MFOHome About Commentary Discussions Funds The Best Resources Support Us!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
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.
  • Market timing is just gambling:
    The only thing that I think makes sense intellectually is to
    1) Keep enough in cash or FI so you do not have to sell during a market crash to pay your current bills and anything else you will need in the X number of years you conservatively believe it will take to recover.
    2) many people's recommendation for the duration of the former in #1, I think is much too short. 3 years or five years etc pales in the light of the 11 years it took SP500 to to completely recover from 2000
    3) If you have sold in a panic during previous crashes, you have too much in equities
    4) Diversify and realize your starting valuations are a very good measure of the returns you can expect going forward.`Buying the SP500 today has a low chance of being a good investment in the next five years.
    5) Take the money you need to live on from the best preforming investment. ie if the SP500 is within 5% of it's all time high sell that.
    sma3 in Fund Discussions
  • The REAL Economy: 'Empty shelves, higher prices’- Americans tell cost of Trump’s tariffs
    .... This is a very interesting read from 2015. Mass deportations will absolutely accelerate the problems with population decline.
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/stratfor/2015/02/17/population-decline-and-the-great-economic-reversal/

    What I am fixing to say doesn't change my current concern about the unwinnable situation we are creating for our young people. This is just a random off the cuff incoherent set of thoughts I had after reading the Forbes article and more about the far range future, if there is one.
    ...
    The author of the Forbes article seems to be wringing his hands over demographic worldwide shifts. I am more optimistic, or have been until recently. (I cannot predict outcomes if time moves backward along with decreased fertility rates. I suppose birth control would need to be outlawed completely to keep wages at poverty levels.) Assuming a more forward projected future, I just see positive change for the human experience. Who says the measure of life is a job? Maybe, with refusal to morph the cast system into something more fun and satisfying, meaningless exchanges of work for subsidence might be unchangeable. I want to believe we just have limited vision about the result of our more powerful, sometimes pessimistic and frightening, imagination.
    Coincidentally, this came out in the W.Post today:

    DrVenture said:
    Thanks for that link. It is important to note that the article I linked is 10 years old, so way behind the curve on the technology.
    My main takeaway is that demographics like this are extremely hard (impossible?) to reverse, minus immigration. People having less children, no children, and waiting longer to have children. In our economy, the consumer drives growth. Can that be replaced by AI or robotics? Maybe, it implies higher wages for everyone, due to labor shortfalls?
    Anyhow, you make many good points.
    DrVenture in Other Investing
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    Many times I have posted that people should RTFM (read the fine manual, i.e. prospectus). Once again sounding like a broken record, you also might consider doing that. Fund companies have a lot of leeway in what they can publish outside of SEC filings so long as they don't fabricate and so long as they stick to standardized performance figures. They may tell the truth, but not the whole truth. Even if you quote them in toto:
    Great stuff.
    ...
    A - Strategy
    Normally investing at least 80% of assets in common stocks included in the S&P 500 Index, which broadly represents the performance of common stocks publicly traded in the United States.
    D - Strategy
    Normally investing at least 80% of assets in common stocks included in the Fidelity U.S. Large Cap Index, which is a float-adjusted market capitalization-weighted index designed to reflect the performance of U.S. large capitalization stocks. It is a subset of the Fidelity U.S. Total Investable Market Index representing the largest companies. Lending securities to earn income for the fund.
    From this, you drew a mistaken inference. That FDFIX uses a tactic, security lending, that is unavailable to FXAIX. Let's go to the videotape, er, FXAIX prospectus.
    Principal Investment Strategies
    • Normally investing at least 80% of assets in common stocks included in the S&P 500® Index.
      The S&P 500 ® Index is a widely recognized, unmanaged index of common stock prices. The S&P 500 ® Index broadly represents the performance of common stocks publicly traded in the United States.
      Effective December 11, 2025, derivative instruments that provide investment exposure to the investments above or exposure to one or more market risk factors associated with such investments are included in the fund's 80% policy, consistent with the fund's investment policies and limitations with respect to investments in derivatives.
    • Lending securities to earn income for the fund.
    Why did you not speculate on FXAIX's possible advantage in shorting fees? What is your speculation on the impact of using derivatives to track an index? Will introducing derivatives into a fund where the usual expectation is tracking via full replication or sampling render the fund no longer "plain vanilla" (a term you introduced)?
    USPRX - $12,098.17. Loser. Oi. Quite aside from the yuge min.
    If were going to include share classes with "yuge min.", I would have mentioned VFFSX ($5B [sic] min).
    msf in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    I have received shorting fees from Fidelity for decades depending on the fund or stock, so I think I understand that process.
    D’s zero ER leads to another instance of the question Why does it not then outperform and become another clear winner in a broader SP500 category. Speaking of which, why did you not speculate about D’s comparatively expanded strategy? You must have thoughts about how it effectively differs from A’s and what that should mean — ?
    Seems to me the inability of FDFIX, with its zero ER and possible advantage in shorting fees, to decisively outdo FXAIX in any period gives support to my original assertion.
    davidrmoran davidrmoran in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    I asserted FXAIX was (simply) the best of the (plain-vanilla) SP500 indices.
    And I took that to be any fund that Lipper and MFO classify as a plain vanilla S&P 500 Index fund.
    https://lipperleaders.com/index.aspx (Lipper screener; search for S&P 500 funds)
    Let us take your 5y as the period of merit
    I used 5 years only because FDFIX doesn't have a ten year record. When I scanned Lipper's S&P 500 funds rated "5" for total return, I used 10 years unless it wasn't available. And it certainly wouldn't make sense to compare FDIFX's 5 year record with FXAIX's ten year record.
    A - Strategy
    Normally investing at least 80% of assets in common stocks included in the S&P 500 Index, which broadly represents the performance of common stocks publicly traded in the United States.
    So it has the freedom to do anything it wants with the remaining 20% of its portfolio and all it can do is track its index? Of course that's a ridiculous question. As is "one would expect D to outperform waaaaay better than A given its flex, no?"
    For the record, "Flex" is the name that Fidelity gave to its internal use zero ER funds. Nothing more.
    Lending securities to earn income for the fund. ... Also, income from shorting, correct?
    Now you've gone off the deep end. Lots of funds lend securities for income. That's not shorting, just the opposite. They lend their shares so someone else (the borrower) can short the securities. And pay the funds for the privilege. Vanguard has been doing that for decades. That's how, in some years, its fund managed to beat its benchmark. Or are you saying that VFINX / VFIAX is not a plain vanilla S&P index fund?
    The [Vanguard 500] fund has historically used securities lending to generate additional income to offset expenses.
    https://www.morningstar.com/funds/what-is-vanguard-500-indexs-achilles-heel
    You may not be aware that Fidelity (and Schwab and ...) provide individual investors the same opportunity to generate income. This page describes both how to set that up at Fidelity and more broadly the risks and benefits of security lending.
    https://www.fidelity.com/trading/fully-paid-lending
    msf in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    Not too long ago someone mentioned WCPBX in another thread. The only brokerage I could find that sold it for under $1M was Vanguard ($500 min). At Fido the min is $1M (even in IRAs), same at Schwab.
    Wells Fargo will also sell it to you for $1M, but not if you're a DIY investor (WellsTrade). In fact, there are only three Weitz funds that Wells Fargo sells through WellsTrade: WBALX, WPOPX, and WVALX.
    https://www.wellsfargoadvisors.com/research-center/mutual-funds.htm
    (screen for Weitz funds)
    Every so often one finds a fund at Vanguard that one can't get elsewhere, at least without ponying up a seven (or higher) figure amount.
    msf in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    Great stuff.
    To review:
    I asserted FXAIX was (simply) the best of the (plain-vanilla) SP500 indices.
    Let us take your 5y as the period of merit. Here is $10k growth w reinvesting:
    USPRX - $12,098.17. Loser. Oi. Quite aside from the yuge min.
    FDFIX - $12,296.16. Winner by $14 ! But wait.
    FXAIX - $12,281.93. See next.
    (God, I pray my figure reading is right. It's like being in court.)
    How did FDFIX do it?
    Ooh: For 1y, D lags A by $3. For 1 month, by half that.
    But for 3mos, it's the other way round: A lags D by over a dollar.
    Could it be their strategy? Can it be that FDFIX --- 'Flex', as you pointed out --- is a juiced SP500 fund? Let's look at their strategies:
    A - Strategy
    Normally investing at least 80% of assets in common stocks included in the S&P 500 Index, which broadly represents the performance of common stocks publicly traded in the United States.
    D - Strategy
    Normally investing at least 80% of assets in common stocks included in the Fidelity U.S. Large Cap Index, which is a float-adjusted market capitalization-weighted index designed to reflect the performance of U.S. large capitalization stocks. It is a subset of the Fidelity U.S. Total Investable Market Index representing the largest companies. Lending securities to earn income for the fund.
    So. Steroids? Well, a different (presumably wider?) stock selection range (a small constraint, surely, or is it advantage?
    Or, rather, one would expect D to outperform waaaaay better than A given its flex?). Also, income from shorting, right?
    So the picayune question is Why does D not outdo A --- which as I originally posted is the best SP500 index fund [by any reasonable criteria, and for the last 5y] --- by a lot more than a few bucks? What's the value added by Fido's investment broadening and by the ability to short?
    davidrmoran davidrmoran in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    As far as I know, Vanguard's brokerage service does not offer low minimum investments
    for high minimum investment funds specifically within IRA accounts.
    However, these types of funds are generally available via most (all?) Vanguard accounts.
    A recent experience springs to mind.
    The minimum investment for WCPBX at Fidelity is $1 million while it is only $500 at Vanguard.
    Numerous TF mutual funds are available via Vanguard with a $500 minimum investment.
    Observant1 in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    Ah, that chart ends at the end of September.
    The data table has two rows with the funds and columns with performances over various time periods through October 31. It shows FDFIX beating FXAIX by 3 basis points annualized (17.65% vs 17.62%) over five years, 3 basis points annualized (22.69% vs. 22.66%) over three years, and 2 basis points (21.45% vs. 21.43%) over the past year (Nov 2024 - Oct 2025).
    I would not have taken short-term trading into account.
    Agreed. Which is why I would discount the fact that YTD (under a year), through Oct 31, FXAIX has done better (same table).
    Best performance is to be inferred in this forum;
    Similarly, in this forum one expects to see higher min funds discussed periodically. Even $1M min funds (e.g. Schwab MMF Ultra shares) get a shoutout from time to time.
    We're not talking about sector funds or alternative investments here. There are more than a few participants here who likely could handle a core investment of $100K.
    For example, FD1000 wrote that his SIL, investing 50/50 in S&P 500 and QQQ can retire now. That sounds like someone who has at least $100K invested in the S&P 500. And masterd wrote "VOO and QQQ (or QQQM) are the only funds I would purchase".
    I don't know how to change the endpoint of the Fido comparison performance chart to get it end yesterday close of trading. Will investigate.
    I am having trouble in any case delving USPRX,
    Try here: https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/fdfix/chart
    Enter the tickers for FXAIX and USPRX one at a time in the "Compare" box. One can compare the three funds' total returns over the lifetime of FDFIX by setting the timeframe to max and setting the frequency to daily.
    Through Nov 3:
    FDFIX: 234.8558%, FXAIX: 234.6069%, USPRX: 236.8972%
    To compare FXAIX and USPRX over USPRX's lifetime, you can do the same thing, only using USPRX's M* chart:
    https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/usprx/chart
    Through Nov. 3:
    USPRX: 1685.5348%, FXAIX: 1659.6410%
    another 2-3 showed [USPRX] had not been around for 5y
    In early Q2 2023, the USAA Mutual Funds will be rebranded as Victory Funds. There will be no changes to the funds’ investment objectives, the investment teams managing the funds or their respective investment processes due to the change in the product branding, and there is no action required on the part of current investors. The Ticker symbols and Cusips are not changing.
    https://vcm.com/assets/fund-docs/Mutual Funds Planned Name Changes Feb 23 2023 Final.pdf
    USAA Asset Management was sold to Victory Capital in 2018-2019.
    https://ir.vcm.com/news/news-details/2019/Victory-Capital-Completes-Acquisition-of-USAA-Asset-Management-Company/default.aspx
    msf in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    Last week, the S&P 500's multiple of sales was at its highest level ever —
    including the peak of the dot-com bubble.
    The Shiller P/E¹ recently breached 40 for only the second time.
    This portends meager S&P 500 returns in the coming years.
    https://marketsam.cmail20.com/t/d-e-gjyktld-duklntldl-r/
    ¹ The Shiller P/E isn't a useful timing tool and can remain elevated for a long time.
    Observant1 in Fund Discussions
  • The REAL Economy: 'Empty shelves, higher prices’- Americans tell cost of Trump’s tariffs
    You can wait until November to buy your discounted Halloween candy, but you still have to pony up. Prices are scary high.
    Get ready to buy just "2 dolls instead of 30" this XMAS.
    The average new car price in the US surpassed $50,000 for the first time in September 2025.
    Separately, something has give with housing prices:
    "The average age for first-time homebuyers had hit an all-time record high of 40 years old, according to the National Association of Realtors."
    It just ain't right.
    But rest assured, that nasty East Wing demolition was completely necessary. Completely. Meanwhile the Epstein fiasco was buried somewhere in the rubble.
    JD_co in Other Investing
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    the best, FXAIX
    The best for you and undeniably one of the best. But simply the best, better than all the rest?
    ...
    ETFs offer greater accessibility at possibly lower trading cost (bid/ask spread vs. TF at many non-Fidelity brokerages). Institutional investors and traders may have difficulty using FXAIX with its restriction of two round trips within 90 days (trading rights are suspended if this is exceeded).
    In terms of raw performance, FXAIX is arguably not even the best. Fidelity's Flex fund FDFIX, used by Fidelity's robo advisor, has a better 5 year return (it hasn't been around for 10 years yet). On the DIY front, USPRX ($100K min) has a better 10 year return. Though technically not an S&P 500 fund, Lipper includes it in its S&P500 index category.
    Different strokes for different folks. "Best" here can be mathematically quantified by constructing ...
    Best performance is to be inferred in this forum; apologies for those misled.
    You appear to have misread your own links and chart re FDFIX, which lags FXAIX a couple bucks over 5y, so far as I can see using Chrome for the Fido research chart comparison page. Ah, that chart ends at the end of September. So I assume FDFIX somehow pulled ahead the last 5 weeks, correct? I don't know how to change the endpoint of the Fido comparison performance chart to get it to stop yesterday close of trading. Will investigate.
    And of course FXAIX outperforms those two major ETFs nontrivially, by a few hundred, over that period.
    Even if those two ETFs had done better, I would not have taken short-term trading into account. And for a stickler I should have written best-performing, yes. Finally, I would of course not have included a $100k min fund, but I am having trouble in any case delving USPRX, as over a half-dozen sites show it grew only into the ~$18,000s over the last 5y, and another 2-3 showed it had not been around for 5y.
    davidrmoran davidrmoran in Fund Discussions
  • Market timing is just gambling:
    One more post that timing the market is just gambling:
    I reduced my equity holdings from 45% to 30% over the summer thinking things were too overvalued and told myself I will not buy until October which is normally not a good month. FOMO was hard as everything was going higher and higher just about EVERY day but I wasn't going to budge! I apologize for not alerting the board that I was going back to 45% November 3rd. The last 2 days are just a slap in the face which as we all know happens to all of us. Down days after a big purchase. I will follow my asset allocation plan, I will follow my asset allocation plan. I will continue to type that 100 times as punishment for bad behavior. UGH
    gman57 in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    Concur. RWL is another possibility that focus on the company’s revenue. It has 9.4% exposure to tech sector versus the 31% of that in S&P500 index.

    RWL, SPGP, and SPHQ are now in the red for four weeks.
    It's tech, or nothing, in the U.S. market.
    The question in my mind is where are we in the cycle?
    DrVenture in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    I was looking at our taxable accounts, and noticing the returns on our various tech-sector funds, and so I asked myself, why even buy the S&P 500 these days--not that I am actually in the market for adding much of anything to the taxable at this point.
    If I was 20-30 years younger, why not just buy a tech fund--or four in the case of my taxable (because I like baskets)--and rearrange the rest of the deck chairs to suit my druthers, i.e., risk tolerance?
    It is pretty much what I do. I own the S&P for its wide exposure. But I juice returns with LCG, tech and others as the momentum dictates. I was more heavily allocating to sectors, until approximately 2023, when the S&P began to outperform nearly everything else. So, I shifted more assets in that direction.
    My 60/40 portfolio is at 17% YTD. Some of that "40" is Pimco CEFs and there is a LOT of cash. So, not a "normal" 60/40 portfolio of S&P and treasuries. Admittedly, certain individual holdings have done a lot of the heavy lifting this year: WBD, CEG, NOK, TSM, RTX, JNJ, PRSCX. When I X-ray my total portfolio to account for mutual fund compositions, NVDA is now my largest holding, with FAANGs basically trailing right behind.
    DrVenture in Fund Discussions
  • K-shaped economy
    https://www.morningbrew.com/stories/2025/11/03/evidence-of-k-shaped-economy-popping-up-everywhere
    -The affluent doing very well along with the booming stock market and the appreciation of their homes in the inventory-crunched real estate market.
    -Nearly everyone else faltering due to a shaky job market, high interest rates, and/or inflation.
    Auto: In September, the cost of a new vehicle passed the $50,000 mark for the first time, according to Cox Automotive’s Kelley Blue Book. And repossession volume passing through Manheim, the auction group owned by Cox, was up 12% through the end of September on an annualized basis, according to the Wall Street Journal’s deep-dive into the rise of auto repos.
    Airlines: Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian said that sales of premium seats would exceed those of coach seats for at least one or two quarters in 2026.
    Food & bev: Coca-Cola CEO James Quincey told CNBC that sales of its premium brands, like Smartwater, Topo Chico, and Fairlife, are juicing the company’s sales, while Coke demand is up at dollar stores, as well as at amusement parks frequented by higher spenders.
    Consumer goods: Apple grew by double digits last quarter, thanks to strong sales of the $799 iPhone 17. And while economist Leo Feler told Marketplace that “everyone has kept buying health and personal care items,” how and when they buy them has changed. Wealthier shoppers are making hauls at Costco, while budget-constrained shoppers use up everything at home before going shopping.
    Zoom out: Economic trends suggest that the gap will widen rather than narrow. Economist Betsey Stevenson of the University of Michigan told Marketplace, “The real risk to a K-shaped economy is social and political instability.”—HVL
    DrVenture in Other Investing
  • Schwab: Shake Off Emotions and Control your Portfolio
    Back on topic, after the usual disruption. Of course, controlling one's emotions is very important to investing. And we all need a reminder now again.
    This bull will run its course, despite the many efforts to derail it. We will get lower rates from the FED, which will be unnecessarily stimulative given the present numbers on jobs and inflation. We will continue with tariff headwinds and higher government spending. The debt build up will continue too.
    The party will continue for a while. Worries are relevant, if a bit premature. The hangover may be a doozy! Have you preferred meds handy. I will be dancing near the exits, and ready to summon my Uber.
    Also, see the thread "K-Shaped economy". It illustrates what is happening. We have good numbers that are benefitting those who are already wealthy, while leaving everyone else behind. Even, new college grads are having trouble with the job market. We are helping the wrong people, those who are already rich. The "good" numbers we are seeing represent that.
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeltnietzel/2025/09/10/new-report-as-skills-gap-grows-job-market-for-college-grads-at-5-year-low/
    DrVenture in Other Investing
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    That is if one wants to diversify away from tech and AI-related stocks.
    Future market for Tuesday, November 4, 2025 is all red, including the safe haven asset such as gold.
    https://finviz.com/futures.ashx
    RWF is up for me so far. But so are SMH and GRID.
    Between holding SPHQ and SPGP in the taxable, I took a pass on RWL.
    WABAC WABAC in Fund Discussions
  • Why buy the S&P 500?
    That is if one wants to diversify away from tech and AI-related stocks.
    Future market for Tuesday, November 4, 2025 is all red, including the safe haven asset such as gold.
    https://finviz.com/futures.ashx
    Sven in Fund Discussions
  • Schwab: Shake Off Emotions and Control your Portfolio
    MikeW: @FD1000. I find your bullying annd condescending attitude to really be a detriment to this board. I don’t post often but couldn’t let your ignorant and insensitive comment pass.
    The above comment violates the site’s rules.
    Most of your other comments are also off-topic — the discussion here is “Shake Off Emotions and Control Your Portfolio.”
    Since January 2025, several posters on this site have been hijacking what used to be a great investment forum with hundreds — if not thousands — of off-topic posts, while calling others ignorant, insensitive, pathetic, or worse, and using foul language.
    Please take a moment to look in the mirror.
    FD1000 in Other Investing