http://www.dallasnews.com/obituary-headlines/20150122-don-hodges-80-co-founder-of-dallas-mutual-fund-firm.ece
Hodges used to have an investment minimum of $250 at FIDO, but it looks to no longer be the case. Is that something that Fido has done bc it is an NTF fund?

Right, so here's the allure...

Basically, investing with Bruce the past 15 years means you have more than quadrupled your investment since FAIRX inception. You've earned 11.7% per year!
Who has beaten that? Suspect very few.
But you are absolutely correct about performance last 5 years and one year. But he does have strong 3 year performance, so he's not a Three Alarm Fund, if that is what you mean.
I certainly hope he's not another Hussman from a performance perspective. And, their investing styles? Really, no comparison.
c

Thanks Charles. Although wondering if anyone here has been with the fund since inception, I can see where you are coming from and not trying to stir things up. But back to that topic we have discussed many times here, who is to say his early out performance wasn't simply a byproduct of luck?
Edit: Haven't many healthcare/biotech funds bested FAIRX over that 15 year period and with a much smoother ride?

Right, so here's the allure...

Basically, investing with Bruce the past 15 years means you have more than quadrupled your investment since FAIRX inception. You've earned 11.7% per year!
Who has beaten that? Suspect very few.
But you are absolutely correct about performance last 5 years and one year. But he does have strong 3 year performance, so he's not a Three Alarm Fund, if that is what you mean.
I certainly hope he's not another Hussman from a performance perspective. And, their investing styles? Really, no comparison.
c

Hi @fundalarm
I was reading through this thread again and looked again at PIMIX and its current holdings as of its last posting. This and its cousin, PONDX have a much different mix of holdings from the previous several years. The overwhelming majority of prior holdings were directed at the mortgage sector, both agency and non.
Disclosure: We hold PIMIX at this time; although it has had a rough start for this year, but rewarding for the past several years. I fully trust both managers and their skills with a multi-sector bond fund and the flexibility available to them.

Hi catch,
I am not fundalarm, but please bear with me.
As you know, PIMIX and PONDX are the "same" fund. The only difference is in the "share class" or expense ratio. PIMIX are "institutional" shares and have an expense ratio of 0.45% and PONDX are "D" shares and have an expense ratio of 0.77%. Other than that, no difference.
You are correct that PIMIX (or PONDX) has had a rough start, but rewarding in the past. You are also correct that Dan has reduced his exposure in the mortgage sector. That said, I am confident Dan Ivascyn is as bright and sharp as the past. However, where I have some reservation, is with his promotion with the departure of Bill Gross. With his increased responsibilities, will he be able to perform at the high level that we both are accustomed to? I have no idea.
This is how I am handling PIMIX. It's still positive YTD. If and until it goes negative by 1%, I am staying with it. Yes, Junkster has taught me a few things ;-)
Mona

And some folks collected glassware.
https://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search;_ylt=A0LEViQRntFUgwkA1GYnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTB0N25ndmVnBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1lIUzAwNF8x?_adv_prop=image&fr=yhs-mozilla-001&va=Depression+glass&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-001

Hi @fundalarm
I was reading through this thread again and looked again at PIMIX and its current holdings as of its last posting. This and its cousin, PONDX have a much different mix of holdings from the previous several years. The overwhelming majority of prior holdings were directed at the mortgage sector, both agency and non.
Disclosure: We hold PIMIX at this time; although it has had a rough start for this year, but rewarding for the past several years. I fully trust both managers and their skills with a multi-sector bond fund and the flexibility available to them.
And yes, high yield has been happier again these past several trading days. I can not confirm; but suspect some of the positive direction is related to more positive action in the energy sector and their junk bonds. I also feel that if crude prices remain below $60/barrel and especially around the $50 area for the next year or so, that there be both high yield defaults in this area; as well as stronger players in this area (fracking) to start to buy the companies that are on the edge, a consolidation.
Take care of you and yours,
Catch

Except for oil and gas issues, things are really looking up for junk rated companies.
http://blogs.barrons.com/incomeinvesting/2015/02/03/moodys-corporate-liquidity-rises-burned-by-energy/

Hi @fundalarm
I was reading through this thread again and looked again at PIMIX and its current holdings as of its last posting. This and its cousin, PONDX have a much different mix of holdings from the previous several years. The overwhelming majority of prior holdings were directed at the mortgage sector, both agency and non.
Disclosure: We hold PIMIX at this time; although it has had a rough start for this year, but rewarding for the past several years. I fully trust both managers and their skills with a multi-sector bond fund and the flexibility available to them.
And yes, high yield has been happier again these past several trading days. I can not confirm; but suspect some of the positive direction is related to more positive action in the energy sector and their junk bonds. I also feel that if crude prices remain below $60/barrel and especially around the $50 area for the next year or so, that there be both high yield defaults in this area; as well as stronger players in this area (fracking) to start to buy the companies that are on the edge, a consolidation.
Take care of you and yours,
Catch

Quick summary of today's call follows...
Classic Bruce Berkowitz.
Remains committed to investing in his best ideas.
Deeply undervalued stocks...far below assessed value.
Looks for large gaps between price and value.
Investing requires as much insight into psychology as it does accounting, along with patience and courage of conviction...until the crowd finally agrees.
Patience pays.
He has 100% of his savings invested in Fairholme funds and ideas. Employees continue to increase their investments in Fairholme funds.
He does not hedge. He does not short. "Not in our DNA." The closest thing to hedging is when he exits a position deemed at fair value. "Knowledge is our hedge."
Attempts to stay course under pressure, when he know he looks wrong...through inflows and outflows. Believes current shareholders know what to expect and are in it for the long term, five years or more.
He remains the sole asset allocator. He uses his staff of half a dozen analysts, along with outside experts to challenge his positions. His analysis staff continues to increase. He expects to remain leading Fairholme for life...at least the next 20 years.
His job is to find "fallen angels priced to fail," expecting Mr. Market to disagree with him at times.
He ties to focus on valuing positions. He tries to avoid predicting time-frames.
He believes risk is not volatility, which he recognizes some see as a proxy to risk.
Risk is potential for permanent loss of capital, adjusting for inflation.
Volatility is needed to prosper.
Perception and reality meet when price equals value.
Acknowledging returns can be "lumpy, but above average" over long run, besting SP500 index.
Remains committed to AIG, BAC, Fannie & Freddie, and yes, Sears Holdings...even, Eddie Lampert, who he knows is no longer regarded very highly by public.
AIG and BAC will continue to get stronger as Great Recession troubles get behind them. Both will benefit in higher interest rate environment.
He wove an amazingly detailed trail of folks once inside or now inside Treasury that likely aided FHFA take all Fannie & Freddie profits via conservatorship, though now deny Treasury involvement. He believes both agencies remain vital to nation and future growth and have made more money for government than any in history. Government can't be above legal scrutiny, and he remains confident he will win suit. The case is in discovery stage and Fairholme has been mandated to not disclose any of its material findings to public because of potential harm to government.
On Sears, he believes the real estate remains a "once-in-a-lifetime" opportunity. He denied that he is so committed to Sears that he can't turn back now. He and every real estate expert he has brought into review continue to see extraordinary value. The REIT, which he says he did not have details on, will likely help reveal true value. He also stated that he thought the retail losses were starting to stem.
He exits positions only when they no longer rise to top of best ideas at Fairholme.
He intends to post call transcript on-line.
And, if anyone has further questions, or thinks "he is full of it," he welcomes emails and opportunity to answer.

I sold PVGFX not so much because Horn had a terrible 2008 (-4% vs. World Stock bogey), but because that loss came on top of an even worse relative performance in 2007 (-15% vs. the bogey). Horn did respond personally to my complaints, to his credit. Those with a stronger stomach than I did OK by hanging on.

81.95% for investment grade. as of 12/31/2014 TGBAX
AAA 11.59 —
AA 16.96 —
A 36.82 —
BBB 15.37

@JC, is it not that their principles are more or less 'go anywhere' / opportunistic?

On first glance these funds look very similar. I went to the prospectus of each fund.
There are a few details like the allocation percentages that are different. The issue with comparing these funds is that they are like oil on water. RSIVX is currently holding a lot of corporate instruments. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/76882K751?type=o-NavBar
PONDX is spread out over the spectrum. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/72201F458?type=o-NavBar
Pimco is well known for buying derivative instruments which would increase volatility.
The category "Multisector Bond" is general. But, I am splitting hairs here. Yes it could be said that these funds are similar. The background heritage and investing style of the fund companies themselves might be the biggest difference here and one that should be noted as I did with the derivatives issue.

Hi John,
1. "On first glance these funds look very similar" - Not to me, but I can see why to some.
2. "There are a few details like the allocation percentages that are different. The issue with comparing these funds is that they are like oil on water".
3. Why is comparing these funds "like water on oil"?
A. The allocation percentages are very different and always have been.
B. "RSVIX is currently holding a lot of corporate instruments (and historically has)"
C. "PONDX is spread out over the spectrum (and always has been)"
D. "Pimco is well known for buying derivative instruments which would increase volatility (and always has been)"
So based on your description, what does RSIVX and PONDX have in common?
Morningstar incorrectly categorizes both as Mulisector Bond Funds. All one needs to do is read the prospectus of each, as you have done, to conclude "The issue with comparing these funds is that they are like oil on water"
Best Regards,
Mona

@JC, is it not that their principles are more or less 'go anywhere' / opportunistic?

On first glance these funds look very similar. I went to the prospectus of each fund.
There are a few details like the allocation percentages that are different. The issue with comparing these funds is that they are like oil on water. RSIVX is currently holding a lot of corporate instruments. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/76882K751?type=o-NavBar
PONDX is spread out over the spectrum. https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/composition/72201F458?type=o-NavBar
Pimco is well known for buying derivative instruments which would increase volatility.
The category "Multisector Bond" is general. But, I am splitting hairs here. Yes it could be said that these funds are similar. The background heritage and investing style of the fund companies themselves might be the biggest difference here and one that should be noted as I did with the derivatives issue.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/811030/000089418915000617/hodges_497e.htm
Filed Pursuant to Rule 497(e)
1933 Act File No. 033-12213
1940 Act File No. 811-05037
HODGES FUND
Retail Class – Ticker: HDPMX
Institutional Class – Ticker: HDPIX
HODGES SMALL CAP FUND
Retail Class – Ticker: HDPSX
Institutional Class – Ticker: HDSIX
HODGES SMALL INTRINSIC VALUE FUND
Retail Class – Ticker: HDSVX
HODGES SMALL-MID CAP FUND
Retail Class – Ticker: HDSMX
HODGES PURE CONTRARIAN FUND
Retail Class – Ticker: HDPCX
HODGES BLUE CHIP 25 FUND
Retail Class – Ticker: HDPBX
HODGES EQUITY INCOME FUND
Retail Class – Ticker: HDPEX
Supplement dated February 3, 2015 to the
Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information dated July 29, 2014
The Hodges Funds regret to inform its shareholders that Don Hodges has passed away at the age of 80, and therefore, no longer serves on the team of portfolio managers for its series: Hodges Fund; Hodges Small Cap Fund; Small-Mid Cap Fund; Pure Contrarian; Blue Chip; and Equity Income Fund.
Eric Marshall will join Craig Hodges as co-portfolio manager to the Hodges Fund.
Please retain this Supplement with the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information.

In other news, one of Cramer's picks Chipotle is off 5% after hours as they missed on their earnings.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102389870

Hi, Mo.
No problem. As I say in the recap of our conversation with Bernie Horn, a lot comes down to how you weigh 2008 and how you assess their response to it. It's a strategy that's worked exceptionally well in 15 of 17 years and really poorly in two. How important those two are (is worrying about 2008 the equivalent of fighting the last war? are we building Maginot-like portfolios) and how intelligently you think they've handled it strike me as major drivers of whether the Polaris products make it in.
In general, I'm agnostic on the first question and pretty pleased with the answers to the second but that's not necessarily definitive.
As ever,
David

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
WSJ Slant:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-stock-futures-edge-higher-1422969398
Bloomberg Slant:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-03/u-s-index-futures-advance-office-depot-soars-on-staples-talks
Reuters Slant:
http://www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USKBN0L718Z20150203
MarketWatch Slant:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-stocks-futures-pull-back-as-caution-sets-in-ahead-of-factory-orders-2015-02-03/print
WSJ Markets At A Glance: http://markets.wsj.com/us
Sector Tracker: http://www.sectorspdr.com/sectorspdr/tools/sector-tracker
Current Futures: http://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Hi Hank,
Many thanks for your fine posting that highlights very special parts of this month’s MFO Commentary section. This month’s edition does have its complex components that will require a reread for a fuller understanding. But it’s worth the effort. In my case I just might need several rereads.
I agree that Ed’s observations about gold and currency exchange are particularly provocative. I’ve always been mostly perplexed by money exchange markets. Forex has been a Black Box to me.
In the investment community, money is a necessary element that satisfies several purposes. Knowing its history will definitely serve an investor well. I posted a Link to an excellent video series that presents its history a year or so ago, but I believe it bears repeating now given the February Commentary. Here is a Link to Niall Ferguson’s recent 4-part video, The Ascent of Money, on the topic:

Although it is a 4-hour time commitment, the Ferguson film is worthy of MFOer attention. Please give it a look-see.
Best Wishes.

Ukraine only about 6% of holdings. Over 95% of portfolio are investment grade. Might hurt a bit but far from a catastrophe. Hasenstab will come through just fine.

I just looked at the portfolio on Morningstar and it looks like only a little more than 81% is in investment grade bonds. I looked at TPINX, Templeton Global Bond A. The Global Total Return Fund is only a little more than 65% investment grade. Please correct me if I've got this wrong. I view investment grade as BBB and above.

I use TGBAX

ron, my comment was with respect to yours which said "Over 95% of portfolio are investment grade"
That doesn't coincide with the info I looked up in M*. Don't know where you are getting the info that over 95% of the portfolio is investment grade. Looks to me like about 81% and 65% for the two funds, per above. Perhaps you were referring to something
different

I simply added all that was BBB and above.

This thread was worrisome enough from a contrarian point of view and now today's action. Up to 19% in corp junk and looking to go 25% by the close depending on the rest of the day.

FYI: After a decade fraught with manager turnover and miscues, it appears that, in at least one respect, Vanguard Capital Value Fund (MUTF:VCVLX[1]) is on a steady course.
Regards,
Ted
http://investorplace.com/2015/02/buy-worst-sell-best/print