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.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
I lost 2 funds - STHBX and STHYX (Wells Fargo Advantage)
I have been trying to find out what happened to my 2 funds, STHBX and STHYX. There are no more quotes for these funds after 10/23/2015. And I did not receive any e-mail from Wells Fargo. Can someone point me where to look? Thanks.
They may have converted to the A share class because WF dropped the Advantage moniker for a number of their funds on/about 10/23 thereby giving them different symbols. This info was given in a supplement to the prospectus. So if that's what happened, you might find out what your new symbols are.
"Effective after the close of business on October 23, 2015, all Investor Class shares of each Fund converted to Class A shares of the same Fund (the “Conversion”). Following the Conversion, all references to the Investor Class shares in each Fund’s Statement of Additional Information are hereby removed."
The Investor shares disappeared on 10/23. The "Advantage" name disappears in December. Their argument, valid or not, is that "A" shares are widely available without a load so reducing the number of share classes is no big deal.
Love seeing these old "ST" tickers from the old Strong Funds where I once invested. Wells inherited these from Dick Strong when he was banned from the securities business by the SEC. Bought up what was left of his firm and kept the old fund names for awhile. The "Advantage" label came from Strong too. But I can only recall it applying to their Ultra-Short bond fund.
While he was a crook, Strong actually had some pretty good funds and some talented managers. 15 years have passed. Possibly Wells is trying to distance themselves from the origin of some of these.
@hank, Thought that was a bit heavy-handed. Other firms paid fines in form of reduced management fee. It was sheer greed that drives these firms to commit these acts. Janus was another firm that went downhill since then.
Dick Strong when he was banned from the securities business by the SEC
From the SEC Complaint: "From 1998 through 2001 and in 2003, Strong frequently traded 10 Strong funds, including one over which he was the portfolio manager, making approximately 660 redemptions inconsistent with the limitations of the prospectus in the forty accounts that he controlled. As a result of his trading, Strong had gross profits of $4.1 million and net profits of $1.6 million. SCM failed to disclose Canary's trading agreement, and the inherent conflicts of interest involved in allowing such trading, and Strong and SCM failed to disclose Strong's frequent trading activities, to the Boards of Directors of the Strong funds or to the shareholders of the funds ..." ---
Regarding his personal accounts, 660 redemptions (1998-2003) is an eye-grabber. Anybody here ever come close to that number of trades over a 5 year period? As a former shareholder I can tell you they didn't tolerate such frequent trading by most clients. I was cautioned once after doing about 6 trades in one of their funds over a year's time.
Strong appealed to many small investors in the Midwest. Low minimums, flashy literature and promotion, and a sizeable stable of competitive funds. Strong himself, through one of his publications, taught me: "Pay Yourself First." That saying probably didn't originate with him, but I heard it first from him and it was inspiring and helpful at the time. A fairly charismatic figure, he appeared as a guest once on Rukeyser's Wall Street Week - though you could tell old Lou wasn't too impressed.
A minor point...I bought both the Wells Fargo fund earlier this year at the same time as ZEOIX....they are neck and neck this year and both serve as solid cornerstones for a short term cash depository in my IRA. As a plus, SSTHX is available with no fee at Schwab, so I can add to it with current distributions unlike ZEOIX.
The Wells Fargo Fund is a great Owl....frankly, I don't think that this resource gets enough recognition. Hence this post.
Many other posts have compared ZEOIX to RPHYX. Now, comparing SSTHX and RPHYX for the past three years, we have the typical $10000 at $10,733 for RHYPX, and $10,663 for SSTHX, pretty much a dead heat. In this year's difficult market though, it's 0.76% return for RPHYX, and -1.30% for SSTHX, about a 2% difference in favor of RPHYX. While I'm certainly less than thrilled at the deterioration in the RPHYX NAV, it would still seem to be a better place than SSHTX at least for now.
Looking at ZEOIX, it's doing quite well this year, at a 2.58% return, and with $10,966 for three years. Unfortunately, it's not available NTF at Schwab, as Press notes. Guess I'll have to stick with RPHYX for a while.
@hank, thank you for the details on SCM. For the small personal gain, his firm was sold to Well Fargo. I also read he has vision of SCM as big as Fidelity.
In this year's difficult market though, it's 0.76% return for RPHYX, and -1.30% for SSTHX, about a 2% difference in favor of RPHYX. While I'm certainly less than thrilled at the deterioration in the RPHYX NAV, it would still seem to be a better place than SSHTX at least for now.
Old Joe...unless I'm misreading something, SSTHX has a +2.79% record for the YTD. While perhaps not something to write home about, it certainly is doing precisely what I would like a bond holding to do. As rates inch up, it will be interesting to see how this and ZEOIX behave, as I have both within the bond sleeve.
Hi Press- Odd, today Schwab is saying -0.32% (to 10/31), and when I posted the above I copied/pasted from the Schwab page, so it wasn't a transcription error. But you're right- Google (using M* data) is showing +2.78%. I thought that with all of that computing power out there this stuff wasn't supposed to happen, but as MFO has long noted, even M* can't seem to get some stuff right for long periods of time.
Old Joe...yes, I pulled the data from M*. Looking at my Schwab account, their presentation is a bit confusing. It looks like Schwab reports a YTD performance number both with, and without a 3% load. Without factoring in the load, the reported +2.78% figure is correct. Very odd.
It looks like Schwab reports a YTD performance number both with, and without a 3% load. Without factoring in the load, the reported +2.78% figure is correct. Very odd.
press
So you as an investor in this fund take all the market risk and as a result of the 3% load and you enjoy negative returns. Nice work if you can get Wells Fargo.
Seems to me, the 3% load adds its own risk to this "Advantage High Yield" fund. Investors paying this load are being taken "Advantage of" and paying risk-less "High Yields" to Wells Fargo.
Comments
STHYX and STHBX - http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1081400/000108140015000890/invclassliquidation.htm
(click to see filing)
Excerpt from filing:
"Effective after the close of business on October 23, 2015, all Investor Class shares of each Fund converted to Class A shares of the same Fund (the “Conversion”). Following the Conversion, all references to the Investor Class shares in each Fund’s Statement of Additional Information are hereby removed."
October 23, 2015
Maybe yes, maybe no.
Thank you for your help! This site has the smartest and most helpful contributors!
While he was a crook, Strong actually had some pretty good funds and some talented managers. 15 years have passed. Possibly Wells is trying to distance themselves from the origin of some of these.
Memories
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-49741.htm
(Above link sometimes doesn't work. You should, however, be able to pull up this 2004 SEC document doing a Google search. It's good reading.)
From the SEC Complaint: "From 1998 through 2001 and in 2003, Strong frequently traded 10 Strong funds, including one over which he was the portfolio manager, making approximately 660 redemptions inconsistent with the limitations of the prospectus in the forty accounts that he controlled. As a result of his trading, Strong had gross profits of $4.1 million and net profits of $1.6 million. SCM failed to disclose Canary's trading agreement, and the inherent conflicts of interest involved in allowing such trading, and Strong and SCM failed to disclose Strong's frequent trading activities, to the Boards of Directors of the Strong funds or to the shareholders of the funds ..."
---
Regarding his personal accounts, 660 redemptions (1998-2003) is an eye-grabber. Anybody here ever come close to that number of trades over a 5 year period? As a former shareholder I can tell you they didn't tolerate such frequent trading by most clients. I was cautioned once after doing about 6 trades in one of their funds over a year's time.
Here's a story detailing the rise and fall of Strong Capital Management and which references the takeover by Wells Fargo in May 2004.. http://www.pionline.com/article/20120806/PRINT/308069980/one-time-powerhouse-strong-financial-down-to-a-staff-of-1
Strong appealed to many small investors in the Midwest. Low minimums, flashy literature and promotion, and a sizeable stable of competitive funds. Strong himself, through one of his publications, taught me: "Pay Yourself First." That saying probably didn't originate with him, but I heard it first from him and it was inspiring and helpful at the time. A fairly charismatic figure, he appeared as a guest once on Rukeyser's Wall Street Week - though you could tell old Lou wasn't too impressed.
The Wells Fargo Fund is a great Owl....frankly, I don't think that this resource gets enough recognition. Hence this post.
press
Looking at ZEOIX, it's doing quite well this year, at a 2.58% return, and with $10,966 for three years. Unfortunately, it's not available NTF at Schwab, as Press notes. Guess I'll have to stick with RPHYX for a while.
press
press
So you as an investor in this fund take all the market risk and as a result of the 3% load and you enjoy negative returns. Nice work if you can get Wells Fargo.
Seems to me, the 3% load adds its own risk to this "Advantage High Yield" fund. Investors paying this load are being taken "Advantage of" and paying risk-less "High Yields" to Wells Fargo.