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.
  • The $42 Billion Question: Why Aren’t Americans Ditching Big Banks?
    I've been banking online for 15+ years. I still have an account with one of the Big 4 and keep just above the minimum balance to avoid monthly fees. Best of both worlds though for all practical purposes I can close out my physical bank account.
    Over 15 years the differential between online bank rates and the measly rate I get from my Big 4 bank has been pretty significant.
  • Vanguard Quits Net-Zero Alliance
    Let me add this info based on % of total electricity produced by renewables.
    Sorry about formatting.
    Rank: State: Electricity production from renewables: Largest renewable energy source: Largest non-renewable energy source:
    1 Vermont 99.9% Hydroelectric Natural gas
    2 Maine 78.6% Hydroelectric Natural gas
    3 Idaho 76.3% Hydroelectric Natural gas
    4 South Dakota 73.8% Hydroelectric Coal
    5 Washington 69.8% Hydroelectric Natural gas
    6 Oregon 62.2% Hydroelectric Natural gas
    7 California 48.2% Hydroelectric Natural gas
    8 Montana 44.7% Hydroelectric Coal
    9 Iowa 43.6% Wind Coal
    10 Kansas 41.7% Wind Coal
    11 Oklahoma 39.1% Wind Natural gas
    12 North Dakota 35.0% Wind Coal
    13 Alaska 29.7% Hydroelectric Natural gas
    14 New York 28.5% Hydroelectric Natural gas
    15 Nevada 28.4% Solar Natural gas
    16 Colorado 24.9% Wind Coal
    17 Minnesota 24.3% Wind Coal
    18 New Mexico 24.2% Wind Coal
    19 Nebraska 23.2% Wind Coal
    20 Texas 18.8% Wind Natural gas
  • The $42 Billion Question: Why Aren’t Americans Ditching Big Banks?
    The average rate on money-market and savings accounts at the five largest banks nearly tripled in the third quarter from where it was in the second
    Trippled, wow. BofA's base savings account rate went up from 0.01% all the way up to ... 0.1%. WSJ is correct; Platinum Honors will quadruple that, to 0.04%.
    https://www.bankofamerica.com/deposits/savings/savings-accounts/
    Platinum Honors at BofA does have merit, but that's not to be found in its savings rates. Rather in its credit card rebates, where one can get as much as 5.25% cash back for keeping $100K in BofA or Merrill (formerly Merrill Edge).
    As to why people don't change banks, bank accounts are very sticky. For some it's because they've been using the same bill payment/checking system for a long time and it's an effort to move. For some it's the hassle of changing direct deposits. For some its physical proximity or ubiquity, especially with large banks that surcharge for foreign ATMs. For a few it may be safe deposit boxes (which are free with Platinum Honors, but relatively few BofA branches still have boxes).
  • Vanguard Quits Net-Zero Alliance
    @sma3 "Texas at least, can claim their economic interests are at stake, although with the huge wind and solar arrays there, they will probably do pretty well with renewable energy. "
    Are you implying Texas has huge solar & wind projects at this time or they could develop them ?
    Texas is the #1 state in wind energy; if it were a separate country, it would be #5 in the world. Wind and solar bailed out the TX grid this summer when it could have collapsed under the heat the state experienced.
    TX wind power
  • The $42 Billion Question: Why Aren’t Americans Ditching Big Banks?
    Americans are missing out on billions of dollars in interest by keeping their savings at the biggest U.S. banks.
    Following are edited excerpts from an article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal. While we here at MFO discuss the merits of CDs which pay 4.85%, huge numbers of fellow Americans are earning next to nothing on their bank deposits.

    The Federal Reserve has raised interest rates to their highest level since early 2008. Yet the biggest commercial banks are still paying peanuts to savers. In theory, savers could have earned $42 billion more in interest in the third quarter if they moved their money out of the five largest U.S. banks by deposits to the five highest-yield savings accounts—none of which are offered by the big banks—according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of S&P Global Market Intelligence data.
    The five banks—Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., U.S. Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co.—paid an average of 0.4% interest on consumer deposits in savings and money-market accounts during the quarter, according to S&P Global. The five highest-yielding savings accounts paid an average of 2.14% during the same period, according to data from Bankrate.com. These five banks collectively hold about half of all the money kept at U.S. commercial banks in savings and money-market accounts tracked by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. That share has held steady despite the availability of higher rates elsewhere.
    The $42 billion gap in the third quarter was the largest amount since record-keeping began, but will likely be dwarfed in the fourth quarter because top high-yield savings accounts have raised their interest rates to more than 3.5%.
    Since the start of 2019, Americans have lost out on at least $291 billion in interest by keeping their savings in the five biggest banks. That total balloons to $603 billion when going back to 2014, when the FDIC started tracking consumer deposits in money-market and other savings accounts.
    And U.S. savers have likely missed out on much more than $600 billion because the average rate the five biggest banks have paid over the past eight years, 0.24%, includes higher-yielding money-market accounts and some business accounts. Traditional savings accounts paid an average rate of 0.02% at the five largest banks during that period.
    Why haven’t savers moved more of their money? Some customers aren’t aware of how much money they could make by switching, and others just don’t care. Alicia Gillum has been with Bank of America for 26 years and says she has no interest in searching for a new bank, even though her savings of more than $100,000 is earning almost no interest. Her loyalty has earned her Platinum Honors Tier status, which affords her a 0.04% interest rate on her savings instead of the 0.01% rate the bank pays to customers of its basic savings accounts.
    Americans flush with stimulus payments and enhanced unemployment checks flooded U.S. banks with deposits earlier in the pandemic. The biggest banks got an outsize share of those deposits. About $425 billion flowed into money-market and savings accounts at U.S. commercial banks between the first quarter of 2020 and the third quarter of 2022, according to the FDIC. More than 95% of that went to the five largest banks.
    But things could be changing. The average rate on money-market and savings accounts at the five largest banks nearly tripled in the third quarter from where it was in the second. And people are starting to move their money around in other ways to take advantage of higher rates, pouring a record amount into higher-yielding savings vehicles such as Series I savings bonds and Treasury bills this year.
    Wow! "Platinum Honors Tier status" at BofA... Now that's really something!
  • CD Rate update
    My guess is that it is a pause. I think pauses are not unusual just before the Feds make a decision about interest rate hikes, but I fully anticipate the Feds to continue with interest rates, even though they are likely going to be smaller and less frequent. However, I am not anticipating longer term rates of 5 years, to be as high as shorter term rates of less than 2 years. I think there is too much optimisim that this rate hike period will only last another year, and at that time, I suspect shorter term rates will likely settle into a period where they are not rising so fast every few months.
  • Uranium bulls starting??
    https://theoregongroup.com/the-uranium-bull-market-and-the-coming-of-the-second-atomic-age-the-oregon-group-special-report/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=TwitterGeneralNoSubscribe&utm_id=Uranium&twclid=2-447nm4f8viiut65oyg7lbhld2
    Uranium is at the start of a 10-year bull market, according to our new report. The Oregon Group forecasts the uranium market will be positively impacted by a large net increase in global nuclear reactors, which require uranium as fuel.***
    Many yrs bull Uranium??
    Very volatile
    Maybe looking adding more UEC URA or $Urnm maybe 0.5% of portfolio
  • Wanger Select Fund to be reorganized
    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/929521/000119312522300645/d426006d497.htm
    497 1 d426006d497.htm WANGER ADVISORS TRUST
    Supplement dated December 8, 2022
    to the Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (SAI) of the following Fund:
    Fund Prospectus, Summary Prospectus and SAI Dated
    Wanger Advisors Trust
    Wanger Select May 1, 2022
    In December 2022, the Board of Trustees of the Fund, having determined that a reorganization of the Fund was in the best interest of the Fund and its shareholders, voted to approve an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization to reorganize the Fund (the Target Fund) with and into Wanger Acorn (the Acquiring Fund).
    Pursuant to applicable law (including the Investment Company Act of 1940) the reorganization may be implemented without shareholder approval. The reorganization is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2023 and is expected to be a tax-free reorganization for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Additional information about the reorganization will be made available to shareholders in a Combined Information Statement/Prospectus prior to the reorganization date.
    The foregoing is not an offer to sell, nor a solicitation of an offer to buy, shares of the Acquiring Fund, nor is it a solicitation of any proxy. Because the Target Fund will reorganize into the Acquiring Fund on its reorganization date, you should consider the appropriateness of making a new or subsequent investment in the Target Fund prior to its reorganization date. You should consider the investment objectives, risks, strategies, fees and expenses of the Acquiring Fund and/or the Target Fund carefully before investing. To obtain the Acquiring Fund’s current prospectus, shareholder reports and other regulatory filings, contact your financial intermediary or visit columbiathreadneedleus.com.
    Shareholders should retain this Supplement for future reference.
  • AAII Sentiment Survey, 12/7/22
    For the week ending on 12/7/22, bearish remained the top sentiment (41.8%; high) & bullish remained the bottom sentiment (24.7%; low); neutral remained the middle sentiment (33.5%; above average); Bull-Bear Spread was -17.1% (high). Investor concerns: Inflation (high but moderating); supply-chain disruptions; recession (2023); the Fed (slower pace but higher longer); dollar (reversing); crypto winter; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (41+ weeks); geopolitical. For the Survey week (Thursday-Wednesday), stocks were down sharply, bonds up, oil down sharply, gold up, dollar down. #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
    https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/141/aaii-sentiment-survey-weekly?page=8&scrollTo=863
  • Here’s where investors made a ‘risk-free’ 6.6% return in the past four U.S. recessions
    You're not going to sucker me into going through SIPC vs FDIC again :-)
    (See thread on sweep accounts).
    Suffice to say that brokered CDs are actually securities and thus theft of CDs would be covered by SIPC. The value of the CDs themselves is covered by FDIC.
    CDs qualify as "securities" under the Securities Investor Protection Act, are eligible for SIPC protection as such, and therefore are subject to the $500,000 protection limit applicable to securities, not the $250,000 limit applicable to cash.
    https://www.sipc.org/for-investors/investor-faqs#is-a-certificate-of-deposit-cd-treated-like-cash
  • TDA and Schwab
    Any word on when ThinkDesktop will be moved over?? Stunning this integration has taken over 2.5 years and it seems like they're not even halfway done yet. (And Schwab's 'active trader' is horrid compared to ThinkDesktop.)
    Glad I switched over myself back in 2020. I've been thru enough brokerage consolidations that I didn't need any more drama!
  • Steady rising yields in CDs and treasuries
    We don't hold any CD's, but note that several of you have written about the availability of some CD maturities and/or rate changes during the past several weeks.
    The below graphic is for Treasury 'yields', not pricing or performance. The graphic begins November 23 through today, December 7, as of December 7; but will update each business day going forward, for a 10 day range. The only duration, at this time; that is maintaining a more positive yield is the 6 month; with the remainder showing significant percentage drops in yields. If you hover your computer pointing tool over a particular color bar, the current yield will be shown.
    Anyway, not sure if this is of any real value; other than to easily see changes recently taking place.
    30 year through 1 month Treasury yields, as of December 7.
    Remain curious,
    Catch
  • Here’s where investors made a ‘risk-free’ 6.6% return in the past four U.S. recessions
    I think @Old_Joe's explanation for offer rates of CD is plausible.
    CDs do take some time to put out. Various brokerage platforms have fees of 35-50 bps (that are paid by the banks, not the retail buyers). So, banks set some offering rate ahead and then they set the offer price at brokerage for current conditions. I don't think this should matter much to retail CD buyers but there may be related tax complications.
    BTW, brokerage CDs are fast but expensive way for banks to raise deposit money - their "cost" is the CD offer rate + brokerage platform fee (35-50 bps) + internal overhead. But the money may be raised in days.
    Note that Treasury does this all the time with setting coupons for T-Notes/Bonds and purchases at Auctions are below/above par. It purposely did that for TIPS so that those could be sold above par to achieve negative real rates (bonds with negative coupons cannot work). Treasury doesn't pay any brokerage platform fee, nor brokers charge any commissions for Treasuries (for auction or secondary purchases). Brokers just play nice to the Treasury/Fed and we almost get free lunch.
  • Here’s where investors made a ‘risk-free’ 6.6% return in the past four U.S. recessions
    The 98 cents you pay now but once matured you get the 100 cents, get 4.5% divs annually base on 100 cents (450$ per yr) that why some cd may yield slightly higher base in purchase price (of course lowered price mean more risks like credit suise cd and higher bankruptcy risks)
    Becareful because Once bankruptcy goes to court may loose all your monies in bonds but may not loose in cd.
    As long as banks are fdic back by Feds investors will get cash back but may take awhile through court procedures.
    That why I am scare buy credits suise but fond of boa or wells Fargo or Chase cd backed w FDIC/FEDS. Better get little less ytm but lessen headaches long terms
    W bonds investments higher grades better to sleep at night, that why you are betting companies won't bellied up in 12 24 or 36 months holding these vehicles (boeing Ford GM Toyota pg&e etc) . Ytm higher than cd near5%
    I am not sure if we need continue hold BBBY
    , previously ut they are cc- or lowered chance bankruptcy so high maybe 40 50% annually. We bought Bbby bonds 4 yrs ago rated bbb but their rating dropped severely bad last 7 8 months because poor run companies, poor Er, and no more creditrd/cash, lost customers and poor overall economic conditions. Price dropped they are due in 6 months so we are holding on hopeful won't bankruptcies in 6 months. If you sell them you loose 50% of capitals or more prices do low.... As long as they don't bankrupt by April next yr we get all capital back once called
  • Vanguard Quits Net-Zero Alliance
    Vanguard is quitting the Net-Zero alliance NZAM/GFANZ.
    GFANZ (Global Financial Alliance for Net-Zero; 04/2021- ) includes 550 members with $150 trillion AUM. Mark Carney (BOE) has been the prime mover for GFANZ; Michael Bloomberg is Co-Chair. Within GFANZ, there are 7 sector specific alliances and NZAM is for asset-managers.
    Vanguard said that in managing its index funds, it didn't want to be constrained by Net-Zero objectives; it also didn't want its investors to be confused by contradictions from its membership in NZAM/GFANZ. Some other US companies are also thinking of leaving GFANZ after a rush to join this new alliance.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-07/vanguard-quits-net-zero-alliance-marking-biggest-defection-yet
    GFANZ https://www.gfanzero.com/
    NZAM https://www.netzeroassetmanagers.org/
  • Here’s where investors made a ‘risk-free’ 6.6% return in the past four U.S. recessions
    @MikeM- For any particular CD issue you want to be looking at the "YTM" percentage. YTM is "yield to maturity", and depending on circumstances may be the same as, or different from, the actual "advertised" yield. If the issue price is 100, the the actual yield and the yield to maturity will be identical. If the issue price is less than 100, then the YTM should be higher than the advertised yield, conversely, if issue price is more than 100, the YTM will be lower than the advertised yield.
    Let's say that you are choosing between two CD issues: a 5% and a 4.5% in a healthy market with lots of CDs to choose from. Of course buyers would choose the 5% issue over the 4.5%, and not too many of the 4.5% CDs would be sold. By charging something less than 100 for the 4.5% issue, the YTM will be close to the same return as the competing 5% issue.
    I'm not at all certain as to why new issues would sell at anything other than 100, but I can hazard a guess: I would think that it could take some time for a bank to go through all of the procedures necessary to actually issue a tranche of CDs. They would need to review their need for funding over a certain time frame, factor in the prevailing rates that the market is calling for, and of course jump through all of the registration hoops that are required.
    If, as in the past couple of months, the market rates are rapidly fluctuating, the bank might just give it their best guess as to what the competitive rates will be when the CDs actually hit the market. So if they "guessed" at 5%, but if when actually issued the competitive market rates are actually 4.5%, then the bank might price that CD issue at more than 100, thus causing the bank's actual repayment cost (YTM) to be closer to 4.5%.
    Again, all of this is just a guess on my part. Perhaps someone like @msf or @yogibearbull would have more information in this area.
  • CD Rate update
    Perhaps this means something or maybe not. I keep track of CD rates available at Schwab. On Nov 7 one could purchase a 60 month CD @ 5.00%. After that, 60 month CDs disappeared. Today they are back at 4.00%. 12 month remains around 4.8%. A trend or a pause?
  • Kopernik Global All-Cap Fund re-opening to new investors
    Interesting.
    The fund absolutely cratered in its first two years, 2014 and 2015. Terrible absolute returns - down about 40% - and terrible relative ones. Great since then but reopening, I'm guessing, because it saw massive outflows in the last couple months despite okay returns, about 4% in the past three months which isn't great but wouldn't normally cause investor flight.
    I might ask them.
    David