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

Flexible portfolio alternatives to FPACX

Have any recommendations for a core mutual fund (or ETF) that would be a flexible portfolio alternative to FPACX? thx


  • edited August 2020
    In the same Morningstar category: PRWCX, if it ever opens up again to new investors. Check out BRUFX. (Same category, too.) A "flexible portfolio alternative?" I dunno quite what to make of that... A while ago, people were not happy with FPACX holding 15% in cash. Now it's almost 20%. I think the fund managers aren't buying because the Market is flying high. Stuff is expensive. By the way, the fixed income portion, I see, is rather small compared to peers right now. 22% foreign equities. You ARE looking for a CORE fund. Others: DODBX (Dodge & Cox.) VGSTX (Vanguard, but there has been some dissatisfaction with customer service at Vanguard reported here.)
  • Some years ago, I experimented with flexible (I call them "go anywhere") funds. The Pimco All Asset funds come to mind.

    I found that the "go anywhere" funds that I chose seemed to go to the wrong places. I use mostly target date funds now.
  • There's "flexible" and there's flexible. The former (perhaps I have these backward:-)) is what @Bitzer is describing: funds where the pool they "fish" in is everything. Commodities, alternatives, whatever, anything goes.

    Flexible funds, on the other hand, fish in well defined pools, and have flexibility within those ponds. In olden times, there were traditional balanced funds, rigid 60/40 allocations. Then came asset allocation funds, which might take 60/40 as a "neutral" allocation, but could tweak the mix according to market conditions. Then came tactical allocation funds, and all sorts of variants.

    A fund like VGSTX is an old style balanced fund, with little flexibility in allocations. PRWCX is a very flexible fund, and also fairly "flexible" in its ability to use junk bonds and simple derivatives.

    I might expand my pool a bit, while still keeping some guardrails - I'd look at world allocation funds that are flexible (dynamic allocations). Something like MDLOX or SGENX. RPGAX is a fine world allocation fund but not all that flexible.
  • edited August 2020
    Morningstar classifies FPACX as a 50-70 asset allocation fund. With this, there are many funds that are rated higher than FPACX, by M*, as it only carries two stars. Some flexible portfolio funds that I own are BAICX, CTFAX, PGBAX, JNBAX & GAOAX all of these being listed by MFO as flexible portfolio. There are possibly a few that I missed.

    Here is the link to the MFO Quick Search Tool. I am sure you will find something listed that betters FPACX. This is a tool that I often use in my review of funds, that I own, where I might be seeking another one. Enter your ticker symbol in the bottom left had corner under "fund symbols." You can enter up to five. After the fund profile appears click on flexible portfolio and you can then view the many flexible portfolio funds that appear along with their ratings. It is indeed a great tool. Thank you @Charles.
  • edited August 2020
    Assuming your investment platform (Fidelity, etc.) allows you numerous choices for purchase; and with some of the funds already mentioned above, part of the choice would be U.S. centered or global, too. I remain U.S. focused at this time.
    The below chart (started before added comments) contains mostly U.S. equity centered, balanced funds (moderate allocation, 50 - 70% equity).
    As to BRUFX mentioned above, this is only available via direct investment (postal) with Bruce and not through electronic choices on other platforms. My concern with Bruce at this time is the age of the managers (2), being 88 and 60; if my information is correct. As to DODBX, their recent lower performance is likely due to more exposure to non-U.S. holdings.

    Viewing the chart backwards for a number of years finds FPACX in the middle of the pack. Recent performance is apparently due to being a bit edgy with the market melt in February, which is understandable. The other funds in this list apparently maintained or added to the equity positions during and after the melt.
    Our accounts are with Fidelity and we have access to many moderate allocation funds, but I remain biased to FBALX , which has an annualized return of 9.4% since inception in 1986 and remains in the upper 90% of the nearly 700 similar funds . During this period, this fund has been through a lot of market swings, and most individual investors would be very pleased to have this long term performance.
    You could build your own with a 2 fund or etf combo of equity and bonds (ex. QQQ and AGG) OR a decent active managed equity and bond fund combo. While I remain biased to high quality bonds, their future may not persist as over the past 40 years. 'Course the death of bonds has been in place for quite awhile. But, if quality bonds lose their value in the coming years with a "build your own", the same lose of value would likely be reflected in an active managed, moderate allocation balanced fund, too. We have a 529 educational account we manage, which was started with and still maintains the same mix of 50/50, being VITPX and VBMPX. The 10 year annualized combined return is 8.8%. We'll take this performance without complaint.

    1 year chart of FPACX , JABAX , CTFAX , ABALX , FBALX , FPURX

    Strictly my opinions and viewpoints. There are many investment paths to follow.

Sign In or Register to comment.