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.
  • Ford Retirement Plans To Pull $900 Million From Fidelity Contrafund
    Not picking on M* or something. Contra fund is a growth-oriented fund and S&P 500 is not its benchmark. The second comparison to the large cap growth fund is okay though.
    Contrafund's 7.71 percent total return is three times more than the S&P 500's 2.48 percent, according to Morningstar. Danoff is beating 73 percent of his large-cap growth fund peers.
    The collective investment trusts they referred to is a similarly managed products only available to retirement accounts but at much lower expense ratio. Looks like something at Ford is doing the right thing for their employees.
  • Peter Lynch: Inside The Brain Of An Investing Genius
    FYI: ( I owned Fuidelity Magellan from 1972-1996 and made a lot of $$$ from Lynch's skill as Magellan's manager. It is the single best investment I ever made.)
    Consider that Lynch’s Magellan fund averaged +29% per year from 1977 – 1990 (almost doubling the return of the S&P 500 index for that period). In 1977, the obscure Magellan Fund started with about $20 million, and by his retirement the fund grew to approximately $14 billion (700x’s larger). Cynics believed that Magellan was too big to adequately perform at $1, $2, $3, $5 and then $10 billion, but Lynch ultimately silenced the critics. Despite the fund’s gargantuan size, over the final five years of Lynch’s tenure, Magellan outperformed 99.5% of all other funds, according to Barron’s. How did Magellan investors fare in the period under Lynch’s watch? A $10,000 investment initiated when he took the helm would have grown to roughly $280,000 (+2,700%) by the day he retired. Not too shabby.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://investingcaffeine.com/2015/08/15/inside-the-brain-of-an-investing-genius-2/
  • Ford Retirement Plans To Pull $900 Million From Fidelity Contrafund
    FYI: Ford Motor Co said it was dropping Contrafund as an investment option in its employee retirement accounts, pulling an estimated $900 million from Fidelity Investments' flagship mutual fund.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/14/us-ford-motor-fidelity-contrafund-idUSKCN0QJ1GP20150814
  • Steven Goldberg: New Grandeur Peak Funds Are Worth Getting Excited About
    @swamprev, was it a retirement account you moved? It seems like a taxable account still wouldn't be able to add unless you had a pre-established automatic investment plan. If I was able to add to a taxable account I would move it for sure.
  • Steven Goldberg: New Grandeur Peak Funds Are Worth Getting Excited About
    There's a supplement at the beginning of the prospectus that overrides the paragraphs @Old_Joe highlighted and hard closes the funds, whereas the paragraphs above reference the initial soft close.
    The new language is:
    Effective as of the close of business on September 30, 2014, the Fund will close to all purchases, except as described below (the “Hard Closure”).
    The Hard Closure of the Grandeur Peak Global Reach Fund means purchases will no longer be accepted into this Fund from either new or existing
    shareholders after September 30th, unless the purchase is part of one of the listed exceptions:
    Institutional Shareholders:
    • 401k plans with an existing position
    • Automatic rebalancing of an existing position (as long as purchase amounts are de minimis, as determined by Grandeur Peak)
    Retail Shareholders (Direct Shareholders Only):
    Retirement Accounts
    • Education Savings Accounts
    • Minor Accounts (UTMA/UGMA)
    • Pre-established Automatic Investment Plans
    All Shareholders:
    • Automatic reinvestment of the Fund distribution
    Separately, I think it's a bit funny when people suggest the Global Micro Cap fund might only be open for one day. It will help that they're going to limit any individual's investment to $100K, but that's still just 250 people if they all invest the maximum, which I'm sure not everyone will do. I figure it might be lucky if the fund is open until lunchtime on day one. $25 million is not very much. I wonder if they would ever consider or whether it's even possible to require people to subscribe in advance and then to prorate shares of the fund to those who subscribed based on the response they get. Has anyone ever experienced something like that?
  • Steven Goldberg: New Grandeur Peak Funds Are Worth Getting Excited About
    Hi Old_Joe
    Per: Existing shareholders of the Fund as of March 5, 2014 may continue to purchase additional shares of the Fund.
    Aside from the advisor/retirement accounts noted.
    Thinking that this statement regards direct investments via the fund company, eh?
    Below is the message when attempting an additional purchase of GPROX at Fido.
    Error: (009078) The mutual fund you entered is not open for subsequent purchases. Please review your order or call a Fidelity representative at 1-800-544-6666.
  • Steven Goldberg: New Grandeur Peak Funds Are Worth Getting Excited About
    Excerpt from the Prospectus:
    PURCHASE AND SALE OF FUND SHARES
    As of the close of business on March 5, 2014, the Fund is closed to new investors seeking to purchase shares of the Fund either directly or through third party intermediaries, subject to certain exceptions for financial advisors whose clients have already established an account in the Fund and participants in certain qualified retirement plans with an existing position in the Fund as of May 1, 2013.
    Existing shareholders of the Fund as of March 5, 2014 may continue to purchase additional shares of the Fund. The Fund’s investment adviser retains the right to make exceptions to any action taken to close the Fund or limit inflows into the Fund.
  • My Engineer Buddy Is Now Crowing ... But, We Both Have Smiles.
    The more I look at VMVFX,with a 0.3 ER, global scope and active management, the more convinced I am that it is the fund for the money I invest for my children and grandchildren, even with its short track record. I thank MFO for bringing it to my attention. Its recent record is impressive, and I think it will be stable, since it's owned by its investors.
    DSENX, in which I am invested, has a higher ER, US focus, and too many moving parts for me to commit to a 40 to 70 year run. I think PRWCX is closed to new investors.
    I don't value my investment skills that highly, and late onset dementia is a family risk; so, I'll trust Vanguard's management over my own. The only real question is whether a bond component is necessary, or if Social Security represents it. Considering the current bond return, I'll hold off on BND. My actively managed bond funds have a variable recent performance, nothing I would rely on for my descendants' retirement.
    Now, I only need to convince myself to transfer my other funds and stocks and relax. (Although I'll probably read MFO looking for a superior option for my own money.)
  • Time to dump YAFFX?
    I am holding (only) because I trust the family and the method, but cannot affirm that that is necessarily good advice. In retirement I value downside protection and assume Yackts still have that. As for alternatives, I have moved a lot into DSENX.
  • My Engineer Buddy Is Now Crowing ... But, We Both Have Smiles.
    Hi @ MileM,
    Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts and perspectives.
    It is for sure being a former corporate credit manager who believes in spreading his risk among many over just a few there is no doubt in my mind that my investment style through my fund sleeve management system, where each sleeve consists from three to six funds or in a couple sleeves seven funds, just might not be right for some. Currently my portfolio is comprised of ten investment sleeves plus two cash management sleeves. The total number of funds currently held total fifty one.
    PRWCX dusted my britches as it did most. If it had been available for purchase for me in one of my investment platforms I would have probably have owned it. Currently, M* reports that it is only available for new money for those that currently own it and possibly in some retirement plans as it shows limited access in its fund report.
    Indeed it is a great fund along with some others that I do not own. But, I still have a smile on my face as I am still ahead of most conservative, moderate and global allocation funds.
    Again, thanks again for stopping by. It is indeed appreciated.
    Old_Skeet
  • My Engineer Buddy Is Now Crowing ... But, We Both Have Smiles.
    Hi @Old_Skeet
    Yes, and I suspect there are indexes that closely match holdings within either VTI or BND. If one's retirement plan (rollover IRA) is or has a brokerage feature, an index or etf match or direct investment could be had/found to reflect VTI and BND.
    VTI is more of the variable in the numbers I posted, as it is at 50% of the total portfolio, versus 60% S&P index held by your friend. 'Course, they are both U.S. centric equity; with VTI having a wider spread among cap sizes.
  • My Engineer Buddy Is Now Crowing ... But, We Both Have Smiles.
    Hi Catch 22,
    The performance numbers that you are reporting come from etfs. The ones used in the study come form those he actually holds in his retirement plan plus he has held some cash along the way too. And two, it seems the etfs are perhaps more efficient over the mutual funds he holds.
  • My Engineer Buddy Is Now Crowing ... But, We Both Have Smiles.
    My engineer buddy is crowing …
    My high school buddy who became an engineer by profession has now started to crow as his 60/40 walking allocation consisting mostly 60% invested in the S&P 500 Index, about 35% in the aggregate bond index plus keeping about 5% in cash has now come to life and has bettered my recent performance. His numbers for the past one, three, five and ten year periods, tracked by Morningstar, are 6.8%, 10.0%, 10.0% and 5.6% respectively while mine, also tracked by Morningstar, on my master portfolio which uses my sleeve management system, are about 2.9%, 10.1%, 9.8% and 6.9% respectively. The above performance numbers do not reflect special investment positions (SPIFFS), held from time-to-time, as they added to our above performance numbers but not reflected in this analysis.
    It seems, over the past ten year period my master portfolio has bettered his 60/40 portfolio by more than twenty percent. So, it seems active management has out performed passive management over the long haul while passive now leads over the shorter period and they both have performed about the same through the mid years.
    In comparing both of our portfolios to CTFAX which is a professional run hybrid type asset walking fund based upon setting its stock and bond allocation by the varying price valuation of S&P 500 Index has returned 3.2%, 6.6%, 8.9% and 6.2% for the same respective periods. I have linked it's Fact Sheet below for those that would like to review same.
    https://www.columbiathreadneedleus.com/content/columbia/pdf/LIT_DOC_3C97987F.PDF
    It is interesting that his S&P 500 Index fund has returned an average of 7.0% for the ten year period while his bond index fund has returned 4.2%. Perhaps, Mr. Buffett provided good widsom and thought path that an investor would do well by just investing in the S&P 500 Index along with some US Treasury bonds.
    I score both of us as winners over some of our classmates that chose many years ago not to become investors. No doubt, the years ahead for both of us will most likely be easier than those that chose not to become long term investors. We have classmates that bettered both of us during our working years ... but, I don't think they will going forward as most of them did not invest and thus prepare for retirement. I know some of them lived high on the hog and spent most of what they were making to live a high profile lifestyle. Some of these folks will just have to keep working ... but, neither of us will as we both have smiles.
  • Edward S on balanced funds and investable alternatives
    Yeah, this is how I read him, and rightly or wrongly is seriously at odds with very thoughtful and deeply researched work earlier in the year from Morgan, Goldman, and Fidelity. Maybe he will prove right. In retirement, I am not acting accordingly.
  • David Snowball's August Commentary
    hank said
    August 2 edited August 2 Flag
    A few morsels from Ed:
    "Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. - Joseph Heller"
    Will this be mediocroty thrust upon us? As in;
    Hi ! I'm from the government,and I'm here to help you.
    The New School's Teresa Ghilarducci weighs in on mandated savings, risk aversion and avoiding fees
    Aug 5, 2015 @ 10:46 am
    By Bloomberg News
    Retirement policy wonks don't usually get hate mail. But in 2008, Teresa Ghilarducci, an economics professor at the New School for Social Research, proposed replacing 401(k) plans and their income tax break with a mandated government savings plan for all workers. The blowback from some Tea Partyers was so intense that the school's chief of security gave her his cell phone number.
    The plan called for mandatory savings of 5% of salary, with the government handling all investment decisions, guaranteeing a rate of return above inflation, and ultimately paying out the retirement money in a lifelong annuity. It's pretty radical. Conservatives hate it. She continues to advocate for it, though she won't comment on whether she has discussed it as one of the cadre of economists advising Hillary Clinton in her presidential bid.
    About 15 years ago, Ms. Ghilarducci started to focus on getting to retirement in fighting shape.
    “It was a pure money play,” she said. “I lost some weight and am devoted to my seven-minute workout app and weight training at the gym." It's not about vanity, she said, "but the money I hope to save if I can avoid illnesses such as diabetes and osteoporosis.”
    Ms. Ghilarducci said if she didn't have access to TIAA-CREF she'd park her money in Vanguard index funds.
    “It's against my religion to invest in actively managed funds,” she said. "I suspected they were fishy when I was younger, and now we have plenty of evidence that passive [investing] is better."
    After doing some intensive research on long-term care insurance, she decided to pass. She cites the high premiums on the policies and new research that suggests that budget-busting extended care will be needed by fewer elderly people than previously thought.
    “Pushing for Medicare to expand to cover long-term care is my best bet, and honestly, it's everyone's best bet,” she said.
    Many retirement experts and myriad online tools suggest aiming for retirement income that can replace 70% to 80% of your pre-retirement income. Ms. Ghilarducci, who has based her plan on living until 92, is out to replace 100%.
    http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150805/FREE/150809967/this-retirement-expert-got-death-threats-for-her-policy-reform-ideas
    WHO INVITED TERESA GHILARDUCCI TO THE TABLE?
    Lunch and populism with Hillary Clinton’s least-likely adviser.
    BY NANCY COOK
    This article appears in the June 27, 2015 edition of National Journal Magazine as Who Invited Teresa Ghilarducci to the Table?.
    Ghilarducci's big idea, then and now, is to create government-run, guaranteed retirement accounts ("GRAs," for short). Taxpayers would be required to put 5 percent of their annual income into savings, with the money managed by the Social Security Administration. They could only opt out if their employer offered a traditional pension, and they wouldn't be able to withdraw the money as readily and early as with a 401(k). The government would invest the money and guarantee a rate of return, adjusted to inflation.
    To pay for the program, Ghilarducci calls for ending tax breaks for people with 401(k)s —breaks that, according to her and others' research, now go primarily toward wealthier Americans. Instead, every taxpayer would receive a $600 refundable tax credit that would go toward the 5 percent annual contribution.
    Plenty of economists and policymakers—especially on the state and local levels—have proposed some version of government-run retirement accounts. But no plan has been quite so grandly liberal as Ghilarducci's, which would create a new federal program easily as massive as the one wrought by the Affordable Care Act—and do it by mandating that Americans contribute 5 percent of their earnings. "You don't like mandates? Get real," she wrote in a 2012 Times op-ed. "Just as a voluntary Social Security system would have been a disaster, a voluntary retirement account plan is a disaster."
    http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/teresa-ghilarducci-hillary-clinton-adviser-20150626
  • ETAGX - Eventide Gilead
    ETNHX
    Ahead of the class even with 15-20 % cash.Finally bought 18 months ago.$$$ cost averaging N/L in Schwab retirement actt.Ted,Scott,Kevin, others have extolled many health care investment options for a long time on this board and seem to remain bullish.
    From http://eventidefunds.com/our-products/#!healthcare
    image
    http://quicktake.morningstar.com/syndication/holdings.aspx?cn=GLG117&symbol=ETNHX
    Also own HHCAX for "finacial health" insurance.
  • David Snowball's August Commentary
    Hi @Sven
    I'm puzzled with this other statement in Mr. Studzinski's commentary:
    " most people investing in a balanced (or equity fund for that matter) investment, do not have a sufficiently long time horizon, ten years perhaps being the minimum commitment."
    My "presumption", per the above; would have to center to the possibility of only those close to or in retirement would use a balanced fund (conservative or moderate). Perhaps an explanation will arrive.
    IMO, there remains many folks who should be invested in some fashion but are still afraid of the "nasty Wall St. thing". Balanced funds allow these folks to have market exposure with perhaps limited portfolio destruction, eh?
    Take care,
    Catch
  • How To Play International Small Caps: Lewis Braham
    For Wellstrade customers, OSMYX is available in retirement accounts for a $500 minimum.
    Kevin
  • The Worst Mutual Fund In The World
    from the article about Great-West
    It’s one of the handful of funds on the menus of 401(k) and 457(b) plans offered through their employers; if they want to take advantage of a tax-advantaged retirement plan and want exposure to the S&P 500, there’s one game in town. And it’s not cheap.
    its too bad people are stuck with companies like this. when an insurance company runs your funds, ....