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.
  • DoubleLine Long Duration Total Return Bond Fund in registration
    Me too. Is Gundlach thinking that long duration bonds are best at this time?
    Of course, these bonds have the greatest interest rate risk.
    The fund is supposed to have an average duration of at least 10 years, meaning that if the corresponding interest rates go up 1%, the NAV of the fund will go down by 10%.
    The Fed just revealed yesterday that the Fed Funds rate, currently 0% to 0.25%, is expected by the Fed to be at 3.75% at the end of 2017. If the corresponding rates of the bonds that the DoubleLine Long Duration Bond Fund will invest in also increase 3.75%, the NAV of the fund would be expected to drop close to 37.5%.
    That's huge. What's up with this new mutual fund? Why long duration, in light of what the Fed said yesterday?
    Would love to hear what Gundlach would say.
    He obviously must think rates will not go up 3.75% over the next 3 years.
    MFOers, your comments please......
  • Vanguard Index Funds vs. Vanguard ETFs
    @MOZART325, see above, the 1, 3, 5 and 10-year total return of VTSAX vs. VTI.
    You don't pay the bid-ask spread as a separate fee or cost. It is reflected in the total return performance. The separate fee is the commission, less than $10 at a discount brokerage, or no commission at Vanguard or TD Ameritrade to buy VTI.
    The total return of VTI suggests that the supposed negative effect of the exchange traded fund vs. the traditional index fund has not been realized.
  • Vanguard Index Funds vs. Vanguard ETFs

    @MOZART325, I'm not 100% certain that the index fund has the advantage there over the exchange traded fund. The index fund has to "pay" the bid-ask spread on every single purchase it makes. How is that fundamentally different than the bid-ask spread on the exchange traded fund?
    Suppose you are buying 200K of an open-end mutual fund with 500 million in total assets. You get to buy a pro-rated portion of the 500 million in assets with a zero bid-asked spread. The mutual fund may pay a bid-asked spread when it invests your 200K, but you only pay a small fraction of the cost (200k / 500 million). In other words, all shareholders share the cost of the new purchases.
    On the other hand when you invest the 200K in an etf, you pay the entire bid-asked spread which can be quite costly. Typically the cost might be 0.1% or $200 plus commission.
  • The Dumb Money is Getting Smarter Every Day.
    Hi JohnChisum,
    Thank you for the referenced Bloomberg article.
    I am not quite as sanguine about the improving character of the so-called dumb money investors as the article posits.
    Yes, there is a swing in the positive learning direction, but it is modest and very unsure of itself. A large part of the learning resistance is due to laziness, and another major part is due to innumeracy. Since I occasionally have lectured on this topic to both senior groups and to high school level students, my evidence is personal anecdotal and mostly from readings.
    One piece of evidence offered that “The Dumb Money Is Getting Smarter Every Day” is the customer movement to Index investment products. That’s true, but might simply be a result of exposure, an aggressive selling program rather than a better understanding of the whys for the decision. That just might be blind herd following action.
    I’m often amazed by the general population’s reluctance to learn investment fundamentals. Far too often they accept the wisdom(?) offered by folks with private incentives without challenging its credulity; the audiences are not nearly skeptical enough. They seek specific recommendations without demanding any meaningful explanations. That’s a formula for an impending disaster.
    If the dumb money is getting smarter, the smart money is getting even smarter and faster. Index investing has become an even higher fractional holding among the professional community than among the amateur population. The recent Calpers decision is a timely illustration of this trend.
    It’s remarkable how the entire investment world is morphing towards the simple investment rules that John Bogle has long advocated. I take conformation bias comfort in these rules since I have practiced them for many years. Here is a summary of Bogle’s 10 rules:
    1. Remember reversion to the mean.
    2. Time is your friend, impulse is your enemy
    3. Buy right and hold tight.
    4. Have realistic expectations.
    5. Forget the needle, buy the haystack.
    6. Minimize the "croupier's" take.
    7. There's no escaping risk.
    8. Beware of fighting the last war.
    9. Hedgehog beats the fox.
    10. Stay the course.
    It’s hard to beat John Bogle for investment advice or for the simplicity by which he summarizes his findings and observations. He is indeed a worldwide treasure. Here is a Link to the article that expands on his golden rules and from which I lifted his insights:
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-bogles-10-rules-of-investing/
    There is a noteworthy equivalence between these investment rules and many military maxims that have survived the acid test of war time. Contingency planning, alternate strategies, flexibility, reserve management, defense in depth, learning from mistakes by after-action reviews, risk recognition, realistic outcome expectations, and a resolve to continue the march are taught at even company-level military seminars.
    Investment learning is slow, and at times painful, but it is positive with many pitfalls to avoid.
    Best wishes for your continued success.
  • Help with Actively Managed funds suggestion for the 401K Account
    I have a 403(b) account at Fidelity with all fidelity only choices and another Employer contributed Vanguard based retirement account.
    From 2015, The fidelity account will be moved to Vanguard by the employer, I wanted to send some additional fund suggestions in addition to choices below to see if they will consider adding more choices, This Vanguard account has target funds and index funds.
    Bond Funds
    PIMCO Total Return Admin-----------PTRAX
    Balanced Funds (Stocks and Bonds)
    Vanguard Wellington Fund Inv--------VWELX
    Domestic Stock Funds
    Perkins Small Cap Value L------------JSIVX
    T. Rowe Price Instl Large Cap Growth---TRLGX
    Wells Fargo Advantage Discovery Instl--WFDSX
    Dodge & Cox International Stock-------DODFX
    I have large allocation in VWELX and DODFX and consider rest of the choices not that great. On fidelity side I had large allocation in FLPSX, FSICX, FNMIX and FSCRX, That money will need to move to above funds.
    Please suggest funds preferably with low cost and group managed(instead of single star manager) suitable for retirement account that I can send as suggestion to the Employer.
  • M* ETF Conference - Quick Reaction - Russ Koesterich Opening Keynote
    Mr. Koesterich is the chief investment strategist for BlackRock and iShares chief global strategist.
    The briefing room was packed. Perhaps Several hundred people. Many standing along wall. The reception afterward was just madness.
    His briefing was entitled "2014 Mid-Year Update - What to Know / What to Do."
    He threaded a somewhat cautiously reassuring middle ground. Things aren't great. But, they aren't terrible either. They are just different.
    Different, perhaps, because the fed experiment is untested. No one really knows how QE will turn out. But in mean time, it's keeping things together.
    Different, perhaps, because this is first time in 30-some years where investors are facing a rising interest rate environment. Not expected to be rapid. But rather certain. So bonds no longer seem as safe and certainly not as high yield as in recent decades.
    To get to the punch-line, his advice is:
    1) rethink bonds - seek adaptive strategies, look to EM, switch to terms less interest rate sensitive, like HY, avoiding 2-5 year maturities, look into muni's on taxable accounts
    2) generate income, but don't overreach - look for flexible approaches, proxies to HY, like dividend equities
    3) seek growth, but manage volatility - diversify to unconstrained strategies
    More generally, he thinks:
    We are in a cyclical upswing, but slower than normal. Does not expect US to achieve 3.5% annual GDP growth (post WWII normal) for next decade.
    Reasons: high debt, aging demographics, and wage stagnation (similar to Rob Arnott's 3D cautions).
    He cited stats that non-financial debt has actually increased 20-30%, not decreased, since financial crisis.
    US population growth last year was zero.
    Overall wages, adjusted for inflation, same as late '90s. But for men, same as mid 70s. (The latter wage impact has been masked by more credit availability, more women working, and lower savings.)
    All indicative of slower growth in US for foreseeable future, despite increases in productivity.
    Lack of volatility is due to fed, keeping interest rates low, and high liquidity. Expects volatility to increase next year as rates start to rise.
    He believes that lower interest rates so far is one of year's biggest surprises. Explains it due to pension funds shifting out of equities and into bonds and that US 10 year is pretty good relative to Japan and Europe.
    On inflation, he believes tech and aging demographics tend to keep inflation in check.
    BlackRock continues to like large cap over small cap. Latter will be more sensitive to interest rate increases.
    Anything cheap? Stocks remain cheaper than bonds, because of extensive fed purchases during QE. Nothing cheap on absolute basis, only on relative basis. "All asset classes above long term averages, except a couple niche areas."
    "Should we all move to cash?" Mr. Koesterich answers no. Just moderate our expectations going forward. Equities are perhaps 10-15% above long term averages. But not expensive compared to prices before previous drops.
    One reason is company margins remain high. For couple of same reasons: low credit interest and low wages. Plus higher productivity.
    Advises we be selective in equities. Look for value. Like large over small. More cyclical companies. He likes tech, energy, manufacturing, financials going forward.
    This past year, folks have driven up valuations of "safe" equities like utilities, staples, REITS. But those investments tend to work well in recessions...not so much in rising interest rate environment.
    EM relatively inexpensive, but fears they are cheap for reason. Lots of divided arguments here at BlackRock.
    Japan likely good trade for next couple years due to Japanese pension funds shifting to organic assets.
    He closed by stating that only New Zealand is offering a 10 year sovereign return above 4%. Which means, bond holders must take on higher risk. He suggests three places to look: HY, EM, muni's.
    Again, a moderate presentation and perhaps not much new here. While I personally remain more cautiously optimistic about US economy, compared to mounting predictions of another big pull-back, it was a welcomed perspective.
  • M* ETF Conference - Quick Reaction - An Overview of Trends Shaping the ETF Market
    Ben Johnson, Director of Manager Research at Morningstar, hosted an excellent overview this afternoon on Exchange Traded Fund trends, during a beautiful pre-autumnal day here in Chicago. It's the 5th such conference M* has held.
    The overall briefings included Strategic Beta, Active ETFs (like BOND and MINT), and Exchange Traded Fund Managed Portfolios.
    We got clearance to share some charts from the Strategic Beta portion, which I also found most interesting and perhaps some of you on the board will too.
    Points made by Mr. Johnson:
    1. Active vs Passive is a false premise. Many of today's ETFs represent a cross-section of both approaches.
    2. "More assets are flowing into passive investment vehicles that are increasingly active in their nature and implementation."
    3. Smart beta is a loaded term. "They will not look smart all the time..." and investors need to set expectations accordingly.
    4. M* assigns the term "Strategic Beta" to a growing category of indexes and exchange traded products (ETPs) that track them. "These indexes seek to enhance returns or minimize risk relative to traditional market cap weighted benchmarks." They often have tilts, like low volatility value. And are consistently rules-based, transparent, and relatively low-cost.
    image
    5. Strategic Beta subset of ETPs has been explosive in recent years with 374 listed in US as of 2Q14 or 1/4 of all ETPs, while amassing $360M, or 1/5th of ETP AUM. Perhaps more telling is that 31% of new cash flows for ETPs in 2013 went into Strategic Beta products.
    image
    6. Reasons for the growth summarized here:
    image
    These quasi active funds charge a fraction of traditional fees. And, a general disillusionment with active managers is based on recent surveys made by Northern Trust and PowerShares.
    M* is attempting to bring more neutral attention to these ETFs, which up to now has been driven by product providers. In doing so, M* hopes to help set expectation management, or ground rules if you will, to better compare these investment alternatives. With ground rules set, they seek to highlight winners and call out losers. And, at the end of the day, help investors "navigate this increasingly complex landscape."
    They've started to develop the following taxonomy that is complementary to (but not in place of) existing M* categories.
    image
    Honestly, think this is M* at its best.
  • A question (or two) for Ted...
    @Old_Joe: I wish I could say I have a majic formula for successful investing, but that would be dishonest. Generally speaking, I'm, a very aggressive investor and am always looking for investments opportunities especially when there is blood in the water, ie.; investments no one else wants. Two examples are EIX Preferred Stock who's dividend was suspended for eight quarters the share price dropped below ten dollars,(par $25) and GMAC Bonds that no one expect Marty Whitman and a few other were buying at 40 cents on the dollar.
    Investing is not a one sided game, never make an investment with the idea of not losing money, invest to make money even though there at times when that will not happen. You cannot walk away from risk, if you can't stand the heat, volatility, don't invest in the first place. If you make a mistake, cut your losses, never get emotionally attached to any investment. Always, run with you winners, Big Mo, two examples NI bought at $8.40
    a share and still holding, PFF bought at $16.00 and still holding.
    I don't believe in owning too many stocks or mutual funds. You can attain success with the motto 'few is better". Never invest in something you know nothing about.
    Regards,
    Ted
  • How many 3-alarm funds do you own?
    One ... QRAAX, which is probably a 5 alarm fund :)
    I own it and like it going forward. (Please don't ask me to explain why.) My biggest concern is that at now under $100 mil in assets, Oppenheimer might shut it down or merge it into something else before commodities enter their next bull market. It's so hard to run against the current now days.
  • A question (or two) for Ted...
    Hey there Ted-
    I got to thinking about you while in the shower this morning (no, not that way!), as I was mentally reviewing your general style with respect to market investing. To the best of my recent recollection at least, my impression is that you tend to be nearly fully invested, aggressively so if you don't mind, and pretty optimistic with respect to the market potential as a whole. And that perspective seems to be working just fine for you.
    The reason that I happened to single you out, in addition to your perspective, is that we are pretty close in age- only a couple of years apart, if I remember correctly. Also, I can't ever recall you being at all negative about staying fully invested. So that led me to wondering...
    Would you describe your approach as perhaps a "modified buy-and-hold", in the respect that while you may from time-to-time sell some stuff and replace it with other stuff, by and large you are always pretty much fully invested? How exactly do you see your market approach?
    Taking that question a little further, I would think that such an approach could be very rewarding over a long time-frame of investing, such as someone in their 30s/50s might be looking at. But at our age, with the markets "scheduled" to take a significant dive "sometime" in the future (who knows when?) is that a good position, given that we are getting up there and that the next major market down/up cycle could take 4,5, or 6 years to play out?
    I'd be very curious to know if in your lifetime of experience you have ever attempted to "get out" before something really bad happened, or have you just let the thing roll no matter what?
    I hope that you don't interpret this as being too personal- I'm always trying to learn, and you can only do that by listening to folks with ideas and experiences different that one's own.
    Regards- OJ
  • The Closing Bell: Dow Closes At A Record as Fed Reassures On Rates
    FYI: Stocks rose, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average moving into record territory, as investors were reassured by the prospect of low interest rates for a while longer.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-stock-futures-pause-ahead-of-fed-decision-1410956625#printMode
    http://markets.wsj.com/us
  • Oaktree To Start Mutual Funds To Woo Individual
    FYI: Oaktree Capital Group LLC (OAK), the world’s biggest distressed-debt firm, is starting its first in-house mutual funds as it joins the largest private-fund managers in raising money from individual investors.
    The Los Angeles-based firm filed today with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to sell shares in the Oaktree High Yield Bond Fund and the Oaktree Emerging Markets Equity Fund. The minimum initial investment in each would be $25,000, according to the filing.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2014-09-15/oaktree-to-start-first-mutual-funds-to-woo-individuals.html
  • Dow Theory Still Bullish
    FYI: One index that has done very well over the last couple of months is the Dow Jones Transportation Index. As shown below, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average has yet to make a new high, the Dow Transports index has broken out nicely. In fact, the Dow Transports index is up nearly 17% year-to-date, which is 13 percentage points more than the Dow Industrial's minimal YTD gain of 3.46%. Many investors look for the Transports to lead the way, and the fact that it has done so well is a bullish sign for the major indices like the Dow and S&P 500 in our view.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.bespokeinvest.com/thinkbig/2014/9/17/dow-theory-still-bullish.html?printerFriendly=true
  • B.Gross read
    @JohnN: Sorry John, but I linked this article at 5:00 AM this morning, but don't stop, keep on linking.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/15730/bill-gross-used-45-billion-derivatives-to-lift-gain#latest
  • The Fed's Muddied Message Causing Market Mess.
    Is it the Fed or is it a hyper financial media over speculating and creating hysteria? You decide.
    http://www.cnbc.com/id/102005319