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.
  • What To Expect From Your Bond Mutual Fund
    VWEHX has a five year return (annualized) of 9.43%, and a ten year return of 6.78%. Each of those is under the stated returns.
    I ran a search on bond funds with 5 year returns of at least 9.7% and 10 year returns of at least 7%. There are only 44 funds - 43 of them have "high yield" or "high income" in their name. M* classifies 42 of those as high yield funds; the 43rd, AGDAX (Alliance Bernstein High Income) is classified multisector.
    The44th fund is also classified multisector. It's a high octane version(!) of LSBDX -
    Loomis Sayles Strategic Income (NEFZX).
  • Vanguard: Lawyer-Turned-Whistleblower' Betrayed' Fund Giant
    There are lots of different things going on here. It's been many days since I read a brief or two on the case, so this may not be exactly right (and I don't have the time now to review), but here goes:
    - IMHO Vanguard should win quickly - not on the merits but on procedure - they seem to be arguing that the plaintiff (as former Vanguard counsel) cannot bring suit (breach of attorney client privilege). He may be relying upon a whistleblower exception to the privilege (assuming there is one - I haven't checked statute; Vanguard seems to be saying that caselaw denies there's such an exception).
    But if there is such an exception, he'd have to be saying something new. While he may have new details, the basic argument (that Vanguard charges below market rates) isn't new - Vanguard makes it clear this has been public knowledge for forty years.
    Vanguard is also arguing on the merits (that they didn't break a rule), but I don't expect it to get that far.
    - Why people should care - not because you're a Vanguard investor/owner, but because you're a taxpayer. The complaint is not that Vanguard customers are losing (rather, they're winning with Vanguard's structure), but that the US Treasury, and thus all taxpayers, are losing, because Vanguard isn't paying its fair share of taxes.
    There is a rule that says funds must pay market rate for services. Vanguard Group appears to violate this rule by charging cost - clearly below market rate, since fund management companies charge to make a profit. (In Vanguard's case, those profits would be distributed back to the funds, which own the Vanguard Group management company.)
    So why does this matter, if the higher charges would simply flow right back to the funds that paid those extra charges? Because Vanguard Group would have to pay taxes to the IRS and to states. Only the after tax profits would be returned to the funds.
    If Vanguard Group charged an extra $1M (to earn a $1M profit for all its management services), it might owe the IRS $350K. $650K would flow back to the funds, but the shareholders of those funds would have paid the full $1M extra in management fees.
    At least that's my understanding of some of the issues.
  • bloated
    Hi Crash: Generally I don't. But a lot of smart money (smarter than me) does. As others have said, it depends some on the type of fund. I look at the .53% ER on DODBX and their long term track record, the fact that it's a privately held company, their core of long-term investors, their buy and hold philosophy, etc., and I say: "I can tolerate the bloat". However, I'm sure there's a penalty being paid for the bloat and so that's just my own humble perspective..... Now - If it was a bloated fund charging outrageous fees or experiencing unusually big money flows in/out, it would be a different story.
    Looking at your list above, Crash, these funds appear much more focused (by sector or geo-political region) than my example above and yes, I'd worry about bloat. However, I'd worry even more about the hot money issue. Narrowly focused funds make prime targets for market timers and momentum players.
  • Treasury, IRS OK Annuities In 401(k) Target Date Funds
    With respect to "skimming", do a search on "annuitization puzzle". Here's the first hit I got:
    https://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.25.4.143 (Journal of Economic Perspectives)
    "In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech given in 1985, Franco Modigliani drew attention to the "annuitization puzzle": that annuity contracts, other than pensions through group insurance, are extremely rare. Rational choice theory predicts that households will find annuities attractive at the onset of retirement because they address the risk of outliving one's income, but in fact, relatively few of those facing retirement choose to annuitize a substantial portion of their wealth." (From the abstract)
    "The theoretical prediction that many people will want to annuitize a substantial portion of their wealth stands in sharp contrast to what we observe. Only a tiny share of those who reach retirement age with money in a personal retirement account or other financial assets will choose to annuitize a substantial share of that wealth. Part of the reason is that only 21 percent of defined contribution plans even offer annuities as an option (PSCA, 2009), and virtually no 401(k) plans do." (From the text.)
  • bloated
    Thanks, all. Really. OK, so you guys don't say to yourselves: "When this fund reaches $5B I'm gone. It's a very relative term, considering a fund's mandate. Over the years, I've deliberately put $$$ into young funds which ipso facto do not have a big asset base, yet. Funds like SFGIX Seafarer, MSCFX Mairs & Power Small-cap, TRAMX TRP Africa/Middle East, MAESX Matthews Frontier Asia, DLFNX DoubleLine core-plus, MAINX Matthews Asia bonds...... Of the not wonderful choices available in my wife's 403b, I selected Vanguard Small-cap Index NAESX. Still less that a thousand dollars in there. THERE is a fund that M* has even featured re: asset drift, connected to bloat. M* says it owns way too much now in Midcaps to truly be a small-cap fund....
  • Treasury, IRS OK Annuities In 401(k) Target Date Funds
    Many 401(k)s offer "brokerage windows" that allow employees to purchase individual bonds. The provider (issuer/guarantor) of these bonds can default.
    Are you just asking whether the government is responsible for all losses (such defaults on bonds) in 401(k) plans, or do you have something more specific in mind?
    While the article talks about several different types of offerings where the Treasury Dept has relaxed regulations on what a 401(k) can contain, unfortunately it offers a citation to only one of those changes. So it is difficult to figure out exactly what else is now being permitted. Or frankly, even exactly how the annuities within target date funds would work. (I found I had more questions after reading the cited IRS Notice 2014-66.)
    A keyword here is "permitted." Treasury is adding no requirements, no mandates. Are you suggesting in your question that employees' 401(k)s choices should be further restricted by the government (e.g. closing brokerage windows)?
    There's a case to be made for that. As you point out, the more freedom employees have with their retirement investments, the greater the possibility of total loss (as well as the possibility of greater gain).
  • bloated
    It varies with the strategy. The more stocks you wish to own, the greater your capacity will be. Likewise, the lower down on the capitalization scale you wish to go, the lower your capacity will be. For example, let's say a fund wants to own 40 stocks and it's will to go down to $1 billion in market cap. Assuming you don't want to own more than 5% of any stock you get:
    $1 billion x .05 = $50 million x 40 (the no. of stocks held) = $2 billion.
    So roughly measured, you get a $2 billion capacity for that sort of strategy (GAINX might be a good example). That would be my rule of thumb, anyway.
  • bloated
    Well it depends. Some strategies have a lower capacity than others. But speaking generally, a billion AUM is a nice round number and anything more than that I think we can start talking about bloat. I've seem some funds soft close from 1 to 2 B. But I don't have hard and fast rules on bloat, personally. I invest in some funds with much higher AUM. I'm not sure if I would invest in them today if I did it all over again (Is that a sign that I should sell and move money elsewhere.). I think it's very difficult to deliver top tier returns with AUM over 10 Billion, but there are exceptions. (DODFX has over $64 billion, 5 stars from M* and nearly an MFO great owl (RG of 5 for 10 year, 3 year, and 1 year, RG of 4 for 5 year).)
  • A Gold ETF For The Paranoid
    Howdy folks,
    Interesting article and approach to a miner ETF. It will be curious to see how it actually performs. The gold/XAU ratio is 16.71 (this is where the author talks about mining stocks undervalued relative to bullion). Note that historically (before the advent of the bullion ETFs, 5.0 was the equilibrium point - below which pointed to bullion and above which pointed to overweighting miners. The bullion ETF through this metric completely out of whack and while I haven't been following the trade, I don't think anyone has really quite figured out how to use it today. My best guess is that within your pm holdings, you should overweight miners relative to bullion. BTW, also for the record, the gold/silver ratio is 1/71 which points to overweighting silver to gold as the 'equilibrium' ratio here is historically 1/17 (more realistically 1/30-40).
    And so it goes,
    peace,
    rono
  • Gold Nugget May Fetch $350,000
    Hi Mo,
    Interesting. In the north west part of the Upper Peninsula, is what's called Copper Country. Mined it there until it got too deep to be cost/beneficial. It is what is known as float copper that people still find today.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=float+copper&biw=1920&bih=899&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=GptNVKPfO8iPyATlrYLgBQ&sqi=2&ved=0CEMQsAQ
    I've seen that big rascal in Calumet. Back in the 1850's it was in line to be the state capital as it was the home of the copper boom. They chose Lansing because it was centrally located.
    and so it goes,
    peace,
    rono
  • What To Expect From Your Bond Mutual Fund
    My two bond funds have annual returns of +9.7% 5yr, 7+% 10 yr
    I EXPECT the same for the future, I guess that's stability... or stable enough
  • John Waggoner: Can You Retire On A $1 Million ?
    @Crash, The current president pushed for birth control availability but I don't recall if it passed or not. For the poorest, contraception would be free.
    As for TB's statement, you must understand that it is not the amount of money one has but how they spend money that is the problem. A lot of people here that have money play the keep up with the Juans games. Gambling, drinking, and especially showing off by inviting everyone to eat and be Merry. They are called one day millionaires here. The OFW seaman comes home with a month's pay and it is gone in two days.
    Any inheritance would be gone before they knew it. It's not only the direct family you see, it's all the family everywhere, uncles aunt 5th degree cousins, and then throw in neighbors, friends and just plain people.
  • Regulators Looking into Bond Funds with Hard to Sell Assets.
    Howdy @JohnChisum
    Not to you; but thoughts about the information presented in the article.
    We, being "investors"; operate, in part, that we have the presumption of the full faith and credit of supposed to big to fail soverign governments (central banks) to have our back side when things don't go well in the financial system.
    The ultimate concern for individual investors should be restrictions that could be put in place to access one's own monies. And yes, such restrictions are only a matter of a decision that it is the right thing to do during a financial stress situation.
    As to the center point of the article. High yield or junk bonds and related poorer quality debt exist for the sole fact that those organizations and/or companies placing these financial instruments into the market place are perceived or known to be "on the edge" with the ability to honor a full payback of the monies "loaned" to them by the investors in the bonds issued.
    It does not matter who the issuing entity may be. One needs to ask whether they are more comfortable or comfortable at all; investing in bonds issued by "some" countries (make your own list) or the HY bonds being issued (for example) by well known company names in the U.S., who have such hugh existing debt burdens and "on the edge" of profitable operations; but still need more money to continue to attempt to operate their business model and keep their heads above the waterline of profit.
    A list of holdings (via prospectus) of junk debt issues helps to indicate how much one may have their monetary butts hanging over the "other" side of the quality fence. The same may apply to some of the equity holdings of various mutual funds.
    While I can't disagree with premise of the article; there remains such a tight correlation between junk debt and equities (supposed high quality companies or not); that this "financial intercourse" keeps both areas on the edge, and relying upon one another.
    If the junk credit issues where to crumble, the financial fallout in equity sectors would be widespread, eh?. We witnessed this event 6 years ago.
    Below are two common, and widely used indicators.
    A total return view from the period of Oct., 2007 (when indicators started to become "rough") through March 4, 2009:
    SPY = -51%
    HYG = -27%

    We all have to pick our own investment poison (during the bad times); with the only apparent difference being that some will make one's investments more sick than the other.
    We rely, in part; upon the bond rating agencies, with their abilities and with the data they are provided, to present what we believe to be the facts relative to bond qualities.
    Even to the fact of whether one is supposed to take more comfort in a circumstance that the ECB may purchase "junk" credit issued by Greece (not picking on this country, but an existing circumstance); because no one else wants to buy the bonds. Magic money moves from the ECB to the central bank of country "x". Is this supposed to help me feel better that something, if anything; has been fixed? Not at this house. The "electronic" credit, the money loaned, is parked as a data file for a spreadsheet. What the heck becomes of the outstanding monies that were lent?
    The above thinking is based upon course studies over many years; resulting in the "Whatsamatter U" diploma hanging on the wall, at this house. :) The degree didn't cost much; and that may be evident in this write.
    Take care of you and yours,
    Catch
  • Vanguard: Lawyer-Turned-Whistleblower' Betrayed' Fund Giant
    FYI: (Follow-Up Article)
    Vanguard Group, the Malvern mutual fund giant, has responded to a New York whistleblower lawsuit by former Vanguard tax lawyer David Danon with accusations of betrayal, theft and ethics violations the company says should bar him or his lawyers from bringing the complaint.
    Regards,
    Ted
    http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/inq-phillydeals/280112952.html
  • John Waggoner: Can You Retire On A $1 Million ?
    That is the key. A lot of people do not know how to be frugal. They grew up spoiled by their parents or parent who couldn't say no. That is the end result when they are adults. There is a lot of stuff people can cut back on. Going to the movies every week? Bad habits like pubs or clubs most nights of the week. Eating out all the time instead of cooking at home. The list is huge.
    As for the question of attaining a million being easier for older people, my opinion is that we were raised by folks who endured the Great Depression and WW2. They taught us to spend wisely and save for the future. Somehow the lesson got lost as generations went by and now young children have iPhones and parents spoil them silly. Us older people were working in our school years already. Summers might mean picking berries or whatever was local. Now there are restrictions on how much young people can work.
    My keys to attaining a lot of money? Learn the discipline of saving early on. Even if the amount is small, it is that discipline that gets ingrained into one's mind and eventually you are putting several hundreds into your retirement accounts. (depending on your salary of course) Another key is to quit loaning money to the government in the form of overpaying your taxes. How many people get huge refunds every year? A lot. For example if you got $3000 back on your taxes that works out to $115 each paycheck. (3000 divided by 26) That money could be going to your 401k etc. Reduce your withholding so that you get close to break even. As you put more money into your tax deferred accounts, your taxable income goes down more and that provides you with even more money to put away. Usually big refunds get spent on adult toys or vacations etc.
    If you get a bonus or a raise, think about what would happen if that hadn't happened. Put those raises and bonuses into your retirement accounts too.
    How was my life after all that? I ate well, drove new cars, went on vacations etc. I wasn't deprived of the good things in life, I just knew what my limits were. I never let credit cards ruin my financial plan. That is very easy to do. I had a average middle class wage at my work but I did work OT and that also was saved. By the time I was in my early thirties I had my first $100k. Getting to $200k was much faster. The curve really takes off once you hit a certain amount. My accounts continued to soar as I kept to my plan. I won't tell exactly how much here but it is substantial. I was fortunate to have a good bull market. That is something we don't know or can predict. I made my share of mistakes as well. I pulled out of my funds after Oct 1987. That crash rattled me but it was a learning experience and I didn't make that mistake a second time. I thought about buying AAPL at $18. Hindsight. Thats water under the bridge now. I had money in Twentieth Century Ultra fund when it rose 87% one year. I had money in the TRowe Price New Asia fund when they had some booming years early on. Gold was spectacular in the early 2000's. I guess those made up for the mistakes.
    The main point is to keep pumping the money away and whenever you have an opportunity to increase that, go for it. It's called paying yourself first.
    I apologize for the long post. I didn't mean to drift off here but I wanted to share my experience and maybe someone can use some of my tips to increase their assets.
    Hey, JohnChisum!
    You stole this from me, didn't you????????? ;)
  • Marketfield's Shaoul: Staying Ahead Of The Crowd
    Yeah, I left it a while ago too. It's down 10.58% YTD.
  • John Waggoner: Can You Retire On A $1 Million ?
    davidmoran: Thanks for clarifying. Also, that was in the 2015 budget proposal. The fact that the 401K limit has been raised to $18,000 next year makes me think maybe the budget (or sections pertaining to tax- sheltered accounts) has now been settled.
    Knocking out the exemption would be a real "downer" here in that protecting that $$ from RMD was the primary motivator in doing the conversion. The paperwork wasn't daunting, but was substantial. I recall paying the taxes off in four equal installments in '09 mailing in the checks along with coupons printed from the IRS website (yes- something works there:).
    Thanks
  • Gold Nugget May Fetch $350,000
    The user and all related content has been deleted.