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.
  • The Yale Endowment's Biggest ETF Investment And The Logic Behind It
    Lecture by David Swenson to Robert Shiller's Financial Markets class where Swenson explains why he feels the 60/40 model is broken for endowments and other portfolios with an unlimited time horizon.
  • The Yale Endowment's Biggest ETF Investment And The Logic Behind It
    I thought endowments generally invested conservatively?
    Me too.
    I thought the old standard was a 60/40 allocation.
    60% stocks. 40% bonds.
    Now that has been replaced with a lot of alternative investments like private equity, hedge funds, merger arbitrage, etc, but still JohnChisum's point remains.
    And the person in charge of the Yale endowment is David Swensen. He's a big believer in multiple asset classes that don't correlate well with each other.
    FWIW, he wrote a book for the non-professional investor, and recommended the following asset allocation:
    20% REIT
    15% TIPS
    15% US Treasury bonds
    30% US stocks
    20% foreign stocks (including a dedicated emerging markets allocation)
    all passively invested, meaning with index funds.
  • Former Janus Star Blaine Rollins Attempts A Mutual-Fund Comeback
    the prospectus shows a 5.75% sales fee, expenses at 2.79% (with a hefty waiver around .35%). how many times during the day does he look at the computer screen to tell him whether to sell or buy? the prospectus says this is team managed. why would anyone invest in this fund?
  • The Yale Endowment's Biggest ETF Investment And The Logic Behind It
    FYI: The ivory tower wizards running one of the U.S.'s largest university endowments have woefully lagged the stock market recently.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MTgzMjQ5ODI=
  • Collectibles Lag Equities
    FYI:
    The European academics found that between 1900 and 2012, art, stamps and violins underperformed the equity markets by a wide margin. Stocks posted real returns of 5.2% annually, while art, stamps, wine, diamonds and violins eked out between 2.4% and 2.8%, even though there were periods, such as in the inflationary 1970s, when such passion collectibles shot up in value. The good news for collectors, according to the academics, is that collectibles did beat fixed income and gold during the same period.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://blogs.barrons.com/penta/2014/07/25/collectibles-lag-equities/tab/print/
  • Jason Zweig: Should You Have To Pay A Fee To Fire An Adviser ?
    It's a bad practice that leaves a bad taste in customers mouths. Some years back I had to turn a airline ticket of $350 in for a refund. The airline, Northwest Orient, charged me a refund fee of $75.
    No matter which industry it is, when they charge you to give back your own money it is extortion as Crash stated. Some banks do it through fees to process your money. Sounds more like gangster tactics.
  • Former Janus Star Blaine Rollins Attempts A Mutual-Fund Comeback
    FYI: Blaine Rollins helped catapult Janus Capital Group to fame in the 1990s, earning a promotion in 2000 to captain of the Janus Fund, the family's $50 billion flagship.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.denverpost.com/Business/ci_26176640/Former-Janus-star-Blaine-Rollins-attempts-a-mutualfund-comeback
  • MCHFX (FXI) stuck in a three year sideways cycle
    The fund was up on Friday.
    I noticed that as well. As for Matthews Asia funds here's how they did on Friday:
    image
  • Managed-Futures Funds' Misery Continues
    FYI: Copy & Paste 7/26/14: Lawrence C. Strauss; Barron's
    Tiny gain in first half follows years of annual losses for hedge funds and mutual funds in this sector.
    Regards,
    Ted
    Many hedge funds specializing in managed futures have struggled with poor performance, to put it mildly.
    After shining during the financial meltdown of 2008 -- the HFR index tracking these funds returned an impressive 18.06%, versus a 37% loss for the Standard & Poor's 500 that year -- these funds have fallen on hard times. On average, they lost 3.54% in 2011, followed by negative performances of 2.51% and 0.87% in 2012 and 2013, respectively.
    As a result of this persistent underperformance, net outflows surged to nearly $6 billion in the first half of 2014, according to HFR. "Financial advisors are having a hard time persuading their clients to stay with it," says the manager of a large fund of funds.
    MANAGED-FUTURES FUNDS' ASSETS total about $230 billion, or roughly 8% of the $2.8 trillion invested in hedge funds, according to HFR. The good news is that there are small signs of an improving environment for these funds, which tend to be helped by more volatility and a macro environment in which there's a lot of divergence among asset prices. The unwinding of the Federal Reserve's quantitative-easing program should help. In the first half, the average return for managed-futures funds was 0.37%. That's not great, but it's better than it has been in the recent past.
    These funds rely heavily on futures contracts, usually to make calls on the direction of stocks, bonds, currencies, or commodities. Often with the help of computer algorithms, managers try to identify trends -- whether it's rising interest rates or declining gold prices. AQR Funds describes it in a recent shareholder letter as going long markets whose prices are rising and shorting those with falling prices.
    For managers who can correctly identify trends ahead of the pack, so much the better when it comes to performance. Especially good scenarios are when markets are going from good to very good or from bad to worse, as was the case in 2008. Later that year, stocks and commodities tanked, while gold and Treasuries rallied. All of which led to a stellar performance that these funds haven't come close to repeating.
    One of the trend-following strategy's selling points is that it's a good way to diversify a portfolio, thanks in part to low correlations to traditional assets like stocks and bonds. But with equities doing so well in recent years, many of these funds have been passed by. However, Pat Welton, co-founder of Welton Investment, which runs managed-futures strategies, points out that many of these managers don't take large positions in equities because "it's exactly what you've been hired to diversify away from." In addition, when markets flatten out -- as has been the case with interest rates, for example -- it's harder for managers to find trends and exploit them.
    Yao Hua Ooi, a portfolio manager of the $6.2 billion AQR Managed Futures Strategy fund (ticker: AQMNX), points to "how far you look back to determine whether a market is trending up or down" as a key factor. In the past few years, managers who use longer time horizons -- say at least a year -- have fared better than those who use a shorter window, typically one to three months, he observes. The AQR fund's managers blend shorter and longer time horizons to gauge trends, he adds.
    As if to illustrate how challenged performance has been for these funds, AQR Managed Futures Strategy has a three-year annual return of 1.2%, placing it near the top of its Morningstar category. It's a mutual fund, not a hedge fund, with an expense ratio of 1.50% -- pricey for a mutual fund but considerably cheaper than a typical hedge fund.
    Welton attributes these funds' performance difficulties to the flood of liquidity by central banks around the world, more or less in unison for many years. Low interest rates have been accompanied by lower spreads, making it hard to find good trends to follow, he adds.
    AN 18.73% RETURN in 2010 for the Welton Global Directional Portfolio was followed by three straight years of negative results, triggering outflows. In this year's first half, however, the fund was up 17.41%, having made money in equities, commodities, interest rates, and currencies. The portfolio also had success with so-called relative value strategies, an example of which would be going short one basket of stocks, while being long another.
    Several firms have studied the dismal performance of managed futures. Ooi, of AQR, contributed to a paper on that topic. With the help of financial simulations -- these funds weren't around in, say, the 1920s -- the paper concluded that "trend-following has delivered strong positive returns and realized a low correlation to traditional asset classes each decade for more than a century." Adds Ooi: "Just like any investment strategy, it has had underperformance, but that isn't predictive that the strategy will no longer generate returns going forward."
    Most of managed-futures funds, however, are in crying need of a sustained stretch of good performance -- and sooner rather than later.
    M* Snapshot Of Managed Futures Fund Returns: http://news.morningstar.com/fund-category-returns/managed-futures/$FOCA$13.aspx
  • Q&A With Craig Hodges, Manager, Hodges Small Cap Fund: Video Presentation
    This fund has not seen a bear market. A lot of funds also looked good from 1995 to 2000. Keeps outperforming...famous last words.
  • Jason Zweig: Should You Have To Pay A Fee To Fire An Adviser ?
    FYI: Copy & Paste 7/26/14: Jason Zweig: WSJ;
    Regards,
    Ted
    Even a "fiduciary" investment adviser may still be able to treat clients in ways that might surprise you.
    Someone who owes you a fiduciary duty must put your benefit ahead of his own; in practice, that should mean minimizing fees, eliminating all avoidable conflicts of interest and fully disclosing any other material conflicts. Unlike brokers—who need only ensure that their recommendations are "suitable," given your needs and circumstances—investment advisers are already required by law to meet that standard.
    Even so, many advisers impose "termination fees" on clients who leave the firm within a set period. It is appropriate for an adviser to recoup the cost of setting up and administering your account—and perhaps even to deter you from bolting the first time the market dips a little. But securities lawyers say that termination fees should be directly related to those costs. Otherwise such fees would seem to violate the spirit, if not the letter, of fiduciary duty.
    "If for any reason you don't trust your adviser anymore, or you don't like his performance, then terminating the contract is your only real way to protect your interest," says Robert Plaze, a partner at law firm Stroock & Stroock & Lavan in Washington who formerly regulated investment advisers at the Securities and Exchange Commission. "You shouldn't be penalized for doing that."
    Termination fees are fairly common. In its latest annual brochure, filed with the SEC in May, Horter Investment Management, a financial-advisory firm based in Cincinnati, says that it charges clients $200 if they exit some of the firm's strategies within 90 days. That is in addition to management fees that run up to 2.75% annually.
    The firm manages approximately $700 million, according to another form filed with the SEC. Drew Horter, head of the firm, was traveling this past week and no one else was authorized to comment, said an employee.
    The David J. Yvars Group, an investment-advisory firm in Valhalla, N.Y., says in its SEC brochure, filed in April, that "if an account terminates within one year of opening, a 1% termination fee will apply."
    A client with $1 million would thus pay $10,000 to leave Yvars Group within the first year, in addition to the firm's management fees, which run at a 2.6% annual rate for a stock-oriented account of that size.
    Yvars manages approximately $100 million, according to the brochure. David J. Yvars Sr., chief executive of the firm, didn't respond to several requests for comment.
    Regulators have taken the position in the past "that some termination fees may violate an investment adviser's fiduciary duty," says David Tittsworth, president of the Investment Advisers Association, a trade group in Washington. Such fees, he says, may be unfair if they "penalize a client just for terminating an adviser or keep a client from ending a bad advisory relationship."
    Other experts caution that the law in this area is ambiguous. The SEC, says Mr. Plaze, "should either enforce this or change the rules." A person familiar with the SEC's thinking says that the agency views each such situation based on the facts and circumstances.
    Brian Hamburger, president of MarketCounsel, a consulting firm in Englewood, N.J., that helps investment advisers comply with financial regulations, says advisers are increasingly insisting that clients give them 30 to 90 days of advance notice of a termination.
    In some cases, that might enable advisers to unwind complex or illiquid securities without hastily depressing their prices. But often, says Mr. Hamburger, it simply enables advisers to keep earning fees from clients who have already said they don't even want to work with them anymore.
    So bear in mind that the word "fiduciary" isn't a guarantee that an adviser will put you first.
    If an adviser's brochure says you could owe a termination fee, ask why he feels, as a fiduciary, that such a charge is in your best interest.
    "Clients often make the argument that a termination fee is inconsistent with how an adviser should operate," says Barry Barbash, a partner at law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher in New York and former head of investment-management regulation at the SEC. "They say it makes them uncomfortable, so they'd like to see it struck from the contract."
    Finally, bear in mind that most advisers don't charge termination fees at all, and many will even refund a portion of your fees if you decide to leave the firm. So think twice before you hire someone who will charge you to fire him.
  • 5 Top Mutual Funds To Own From Janus Funds
    FYI: Janus Funds – which just reported second-quarter earnings[1] this week — is one of the biggest mutual fund families in the U.S. with $174 billion in assets under management at the end of 2013 … and you don’t acquire that much of a following without offering some of the top mutual funds on the market.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://investorplace.com/2014/07/5-top-mutual-funds-janus-funds/print
  • Q&A With Craig Hodges, Manager, Hodges Small Cap Fund: Video Presentation
    FYI: (Follow Up) According to a new study by S.&P. Dow Jones Indicies, only two out of 2,862 mutual funds managed to attain top-quartile performance for the five years between March 2010 and current day. One of those two funds was the family-run Hodges Small Cap Fund based in Dallas, Texas.
    Regards,
    Ted
    https://screen.yahoo.com/why-mutual-fund-manager-trouncing-154012095.html
    M* Snapshot Of HDPSX: http://quotes.morningstar.com/fund/hdpsx/f?t=HDPSX
    Lipper Snapshot OF HDPSX: http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/hdpsx
    HDPSX Is Ranked # 22 In The (SCB) Category By U.S. News & World Report:
    http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/small-blend/hodges-small-cap-fund/hdpsx
  • Smallcaps: How To Get The Hard Part Right And Still Screw It Up
    FYI: Philip Murphy’s post on smallcaps S&P Dow Jones Indices’ Indexology blog this week is a notable illustration of how investors can get the hardest part right — predicting the market — and still miss the best returns.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2014/07/25/smallcaps-how-to-get-the-hard-part-right-and-still-screw-it-up/tab/print/
  • Vanguard Faces Tax Evasion
    FYI: Ex-employee alleges low-cost fund provider operated as an illegal tax shelter, avoided about $1 billion in taxes over 10 years.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20140725/FREE/140729927?template=printart
  • Is CAMAX shorting a leverage ETF (SSO)?


    The other thought I have regarding using ultrashorts is potentially using leverage to lessen outlay. Say someone wanted $50,000 in a 1x short S & P 500 fund. They instead use $25,000 in S & P 500 2x ultrashorts and then still have the other $25,000 they were going to use that can be invested in something else.

    One big issue with using leverage to lessen outlay is that the majority of the leveraged short funds are exchange traded funds. These short etfs, or leveraged short etfs, are specifically designed for one day holding periods. If you hold them longer than one day, the math does not work out......they "reset" each day.
    So let's say you make a brilliant call and decide to go 2x short the S&P 500 using a leveraged etf. Let's say that over the next 6 months, the S&P 500 drops 25%. You are expecting a 50% gain from your 2x leveraged etf, but it very well may have a performance that is far out of line from that. The math may not work out at all for holding periods longer than one day on these products.
    It may be a very different story with traditional mutual funds that short or use leverage, but the etfs are designed mathematically for one day holds.
  • Can Individual Investors Time Bubbles?
    From Guggenheim's Macro View
    In his famous speech, Martin preceded his punch bowl comment by saying, on behalf of the Fed, “…precautionary action to prevent inflationary excesses is bound to have some onerous effects…” The flipside -- a lack of precautionary action by the Fed -- will have its own set of consequences in time. It is very difficult to say when exactly these will happen, but near-term indicators suggest the hangover won’t hit while you’re relaxing at the beach this summer.
    Equity Markets: The Bigger they Come the Harder they Fall
    The S&P500 has now gone nearly 800 days since a correction of more than 10 percent – the “meaningful” level for many analysts. The more extended the market becomes, the larger the eventual decline may be. Over the last 50 years, the longer the time between market corrections, the steeper the drop once the correction does occur.(chart)
    http://guggenheimpartners.com/perspectives/macroview/the-hangover
  • Is CAMAX shorting a leverage ETF (SSO)?

    I have never shorted a position, but my understanding is that you have to "own" the shares you wish to short. So the positive 100,000 shares makes sense. The negative portfolio wt (in this case -5.38%) is the clue that the position is being shorted.
    Maybe others can explain this more clearly.
    I've also never shorted a position. My understanding is that you borrow the shares from your broker and then sell the borrowed shares. Your hope is to buy them back at a lower price in the future.
    No doubt that the negative number, -5.38% is the clue that the position is being shorted. I have no opinion regarding whether the shares should show up as 100,000 or -100,000
    I second the motion that perhaps others can shed light on this
    The bolded portion is correct. I've never shorted in terms of going through the process of shorting shares, but I've used various short products. Options seem to be becoming an increasingly popular alternative - if you short a stock, your potential loss is theoretically infinite. If you lose on an option, you're out the option premium.
    The other thought I have regarding using ultrashorts is potentially using leverage to lessen outlay. Say someone wanted $50,000 in a 1x short S & P 500 fund. They instead use $25,000 in S & P 500 2x ultrashorts and then still have the other $25,000 they were going to use that can be invested in something else.