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.
  • Fund Allocations (Cumulative)
    Fund Allocations (Cumulative), 10/31/22
    There were notable increases in the allocations to stock funds, and declines in those for bond and m-mkt funds. The changes for OEFs + ETFs were based on a total AUM of about $27.05 trillion in the previous month, so +/- 1% change was about +/- $270.5 billion. Also note that these changes were from both fund inflows/outflows & price changes.
    OEFs: Stocks 51.85%, Hybrids 6.76%, Bonds 20.32%, M-Mkt 21.06%
    ETFs: Stocks 80.40%, Hybrids 0.49%, Bonds 19.11%, M-Mkt N/A
    OEFs & ETFs: Stocks 58.24%, Hybrids 5.36%, Bonds 20.05%, M-Mkt 16.35%
    Edit/Add: Total AUM for OEFs + ETFs was $34.148 trillion on 12/31/21. It may have bottomed at $27.089 trillion on 9/30/22. A small rebound was seen to $28.172 trillion on 10/31/22.
    https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/245/fund-allocations-cumulative-monthly?page=1&scrollTo=852
  • Carbon neutral fuels , how to invest ?
    I have dabbled in a few small companies but it is hard to 1) pick the correct technology and 2) even harder to predict it will work.
    There are many people, with much more engineering and scientific expertise that I have, spending their careers on this. For an example Google "Thunder Said Energy". Unfortunately their reports cost $500 each.
    I have instead been working on picking the best few Climate Change funds.
    Few have been around for very long, and the best may be GCCHX ( $5,000,000 minimum) but I would also look at
    NALFX GCEBX RKCIX HEOMX
    They are actively managed and cover a variety of climate change issues.
    Something else I am trying is Valueline has a monthly newsletter on "Climate Change " companies that is reasonably priced at $200 for two years
  • What recession???
    "Sales, not adjusted for inflation, rose 5.8% from a year ago...." OK, so NOT adjusted for inflation, total Sales revenues are up. Not too surprising.
    Wait until some of these folks start receiving their inflated NG heating bills this winter.
    Though large scale layoffs have been taking place, especially in Tech, it still doesn't feel all doom and gloom on the job front. Plus, the 4Q stock market bounce has taken some of the edge off.
    "Whistling by the graveyard"?
  • What recession???
    https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/cyber-monday-sets-sales-record-shoppers-splurge-toys-electronics-report-2022-11-29/
    Reuters - Discount-hunting shoppers snapped up more Pokemon cards, TVs and air fryers on Cyber Monday, pushing sales to $11.3 billion, making it the biggest U.S. online shopping day in history, according to data from Adobe Analytics.
    Likely more hawkish discussions from Feds tomorrow meetings.? 0.5
    Prob least 2 3 or 4 months of increased rates
  • Carbon neutral fuels , how to invest ?
    https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=carbon+neutral+fuel+company+squamish+bc&atb=v157-1&ia=web
    Has anyone looked into investing here ? Long term I'm guessing.
    One can imagine that some oil companies would be fearing this , opposing, or possible looking at as another way to make money .
  • Dividends
    @ron : .1167 for how many months in a row. Is this some kind of a record ?
    Since 4/15/20 inception, https://www.cefconnect.com/fund/DLY
  • Why is China ETF Up While Everyone Blames China?
    @Mark, stocks/ETFs/CEFs mentioned in weekend Barron's typically get 1-2 day (Mon/Tue) bounces but there isn't any long-term effect. This Barron's effect has been getting diluted because many stories are now published online on Friday while the markets are open. And I have complained about the "lazy" options fellow who tends to file stories on Wednesdays and never bothers to revise/update them even when there is related news.
    BTW, my Barron's postings (somewhere) go back decades. In fact, one consideration was to provide readers Mon's/Tue's news legitimately and freely on Saturdays. Before all this online stuff, many got their Barron's copy by mail on Mondays/Tuesdays. But my home delivery in the Chicago area has been between 5-7 AM on Saturdays. This has also been a marvel of print/communications technology that so much stuff (text, data) after Friday market close finds its way in print and home-delivered early-AM on Saturday.
  • Why is China ETF Up While Everyone Blames China?
    Barron's options guy Sears noted in the weekend issue the recent bounce in FXI and thought that investors were looking ahead for 2023. He recommended calls on FXI. May be this mentions also caused it to go up when the China and HK markets closed down (although not as much as they were last night) - the so-called Barron's effect (doesn't always work).
    https://www.barrons.com/articles/china-reignite-growth-limiting-risks-51669157037?mod=past_editions
  • Crypto investing coming to your 401(K) account
    And in current "crypto" news:
    Crypto lender BlockFi files for bankruptcy after FTX collapse-
    Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing as fall of FTX continues to reverberate across industry

    Following are excerpts from a current report in The Guardian:
    The crypto lender BlockFi has become the sector’s latest big operator to declare bankruptcy, as the fallout of the collapse of offshore cryptocurrency exchange FTX continues to spread.
    BlockFi, which operates in a similar fashion to a conventional bank, paying interest on savings and using customer deposits to fund lending, says it has $256.9m cash in hand. According to court documents, its creditors include FTX itself, to which it owes $275m, and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to which it owes $30m.
    In a statement announcing its Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing, BlockFi said: “This action follows the shocking events surrounding FTX and associated corporate entities and the difficult but necessary decision we made as a result to pause most activities on our platform.
    “Since the pause, our team has explored every strategic option and alternative available to us, and has remained laser-focused on our primary objective of doing the best we can for our clients.
    “These Chapter 11 cases will enable BlockFi to stabilise the business and provide BlockFi with the opportunity to consummate a reorganisation plan that maximises value for all stakeholders, including our valued clients.”
    The SEC levied a $100m fine on the company in February for violating securities laws, arguing that the investment products the company offered qualified as unregistered securities. The outstanding $30m debt is apparently the unpaid portion of that fine.
    BlockFi has already stumbled close to bankruptcy once already this year, in the wake of spring’s crypto crash.
    After chief executive Zac Prince said the company needed an injection of capital to stave off a liquidity crisis, it signed a deal with none other than FTX, which gave the company access to $400m in loans. The price of the deal was an option from FTX to buy the lender for about $240m, a sharp decline from a peak valuation of $3bn.
    That option was never exercised, and the collapse of the cryptocurrency exchange sparked a bank run at BlockFi, seen by customers as dangerously entangled with Sam Bankman-Fried’s company, that proved terminal. Without the ability to draw on the credit line, nor access its own funds stored on the FTX platform, BlockFi was forced to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
  • Alexa, how did Amazon’s voice assistant rack up a $10bn loss?
    The inclusion of privacy and security issues in this thread warrants notice of this:
    Meta fined €265m over data protection breach that hit more than 500m users-
    Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp have been fined nearly €1bn by EU since September 2021

    Following are edited excerpts from this report in The Guardian:
    Facebook’s owner (aka: Mark Zuckerberg) has been fined €265m by the Irish data watchdog after a breach that resulted in the details of more than 500 million users being published online.
    The Data Protection Commission (DPC) said Meta had infringed the EU’s data protection laws after details of Facebook users from around the world were scraped from public profiles in 2018 and 2019.
    The data appeared on a hacking website last year, prompting an investigation by the DPC, which is responsible for regulating Meta across the EU. The watchdog said a “significant” number of the users were from the EU.
    In addition to the fine, it “imposed a reprimand and an order” requiring Meta to “bring its processing into compliance by taking a range of specified remedial actions within a particular timeframe”.
    In a statement Meta said: “We made changes to our systems during the time in question, including removing the ability to scrape our features in this way using phone numbers. Unauthorised data scraping is unacceptable and against our rules.”
    The punishment brings the total amount of fines imposed on Meta by the DPC to nearly €1bn since September last year. In September Meta was fined €405m for letting teenagers set up Instagram accounts that publicly displayed their phone numbers and email addresses, while in March the watchdog fined Meta €17m for further GDPR breaches and in September last year it fined Meta’s WhatsApp €225m over “severe” and “serious” infringements of GDPR.
    However, one legal expert questioned whether strong enforcement of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation would have the deterrent effect that it intended.
    “By any measure, these are significant fines,” said David Hackett, head of data protection in the Ireland office of law firm Addleshaw Goddard. “GDPR envisaged the imposition of such fines in part to serve as a deterrent to other companies which might consider breaching the law. We are likely to see increased debate about whether such fines actually influence corporate behaviour or if some companies simply see them as an added cost of doing business.
    The DPC regulates Apple, Google, TikTok and other technology platforms owing to the location of their EU headquarters in Ireland. It currently has 40 inquiries open into such companies, including 13 involving Meta.
    Note: Textual emphasis was added
  • Crypto investing coming to your 401(K) account
    Congressional bills regarding cryptocurrency (S. 4760 / H.R. 8730) have at most a tangential relation to DOL's regulation of 401(k) plan investments.
    Here's a brief negative critique summarizing the bill(s): https://ourfinancialsecurity.org/2022/09/news-release-cftc-should-have-narrow-role-in-crypto-to-preserve-sec-primacy/
    For more specifics, that links to a letter detailing several concerns:
    https://ourfinancialsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/AFR-Letter-Stabenow-Bill.pdf
    And a similar letter with some different items described:
    https://www.nasaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/NASAA-Letter-to-Committee-Leadership-Regarding-the-DCCPA-9-9-22-F.pdf
    Finally, a set of slides on the state of cryptocurrency regulation in the United States, "Brought to you by the Connecticut Department of Banking and the Securities Advisory Council to the Banking Commissioner", dated November 15, 2022.
    Among other things, it explains how cryptocurrencies can be viewed as securities by the SEC, as a commodity interest by the CFTC.
    https://www.daypitney.com/wp-content/uploads/2022-11-15-Unmasking-Crypto-Presentation-Final.pdf
    The Congressional bills were referred to the House Committee on Agriculture and to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. I suppose given the risks involved, it makes a kind of warped sense to lump crypto in with pork belly futures :-)
    As to DOL fiduciary duty, my feeling is that it doesn't go far enough. The standard is what a prudent investor would do, not what each individual employee would do.
    While I would personally be delighted with a brokerage window, I do not think that it serves a typical employee well. Studies have shown that employees when faced with a myriad of options (even without a window), are paralyzed. They may dump everything into cash, or divide their money evenly among all options, or not even participate. More choice is not necessarily better choice.
    See, e.g.
    https://www.marketplace.org/2022/01/11/default-options-are-popular-in-financial-decision-making-but-are-they-effective/
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/are-too-many-choices-costing-401-k-holders-1454900917
  • Crypto investing coming to your 401(K) account
    With all due respect to Elizabeth Warren, Dick Durbin and Tina Smith, IMHO cryptocurrency is no more unsuitable today for employer-sponsored plans than it was a month ago. Their current letter is more or less a followup to a similar but more extensive letter sent by Senators Warren and Smith in May. That in turn came after DOL issued guidance on cryptocurrency in 401(k) plans in March, emphasizing its risks.
    Fidelity isn’t the first company to give 401(k) participants access to cryptocurrency assets. Another industry provider, ForUsAll Inc., has linked workers with cryptocurrency exchanges through brokerage windows for several years. Fidelity takes a different approach with its Digital Asset Accounts product, which doesn’t rely on outside exchanges or brokerage windows.
    Employee Benefit Plan Review, October 2022, Volume 76, Number 8, pages 16-19. CCH Incorporated.
    (Published before FTX's collapse)
    The genie has been out of the bottle since brokerage windows were allowed. Fidelity just provided another route to the same investments. That's not to say that plan sponsors have no responsibility for how those windows are used. The DOL guidance hints at that. Quoting again from CCH:
    DOL provides a clear and definite warning to plan fiduciaries:
    The plan fiduciaries responsible for overseeing such investment options or allowing such investments through brokerage windows should expect to be questioned about how they can square their actions with their duties of prudence and loyalty in light of the risks described above.
    While the focus of this guidance is on 401(k) plans, the DOL’s warnings also extend to plans and plan fiduciaries responsible for allowing cryptocurrency investments through self-directed brokerage windows.
    One way of addressing this is to set limits. As stated in the OP, Fidelity sets a 20% limit. So the 20% Bitcoin decline in value lamented in the senators' letter would have resulted in a 4% or less decline in a participant's plan value. Significant but not catastrophic. And ForUSAll sets an even tighter limit, just 5%.
    Finally, note that while some senators are advocating caution, others welcome wild west investing in retirement accounts.
    Update: A Partisan Divide

    The Department of Labor's cryptocurrency guidance has provoked contrasting responses on Capital [sic] Hill.

    On May 5, Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala. introduced legislation that would prohibit the DOL from limiting the kinds of products workplace retirement savers can invest in through self-directed brokerage accounts.
    A day earlier, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., criticized Fidelity Investments for its decision to launch a new 401(k) cryptocurrency product, in a May 4 letter to Fidelity CEO Abigail Johnson.
    https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/benefits/pages/dol-guidance-could-crimp-401k-brokerage-windows.aspx (Limit 3 free articles per month)
  • 2022 year-end capital gains distribution estimates (Vanguard's Final estimated year-end posted)
    Thanks, @TheShadow. After making a big distribution in 2021, BCSIX will do the same this year. According to M* the fund holds 45% of its $3.6 billion in its top 10 positions. Concentration is great until it isn’t. Hard to blame shareholders for fleeing when they see it’s down 42% in the past year and that they’ll have to pay the IRS for the privilege of sticking around.
  • Bruce Fund. BRUFX: holding lotsa cash
    I agree with yogi that FCNTX and PRWCX isn't an apples to apples compare.
    For investment period commencing June 1, 2006 to present day an investment of 10K would be valued at 46K for Danoff and 42K for Giroux. But the ride was a lot more turbulent with Danoff (as can be expected for an all equity fund)
    SD for Danoff is 15.62 vs. 11.64 for Giroux, max DD at -46 vs. -36 and worst year at -37 vs. -27.
    While Danoff beat Giroux since Giroux took charge of PRWCX Giroux has beaten most all equity funds with a lower risk.
  • Bruce Fund. BRUFX: holding lotsa cash
    Yep, Berkowitz the manager of FAIRX. He still holds a 75% position in JOE which is astounding.
  • Bruce Fund. BRUFX: holding lotsa cash
    And elsewhere here, there's a thread regarding Amazon and Alexa. An unexpected FAIL, there. Giroux put a bunch of money into Amazon, and then for the first time, the stock fell, in line with losses, rather than profits. Oops. AMZN is now 2.61% of the equity stake in PRWCX. That's a 31% downshift from the prior portfolio report obtained by Morningstar. Over the past one year, AMZN is down -48%. Ouch.
    PRWCX holds one-third of its stocks in its top 10. THERE's a hefty bet. AMZN is #5 in size there.
  • Bruce Fund. BRUFX: holding lotsa cash
    Giroux does openly assert that his strategy is to maximize profit while allowing for only about 2/3 of the average market volatility, generally. I won't get into an analysis of the numbers you have both reported. I guess wifey and I hold the best of both worlds, with these two. BRUFX and PRWCX. But it's foolish under our current circumstances to add to them with new money. Not enough reportable income. If we did that, they would be non-deductible contributions, while also being tax-free upon withdrawal. I'm already withdrawing money annually from the IRA, and according to the ridiculously arcane and convoluted IRS formula, the tax-free, non-deductible portion is just a fraction of the full amount of my customary annual withdrawal. My tax guy understands it.
    "Hello, IRS? I'm holding $5,000 in my T-IRA which is non-taxable and non-deductible from several years ago, before realizing that it is counter-productive to deposit $$$ into a T-IRA when there's no deduction to be had.
    Why don't I just withdraw that $5000 in one lump, and be done with it?"
    IRS: "Sorry. No. THAT would make TOO MUCH SENSE! We can't have THAT!"
  • Bruce Fund. BRUFX: holding lotsa cash
    Not to malign BRUFX, but I think you own the better fund with PRWCX. I calculate 1,3,5,7,10 year returns as of last friday to be all higher for PRWCX than BRUFX, and with less volatility.