Howdy, Stranger!

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

In this Discussion

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

A Portfolio Review...Adjusting for the next 20 years

beebee
edited December 2019 in Fund Discussions
As part of my end of the year portfolio review I try to simplify my holdings without compromising performance. I am 60 years old and have a pension, but no Social Security (SS's WEP provision eliminated SS for me). I see the next 20 years as a time to spend a little bit of what I have saved knowing full well that, if I am lucky enough to live into my eighties, spending priorities will begin to shift away from "foot loose and fancy free" to "foot wear that's loose and free".

Simplification comes in two forms. One, I am attempting to simplify what I hold (the number of funds) and two, where I hold these funds (the number of institutions where I hold the funds). I manage all of my investments independent of advisors. I do attempt to seek out mutual funds that are managed. So, in a sense, I do pay for investment management advice as a function of the Expense Ratio (ER) of the funds i own that have fund managers or management teams.

Over the next 20 years my withdrawal from these investments need to fund:

- Yearly Income gaps - the yearly shortfall when I subtract my projected yearly expenses from my retirement income.
- One time Expenses - For gift costs (weddings, tuition, holidays), travel costs, medical procedures costs (not covered by insurances), large one time item costs (a car, boat, real estate)
- Roth Conversions up to the 12% tax bracket limit (25% of my retirement accounts are in deferred taxable IRA, 75% in Roth/HSA).
- Help fund retirement needs beyond 80 such as income gaps as a result of inflation, out of pocket health care costs, funeral expenses, providing for surviving spouse, and gifting to beneficiaries (Spouse, Kids, Charities)...oh yeah, and loose fitting shoes.

Here are my present holding by percentages of total:

71% Moderate to Aggressive positions (for long term growth and periodic withdrawals)
PRWCX - 22% (half Roth, half SD IRA)
PRGSX - 10.5% (Roth)
PRMTX - 7.5% (Roth)
PRHSX - 4% (SD IRA)
VMVFX - 6% (Roth)
VHCOX / POAGX-11% (Roth)
VHT - 2% (Roth)
FSMEX - 4% (Roth)
FSRPX - 4% (Roth)

6% Balance position (to cover Long term HC costs)
BRUFX - (HSA)

23% Conservative positions (to cover sequence of return withdrawals, to provide cash for buying opportunities, lower portfolio volatility)
FRIFX, VWINX, PTIAX, VFISX, PRWBX, SPRXX - (mostly Roth)

I am presently at 5 institutions which I will reduce to 4 by Spring 2020 and 3 by summer 2020

Recently, I back tested a portfolio consisting of PRWCX (34%), PRMTX (33%) and PRHSX (33%) which I consider moderately aggressive.

Its past 20 year performance had a MAXXDD recovery period of 3 years. I consider this a reasonable time frame to cover a sequence of return risk withdrawal.

Having at least 3 years of retirement income money earmarked for these future time frames (market pull backs and recoveries) seems reasonable to me. A combination of FRIFX / VWINX / PTIAX / ST Bonds are my choices for this part of my portfolio.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

Comments

  • edited December 2019
    I am presently at 5 institutions which I will reduce to 4 by Spring 2020 and 3 by summer 2020 “

    Great stuff @bee. I’m a dozen years beyond you in age and facing the same challenges. I went from 5 institutions to 4 a year ago - vacating Oakmark. Tough getting it down further anytime soon. I view both Permanent Portfolio Funds and Invesco as “one-trick ponies” at this point. The first for PRPFX and the second for its gold fund. The bulk, however, is at D&C and TRP - both of which I regard highly.

    bee - You incentivized me to count mine: I have 14 funds (which includes 2 ultra-shorts). I find that number quite manageable. (If I counted correctly, you listed 16, including VHT.)

    My allocation :

    Balanced: 25% (3 funds)

    Alternative: 25% (3 funds)

    Diversified Income: 25% (2 funds)

    Cash (Ultra-short / Short-term): 15% (3 funds)

    Real Assets: 10% (3 funds)

    PS - As noted recently, thinking about this allocation is a good way to fall asleep.:)
  • @bee, you mention that the new portfolio 'max recovery time' was about 3 years. Was that the great recession period? I'm wondering because the REIT you are putting in your "income" bucket, which I believe you would be withdrawing from while the market recovered, also went down in the -40% range during that time and also took 3 years to recover. I guess I'm just surprised a REIT, which can be just as volatile as equities, would be in the bucket you use to wait out those 3 years. And why wouldn't some percentage of that bucket be cash (MM, CD)?

    I'm setting up similar to what you are doing, a 3 1/2 year withdrawal bucket, so I like hearing your ideas.
  • Just looking at the mechanics, and not the particular funds ...

    It looks like with a little flexibility, you could get down to two institutions - Fidelity and Vanguard - pretty easily. TRP is now NTF at Fidelity (and at Vanguard, though I'd favor Fidelity for brokerage/third party funds). The only reason I might have for continuing to invest directly with TRP is free M* premium access.

    For the HSA, if you're willing to invest in anything other than BRUFX, Fidelity now offers HSA accounts that are as free as its regular/IRA brokerage accounts. As a side note, you don't have to withdraw money from an HSA as expenses are incurred. You can pay out of pocket and reimburse yourself anytime in the future out of the HSA so long as you hold onto your bills and receipts. So, like other "Roths", you can keep the HSA invested in more volatile funds and draw on the HSA only when it is doing well.

    Personally, I tend to avoid sector funds. In part because I don't claim any macro expertise. In part because, as you wrote, I pay my fund managers to make those kinds of decisions. To each his own. I agree with targeting 3 years or so of "survival funds". Even if the other funds don't fully recover in three years, they should come back enough that drawing on them after that time shouldn't be too painful.

    A curiosity question, no need to respond w/personal data: my understanding of WEP is that "By law, it cannot eliminate your benefit entirely." (AARP page) So I'm wondering how you're getting hit so hard by it.
  • You need $250K in assets at T. Rowe to get free Morningstar Premium.
  • They may have grandfathered $100K Preferred Services customers.
    https://discuss.morningstar.com/NewSocialize/forums/t/373185.aspx
  • @bee, I really appreciate your sharing since we are in similar timeframe as you. Several years ago we started consolidating our IRAs to two brokerages (Fidelity and Vanguard), and the third with our current employers. While Fidelity online service is second to none, Vanguard offers great incentives for those who meet certain asset levels with free trades and low fees. Like msf mentioned, many T. Rowe Price funds are not available on the NTF platforms on both Fidelity and Vanguard. So TRP was eliminated.

    The end result is that it simplifies managing all the funds. Also the ERs was reduced considerably since we use many Vanguard funds and their ETFs.
  • edited December 2019
    Getting back to @MikeM’s and @msf’s original comments. Like most here I suspect,they maintain a “survival bucket” holding X years worth of anticipated needs in the event of a severe selloff in the risk assets to which one is exposed (presumably equities). I’ve heard estimates ranging from 3-5 years worth of anticipated needs held in cash or cash equivalents by various board members over the years. The idea is not to have to sell depreciated assets during a downturn. The expectation is that downturns will last a relatively short time (perhaps 5 years). Folks cite market history to support the perception downturns tend to be short lived and followed by sharp upticks.

    I’d never quarrel with that approach. Certainly sounds reasonable. Personally I’ve never used it. A very conservative investor by nature, I believe I’m better off maintaining 100% invested at all times and pulling annual distributions from that overall pot. (Note: That does not mean 100% in equities or risk assets.) Never have I needed more than 10% from investments in a single year. Most often it’s in the vicinity of 5-7%.

    I could be wrong. But my sense is I’m somewhat protected against severe equity selloffs by the diversification I maintain. It’s probably the #1 reason I pay intense attention to different market sectors almost daily and track several funds that represent various sectors. And, if equities drop sharply, I’ll essentially “rebalance on the run” by shifting withdrawals to the fixed income holdings. To some extent this has been an ongoing process over the years. I always pull distributions from the portions that have fared the best.

    Just some rambling thoughts. One size does not fit all. Admittedly, my approach is better suited for very conservative investors.
  • @bee, 12y ago at 60 I was in something of your situation in terms of holdings, probably not as thoughtfully and with less backtesting ... but now, as I have posted before, I am simplified to ~60% or a bit more DSEEX and the rest divided among FRIFX, PONAX, and PDVAX.
    Plus cash in MINT.
    (Divided b/w ML and Fido, and if I were to do it over I would not do ML except to the extent of getting some BoA bennies.)
    Oh, and a spot in BIVRX (thanks to DSnowball-MFO), plus some held underwater stocks.
  • You are exactly right @hank. There is more than one way to do the withdrawal thing and it comes down to feeling comfortable in a down turn. In my case the 3-4 year safe-withdrawal bucket is less than 10% of the total portfolio, so making that bucket cash and short term bonds doesn't affect the total portfolio return much. It actually allows me to be a bit more aggressive with the rest of the egg. By aggressive I mean a 60:40 distribution.

    I do enjoy reading everyone's input on this topic. Glad bee brought it up.
  • An older column from Kitces:
    https://www.kitces.com/blog/managing-sequence-of-return-risk-with-bucket-strategies-vs-a-total-return-rebalancing-approach/

    In short, if one uses multiple buckets (say, a 3 year short term bucket and one or two others), the results are the same as using an integrated portfolio (as hank does), assuming one rebalances periodically. Which makes perfect sense because taking money from one bucket and rebalancing is effectively just drawing proportionately from each bucket.

    At the end of the piece, Kitces compares that with not rebalancing at all. With no rebalancing, the portfolio ultimately fails. What I would have liked to have seen was a strategic replenishing - refilling the cash/near cash bucket when equities are up.

    Still, his column does confirm there's more than one way to skin a cat.
  • I can only wish that my retirement account had that persons' 1966 dollar amount in 2019 dollars. (inflation adjusted!!!]
    Derf
  • beebee
    edited December 2019
    @msf I am actually still trying accumulate SS credit (part time) so maybe there will be a small SS benefit when I turn 70. On my to do list for 2020...sit down with SS and crunch some numbers regarding my potential SS benefit and this WEP provision.

    For others are not familiar with SS and WEP:
    https://ssa.gov/policy/docs/program-explainers/windfall-elimination-provision.html

    @msf Fidelity's HSA option looks like a good one...on my to do list for 2020.

    @Sven @msf mentioned TRP is available NTF on Fidelity's Brokerage platform...good to know.

    @MikM regarding FRIFX MAXXDD of -40%...you have a very valid point...though this is a small position in my portfolio I did consider this a non-correlated US market asset (.72) it does pay a dividend that appears to remain constant even as share price fluctuates.

    @hank said,
    I could be wrong. But my sense is I’m somewhat protected against severe equity selloffs by the diversification I maintain. It’s probably the #1 reason I pay intense attention to different market sectors almost daily and track several funds that represent various sectors. And, if equities drop sharply, I’ll essentially “rebalance on the run” by shifting withdrawals to the fixed income holdings. To some extent this has been an ongoing process over the years. I always pull distributions from the portions that have fared the best.
    ...seems like a valid approach to me
  • edited December 2019
    Kitces:“ Once ... buckets are established, the retiree then might use the following decision-rule framework for liquidations:

    1) If equities are up, take the retirement spending from equities
    2) If equities are down but bonds are up, take the spending from bonds instead
    3) If both equities and bonds are down in the same year, take the distribution from Treasury bills

    (or, in my case, from “Alternative” investment funds)

    Thanks for the link @msf - I’d never seen any analysis comparing the two approaches before and somewhat humbled that Kitces sees some merit in what I’ve been doing. Of course there will be other experts who disagree.

    My method IMHO only works if one is willing to sacrifice some current level of return in exchange for being fully invested at all times (a lousy misleading term anyway). So, I carry what some would consider expensive, low performing or erratic performance funds as an offset to a severe equity sell-down. Funds like TMSRX, PRPFX, OPGSX - none of which would pass mustard based on the metrics most mutual fund investors use or receive high marks on this board. There’s also a static 15% weighting in the mix devoted to ultra-short and short term bonds. (I just recently increased that frim 10%.) And as Kitces mentions, you have to be willing to sell your winners in a downturn and hang on to your losers.

    One big problem is in trying to backtest anything. For most, 10-15 years seems like an eternity. But in terms of really important global financial turning points 10-15 years is little more than a drop in the bucket. And some of the alternative investment funds (like TMSRX) have only become available recently.
  • @hank : What is it that you like about TMSRX ? 16 % in cash seems a {little } high to be.
    Derf
  • edited December 2019
    Derf said:

    @hank : What is it that you like about TMSRX ? 16 % in cash seems a {little } high to be.
    Derf

    Derf, I’ve owned it since inception. It’s the first fund I’ve ever held that sometimes sees big “up” days when equities hit the bricks, and yet can still hold its own in a rising equity market. That tells me there’s a very low correlation with equities. And I see little correlation with bonds either. It’s also been able to turn out a modest total return this year even while equities climb higher and higher. Yes, it’s lagging Price’s diversified income fund, RPSIX (11% vs 7%) YTD as I would expect. But let’s not forget that RPSIX invests 10-15% in an equity fund, which is benefiting from the hot equity market.

    I’ve read a bit of what Price’s “brain trust” envisions for the fund. What I hear from them is that they foresee a possible scenario in which both bonds and equities are falling together. It’s not hard for one to imagine how that might happen. They believe the approach they’ve taken with this fund will allow it to avoid serious losses under such conditions. Obviously, the fund is new and untested. Time will tell whether it can hold up well during both an adverse bond and adverse equity market as they hope and expect.

    As far as cash level, it can be misleading for a fund that engages in shorting equities as this fund does to an extent. Essentially, as I understand it, the cash-stash serves as a kind of collateral against the equities it has sold short..

    BTW @Derf, Were you aware that board Prima Donna, PRWCX, is currently holding 15% in cash?:)
  • I’ve read a bit of what Price’s “brain trust” envisions for the fund. What I hear from them is that they foresee a possible scenario in which both bonds and equities are falling together. It’s not hard for one to imagine how that might happen. They believe the approach they’ve taken with this fund will allow it to avoid serious losses under such conditions. Obviously, the fund is new and untested. Time will tell whether it can hold up well during both an adverse bond and adverse equity market as they hope and expect.

    As far as cash level, it can be misleading for a fund that engages in shorting equities as this fund does to an extent. Essentially, as I understand it, the cash-stash serves as a kind of collateral against the equities it has sold short..
    Thanks for the information. The shorting strategy is similar to what Pimco does with their bond funds. The fund is still fairly new. Will keep track on this strategy.

    Yacktman funds also hold high cash position and they are lagging their peers.
  • edited December 2019
    Sven said:

    The shorting strategy is similar to what Pimco does with their bond funds. The fund is still fairly new. Will keep track on this strategy.
    funds also hold high cash position and they are lagging their peers.

    It’s hard for folks to get their head around a fund like this. It’s not intended to be a growth fund.
    It can’t keep pace with stocks or bonds when those markets are advancing. One willl probably never produce a M* “Manager of the Year.” Their best use, I’d think, is with an older and very conservative investor who would like to earn a couple % more with an investment than cash or short term bonds are likely to provide without assuming a lot of additional market risk.

    We tend to think mainly of equities as risky. However, under some circumstances, all but the very shortest duration bonds can entail quite a bit of risk. We’ve become somewhat immune to the potential risk in bonds because interest rates have been generally falling or stable for the past 25 years or longer. These alternative type funds carry a lot of baggage of their own as well. More fail than succeed. A lot depends on the manager getting the timing right. The markets / market sentiment have been running against them for quite a while as well. And they carry higher expenses and fees, somewhat justifiably because of the short selling and other derivatives they invest in. Just one ingredient to consider as part of a broader portfolio if one is highly risk averse either by nature or by age and circumstance.

  • Expense ratios for alternatives and long/short strategy funds are quite high, 1.5 -2% and up. So TMSRX is interesting and reasonable on the ER. Providing that TRP's strategy plays out in their favor, this would be a decent vehicle.
  • edited December 2019
    I took a sneak peak (TMSRX) at Marketwatch & to my surprise 32% in TRPUSBF. Looking at 4/th Qter. 2018 shows app. 7% drop. I guess it boils down to downside protection vs upside gain. Is anyone into this fund for say 10% or more of retirement income funding. I did take note it appeared to give out some donuts , but as of now the dividend is unknown to me. Derf
    P.S. donuts $.27 & a wavier in effect for ER.
  • edited December 2019
    @Derf - I wasn’t trying to hype TMSRX. It came up as part of a larger discussion about investing late in the retirement years. I took the time to address your question about the 16% cash position and tried to share a few thoughts on a fund that’s barely one-year old.

    I’d be very surprised if anyone else who posts here owns it. I own a great many funds that are not currently popular. I have to answer only to myself. So, you invest your way and I’ll invest mine.
  • MJG
    edited December 2019
    Hi Guys,

    Thanks for this stimulating exchange. Markets can be and often are complex and frustrating. That’s the nature of the beast.

    But as Benjamin Franklin observed: “speak little, do much. Well done is better than well said.” So let’s just make our decisions, and just do it.

    Best Wishes for the Holidays and beyond

  • This has been a very nice exchange of ideas and facts. Thanks to Bee for initiating it and to everybody who added to it. This kind of conversation is one of the major strengths of MFO.
    It made me curious about how Fidelity (where I do almost all of my business) handles fees on TRP funds, so I checked.
    Most, but not all, charge no fee.
    PRWCX is NTF (but closed to new investors).
    TMSRX has a 49.95 fee
    PRSCX (one of my favorites since I owned it for years in my 403b) is NTF. I think I prefer FSCFX now.
    PRHSX is NTF
    PRDGX is NTF
    PRFRX is NTF.

    There are many more ...
    David

  • @dstone42: Double check TMSRX, I see no fee at Schwab. Only a redemption fee if not held long enough.
    Derf
  • Derf, yeah, there is a fee at Fidelity.
    It's T. Rowe Price Multi-Strategy Total Return Fund Investor Class. Many of the Investor Class funds have fees.
    There is also TMSAX : T. Rowe Price Multi-Strategy Total Return Fund Adviser Class,
    but I guess only Advisers have access to info about it. I can not even get a quote.
    David
  • msf
    edited December 2019
    There seems to be little rhyme or reason as to which funds within a family are sold NTF at a given brokerage.

    Fidelity displays Advisor class shares for a couple of TRP funds on its retail site. Still, they're only accessible through Fidelity® Wealth Services, and carry a TF: PRITX / PAITX, PRTAX / PATAX.

    The difference between the classes is a 12b-1 fee created to pay for the platform or advisor. A few fund other families do something like this with N (retail) and I (institutional) shares. TCW goes so far as to make both classes available with the same minimum purchase, so you choose whether to pay a transaction fee for the same fund. See, e.g. TGFNX / TGCFX.

    Consider a fund like JECAX. NTF at Schwab and TDAmeritrade, but sold with a load at Fidelity, even though Fidelity waives the load on A shares for most of JP Morgan funds.

    Way back in the dark ages, when it was hard to find a free checking account, I was able to purchase a T. Rowe Price Advisor class fund NTF at Citicorp Investment Services. I figured that the extra 12b-1 fee amounted to just a few dollars and it was a cheap way to qualify for free checking. I've long since moved the position to T. Rowe Price, where they did a tax-free conversion to Investor class shares.

  • edited December 2019
    Derf said:

    ”I took a sneak peak (TMSRX) at Marketwatch ... Looking at 4/th Qter. 2018 shows app. 7% drop.”

    I’m not sure what the above is a reference to. If @Derf means TMSRX lost 7% from its inception 2/23/18 to year’s end, that sounds about right. ‘18 was nasty for most everything. And right out of the gate a fund’s liable to do anything. But if he means the fund fell 7% in the 4th quarter, I’ve checked with M* and found that it fell only 3.34% during Quarter 4, 2018. It’s hard to get reliable performance data on such a new fund. So I plotted its course from 10/1/18 until 12/31/18 using M*’s on-site tool. A $10,000 investment in TMSRX on 10/1 was worth slightly less than $9700 at year’s end. I was able to obtain more easily the Quarter 4 performance data (from Zack’s) for OAKBX, a balanced fund I owned up until the end of 2018. During Quarter 4, 2018, OAKBX fell 9.25%.

    I don’t think this makes the case either way as to whether someone should own the fund. Just wanted to make sure Derf and I were looking at the same figures and time-frame for TMSRX. Glad some folks found @bee’s thread interesting or helpful.
  • @ hank: : Appears chart I was looking at didn't take into consideration the 33 cent dividend passed out in Dec. My bad for not catching that !
    My questions pertain to the fact that I'm thinking of dumping PRPFX & finding somewhere else to invest.
    Have a Merry good week !, Derf
  • edited December 2019
    No problem @Derf. Thanks for clarifying.
    Derf said:

    I'm thinking of dumping PRPFX & finding somewhere else to invest.

    You are aware, of course, that PRPFX and TMSRX are two very different types of funds - even though both are considered “alternative” by some investors (including myself). Points to the difficulty of labeling / classifying that class of funds that breaks from the herd and tries to do something. different.

    Merry Christmas to you too.
Sign In or Register to comment.