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.
  • New Strategy For Equity Investing During Retirement Ignites Debate
    I find these kinds of 'research' studies to often have very little application to real-world practice. Additionally, these are based on past history, the last 30 years of which included a bond bull market. In some ways, things ARE different for those starting retirement now, a LOT different than they were 30 years ago. One important aspect is that people are living longer. We run our client lifetime income projections to age 100. Another key point is that there is no 'average' retiree. Our experience is that they have different risk tolerances, different income needs, different lifestyles, different goals in terms of whether they are comfortable spend down their assets or not, just to name a few. And given the current state of health care in this country, and with the potential for the ACA to implode being real, how do retirees plan for health care costs? We tell clients they will absolutely need to be flexible in their investment allocations.
  • Do Retirees Have It Backward ?
    With all due respect, isn't this just another play on the old "greed vs fear" equation? Where was all this fancy figuring back when everything was dropping like a rock 5 years ago? Took a leap of faith than for some to entrust their retirement savings to a traditional money market fund. Guess a near tripling of equity values must have same effect on these strategists as a third shot of Jack Daniels. Everything suddenly looks rosier.
  • Do Retirees Have It Backward ?
    I strongly recommend also studying the comment thread, darwinian, midhenry and the authors, as it is much more sophisticated and nuanced (and spirited) than the usual retirement investing guff, or indeed than many of our discussions here. Scholarly pro types, it appears.
  • Fidelity Undercuts Vanguard's Target Data Funds
    You wouldn't know from the article, but the Fidelity funds are achieving their ER via a temporary fee waiver.
    (Actually, a tip off is that all the funds have the same ER. The funds are comprised of underlying index funds each with their own (different) ERs. So it's highly improbable that all the funds of funds would have the identical ER including acquired fund costs, unless the ER were rigged via a waiver.)
    The waivers range from 9 to 11 basis points (i.e. about 70% of the current ER), and are set to expire May 31, 2016.
    Likely you also wouldn't know about these funds from Fidelity, since they're nowhere to be found on the retail pages. It looks like they are only available to retirement plans (e.g. 401k plans). Here's Fidelity's 6 page glossy, via Union College.
    In the 90s, Fidelity started orienting its company toward gathering retirement plan assets. This is when Magellan became an index hugger (and worse), and when Fidelity clamped down on its managers. Fidelity seems to be using these index funds as part of that strategy (keeping quiet about them except to employers).
    To bee's comment/link - you won't find Fidelity Freedom Index funds listed there (even though another Fidelity employer-only series, Strategic Advisers Muliti-Manager, is there). According to Univ. of Michigan's announcement when they transitioned from Freedom Funds to Freedom Index Funds, the two sets of funds are supposed to be following similar strategies (which I assume means similar glide path). So the Freedom Index funds likely performed similarly to the Freedom funds.
    I spot checked the 2030 fund - Fidelity's index fund underperformed Fidelity's comparable actively managed fund by 55 basis points over the past three years. (The Freedom Index funds are four years old.) Haven't checked whether this is due to different glide paths, or inferior performance by the underlying index funds.
  • an Oakseed update
    SEEDX
    Fidelity Retirement
    Fund minimum: $1,000.00
    Fidelity Brokerage
    Fund minimum: $2,500.00
  • Micro-Cap Stocks: Out Of The Shadows
    Hi TSP,
    Although very young, THVBX (ER 1.75%) looks like an attractive fund. Depending on the size of investment, I would strongly consider buying the much lower cost institutional class, THBIX (ER 1.25%), which is available in retirement accounts at Fidelity (no minimum + TF) and Scottrade ($2500 minimum + TF) according to the web sites.
    Kevin
  • Something To Be Thankful For In Your 401(k)
    The transistion from defined pension plans to 401k, etc. plans; still favors the employer. I will suggest companies are more than happy to "cough up" a few extra matching dollars to forgo the costs of a long term pension plan.
    In the end, those able to have access to a 401k and related plans is the only real thankful portion of an employment benefit package, relative to retirement savings. Any match increases may be regarded as internal corporate marketing to employees for a more soft, warm and fuzzy feeling. There are exceptions to this condition by some employers who have an honest concern for the better welfare of the employees in general.
    The article author was complete with including the reasoning behind the increased matches for some, with full time employment.
  • 3 funds by Greenblatt
    The video was a pleasant infomercial for his funds. I'm sure a link to the interview will be up on the Gotham site in the very near future.
    I appreciated his somewhat dismissive comment about RAFI, which I'm sure will elicit a grin and eyeroll from Rob Arnott:
    "But there's no price component in what they are doing, so they are not actually investing, they are randomizing errors."
    I wonder how Prof. Greenblatt explains to his Columbia students the effects of very high actual fund expenses (GARIX 3.24%, GENIX 3.62%, GONIX 3.77%) on future value- investing returns. Might high expenses prove to be significant headwinds for future fund performance ? Just curious. And maybe he could present objective evidence (1) that common investors need funds such as his in their taxable, retirement or pension accounts, and (2) that investors should use funds such as his instead of much lower cost index funds.
    For now and likely for as long as I have a pulse, I see no reason to invest in the Gotham funds, but I will put them on my watch list merely to monitor.
    Kevin
  • decided to sell AMANX (amana income)
    I think what you folks are telling makes sense.
    I can't handle retirement investment myself. I have become too conservative after 2008 crash. Schwab said they would offer free advisor for anyone whose portfolio is more than 250K. May be I should call them and see what they have to suggest.
    thanks
    nath
  • does anyone know why PRBLX (parnassus equity income) lost 4.6% today?
    trying to learn from you folks how to stay invested when the markets are tanking.
    My biggest weakness is, when the stock market starts going south, I start selling...that is not a healthy investing strategy for a retirement portfolio...i understand that.
    I need to get over that fear like I need to get over the needles fear (I hate shots). :)
    It is a personality shift I need to work on..the only way I can learn is to interact with folks like you and family of mutualfundobservers.
    Regards fundlarm.
    nath
  • Damned Lies
    Reply to @Junkster:
    Hi Jungster,
    You must do very well with your investing program given your psychic powers. I presume you possess that power since you somehow envisioned something in my MFO post that never happened. I never edited any comments relative to any personal intelligence quotient. I did not conceive my opening paragraph as directly applying to me; it was inserted as a general, pity quote. Nothing more was intended.
    It is true that when I’m alone in a room, I am the most intelligent person present. However, when my wife joins me in that room, I’m now the second most intelligent person in that room. I was wise enough to marry into intelligence.
    When meeting anyone for the first time, my initial assumption is that they are intelligent. I have yet to be disappointed. Certainly some folks are more intelligent than others, but even that relative standing is transient. It depends on circumstance and subject matter.
    I wish you success with your intuitive-based investing style. I certainly agree that prudent money management discipline, patience, cost containment, and risk control are all part of a successful investor’s toolkit.
    I’m always baffled by the reluctance of a few MFO members to acknowledge the contributions made by statistical data sets when making an investment decision. Investing is awash in statistical measurements.
    When an investor reviews a chart or consults a summary Table, he is being informed by a statistical collection of data. Most simply expressed, statistics are merely counting and organizing in a manner that allows for easier interpretation of information. Not all this information is honestly presented. That’s precisely why I submitted the references posted earlier.
    There surely is no magical formula that guarantees an investment profit, but statistics of all sorts are used by intelligent investors to identify their investment opportunities and choices. For example, the broad statistic that equities deliver a positive annual return 70 % of the time with a respectable 6 % rate of real return encourages much of the activity on this fine MFO discussion exchange. The fact that equity prices ultimately reflect corporate profits, and that corporate profits are loosely correlated to national demographics and GDP growth rate are all statistically solid findings.
    On a personal level, your decision when to retire, and the required size of your likely nest-egg that impacts that retirement decision, is informed to some extent by government life expectancy tables that project longevity. Statistics seep into many commonplace decisions.
    A proper appreciation of statistical benefits and shortcomings tilt an investor’s success odds just a little in his favor. I agree that intuition should be a component of the investment decision process. But manias, bubbles, panics, and market crashes are all the product of an overactive, emotional investing public.
    The currency of Wall Street is statistical data. Main Street would capture more of the business world’s profits if it was more strongly influenced by these same statistics.
    You certainly need not agree with my reliance on statistical inputs, but it is an integral part of my investment strategy. I suspect statistics, in an unending variety, guide investment decisions for most MFO investors. To each, his own investing poison. I merely express my preferences. I wish you success using whatever method you freely choose.
    I know that you make wise portfolio allocation and selection decisions because I know that you are an intelligent man. Everyone on this Board is intelligent.
    Jungster, in Arthur Schopenhauer’s “The Art of Controversy” his 38th stratagem on ways to win an argument is to become personal, insulting and rude. There is no need to default to that trick. Your harsh judgment that I am “arrogant” is not supported by my many postings.
    I admit that I attempt to make my case with as strong and as positive a presentation as warranted by supportable data. But I also incorporate data shortcomings in whatever position I advocate. I often admit that I struggle to achieve my target investment goals while simultaneously controlling downside risk. That’s a struggle we all confront in an uncertain investment environment.
    I wish you health and continuing success in your investment program.
  • Damned Lies
    Reply to @Old_Joe: >>>>I applaud the way that you managed to define yourself as "a truly intelligent person". Always nice to know where one stands. <<<<
    You picked up on that too I see. But I see he edited out his smugness of being "a truly intelligent person". The damn lie is that you need any knowledge whatsoever of statistics to be a successful trader or investor. It's an almost 100% psychological game. I have over 500 books on trading and investing from the fundamentals to the technicals including math and stats. But the only books that really counted when it came to accumulating my retirement nest egg were the ones that dealt with investor/trading psychology and money management/risk control as well as the books on personal achievement and motivational/personal success. Money management/risk control is not math or stats but that time worn phrase of cutting losses, getting rid of your underperformers, and letting profits run. Simplicty always wins out over complexity.
    Edit: And lastly, at least for me, this game is an art, not a science. Albeit I am not as arrogant as some to believe my way is the only way so for others it can be more science than art.
  • Vulcan Value Partners Small Cap Fund to close to new investors
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000091580213000066/vulcansoftclosesticker112113.htm
    FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
    Vulcan Value Partners Small Cap Fund (the “Fund”)
    SUPPLEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 21, 2013 TO THE PROSPECTUS DATED AUGUST 31, 2013
    This Supplement updates certain information contained in the Prospectus for the Fund dated August 31, 2013. You should retain this Supplement and the Prospectus for future reference. Additional copies of the Prospectus may be obtained free of charge by visiting our web site at www.vulcanvaluepartners.com or calling us at 1.877.421.5078.
    Effective as of the close of business on November 29, 2013, the Fund will close to new investors, except as described below. This change will affect new investors seeking to purchase shares of the Fund either directly or through third party intermediaries. Existing shareholders of the Fund may continue to purchase additional shares of the Fund.
    · A financial advisor whose clients have established accounts in the Fund as of November 29, 2013 may continue to open new accounts in the Fund for any of its existing or new clients.
    · Existing or new participants in a qualified retirement plan, such as a 401(k) plan, profit sharing plan, 403(b) plan or 457 plan, which has an existing position in the Fund as of November 29, 2013, may continue to open new accounts in the Fund. In addition, if such qualified retirement plans have a related retirement plan formed in the future, this plan may also open new accounts in the Fund.
    The Fund retains the right to make exceptions to any action taken to close the Fund or limit inflows into the Fund.
    INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
  • Are U.S. small caps in your portfolio?
    Hi David,
    I have mentioned the Teton Westwood Mighty Mites fund in the past (search for WEIMX). GABSX looks like an attractive SCB fund, but I would try and access the lower cost GACIX. Both WEIMX and GACIX are available in Scottrade retirement accounts for a minimum of $250.
    In our portfolio, we continue to use VXF, WEIMX and DGSCX to cover our domestic SC and MC needs.
    Kevin
  • 6% returns
    Great discussion - mostly beyond my knowledge base. I would like to add, however, that in today's interest rate environment, a 6% guaranteed annual return would be very nice. That's not to say one wouldn't do better on their own with a diversified mix of funds over the longer term - but if I could lock-in 6% for the next decade or two I'd grab it. (For comparison, the 10 year Treasury Bond currently yields well under 3%.) This assumes one is at or close to retirement and that no extra fees should be paid, effectively reducing that return.
  • 6% returns
    Please watch those two documentaries:
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/retirement-gamble/

    I am 30 years old, and I have all my savings in the stock market, but my whole 401k is in VTSMX, with a 0.17% expense ratio.
    Don't forget the sales person makes money when you pay him.
    This is what Buffet has to say: http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2013/01/24/buffett-hedge-fund-bet/
  • One-Third Of Fidelity's 401(k) Customers Are All-In On A Target Data Fund
    Sorry if I am in a minority but I think this is a good thing. Investing is not so easy and while Fido certainly does not have the best target funds the great majority of people with 401k funds are unlikely to outperform an appropriate target fund. I think the closest thing one can get to a defined benefit plan these days is mandatory target fund investments of 7+ % with a decent match by the employer.That at least should result in at least a fair retirement.
  • Edward Jones
    Reply to @Crash: You would be far from the first to get a lot of advice, both general and specific, right here on MFO. I would trust the folks here over EJ or ML any day. There are quite a few experienced investors who are usually happy to offer advice, suggestions, and knowledge regarding specific investment issues.
    If you decide to try that, they'll want to know (at least) the following:
    • Your present age, and desired retirement age
    • Your investment goals, and any special issues
    • Your comfort level with various types of funds
    • What type of investment vehicles may be available to you
    • Your present situation (usually expressed as percentages, not the actual dollar amounts