor, legacy Portfolio Manager will still remain available. We will not retire the legacy version until Investor’s portfolio features are successfully up and running, and we’ll continue to update you on our progress."
    Very long M* thread that requires lots of clicks to get to the recent post page, https://community.morningstar.com/s/question/0D53o000066YnacCAC/does-anyone-else-feel-like-the-new-morningstar-investor-is-a-huge-downgrade-compared-with-the-legacy-portfolio-manager
  • Any limits to how far a fund can fall in a single day? Old Thread / New Question / Same Fund
    I would say ignore Morningstar and compare OPGSX with other gold funds using Fidelity's screener. SGGDX compares favorably to OPGSX with a standard deviation 25% lower. SGGDX also has the highest 3 year Sharpe Ratio in the category as well. I'm not recommending these funds-just providing a bit more info.
    Words from the wise. ...Although I'm too lazy to do it. Morningstar has become too convenient for me. I recognize their marker "Q" which tells you that some A.I or quant formula has been used to MECHANICALLY rate that stock or fund.... I get the Morningstar subscription via TRP. Sometimes, the text is helpful.
    And @MikeM: hilarious! Thank you.
  • Any limits to how far a fund can fall in a single day? Old Thread / New Question / Same Fund
    @hank, I believe ratings are based on a peer group comparison. M* says 5* compared to 68 funds. If all the funds in that group sucked, someone had to be less sucky than the rest.
    @ carew388, I believe SGGDX may be the only PM/miner fund that actually holds gold too, not all equities. I think it holds about 20% of the actual yellow stuff. That will smooth out volatility.
    If I were to hold one of these funds it would be SGGDX - but I won't :)
    As G.W. Bush infamously said:
    “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”
  • What to do?
    Yes, COWZ is up already by 7.5% YTD on saturday, 11 feb, '23.
    SCHP= TIPS. (Schwab.)
    FCBFX. 58% in triple B. (Fidelity corporate.)
    HYMU. Munis. (Blackrock.)
    Balanced: DODBX. Over 15 years, it's in top 7 percent of category. +7.63%.
    Global stocks: YTD +8.42%. (TRP.) PRGSX . Over 15 years: +7.82%, top 18% of category.
    52 USA. 43 foreign, presently.
    Maybe SCHP is an Indexer. None of the others.
    VMIAX. Basic Materials/Chemicals. (Vanguard. Stinky service.). YTD +6.49%. Over 15 years: +7.47, top 22 percent in category.
    Single stocks for steady dividends: BHB. (I own it.) Regional bank in Northern New England. HQ in Bar Harbor, Maine. That's where Acadia National Park is. Branches in ME, NH, VT.
    O is the mother of all REITS. Over 15 years, it's up by +10.45%. Dividends to reinvest. But I don't know how they keep doing it. The payout ratio is a huge, out of line number... But REITS are different animals, too. Since 1994, the stock is up by +730%. That's not a typo.
    (Among REITs, I own PSTL. But it's still rather young.)
    "Happy Motoring!"
    "No, No, NO! Don't open that closet!"
  • Any limits to how far a fund can fall in a single day? Old Thread / New Question / Same Fund
    Same manager since 1997.
    Gold-mining has been terrible for B&H and being top performer in category for 3,5,10 years doesn't mean much. * ratings are based on past performance only within the category, and overall * rating is a weighted average of *s for 3, 5, 10 years.
    Analyst ratings take into account several factors besides the past performance. However, Analyst ratingsQ are computer-generated and are hard to read or make sense out of. It's NeutralQ here. May be M* can train ChatGPT to do a better job.