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.
  • AAII Sentiment Survey, 4/5/23
    @yogibearbull -
    I don’t dispute your historical data on gold or gold miners. (Silver actually peaked sometime in the 70s at double where it is today.) However, in the context of the broader markets, gold’s surge in 2020 wasn’t as remarkable / noteworthy as today, The prior year, 2019, the S&P 500 had risen 29%. And in 2020 it gained another 16%. As your investor sentiment on the stock market shows predominately bearish sentiment today, it might be enlightening to look at sentiment numbers during 2020. Suspect they were higher.
    So I believe gold’s advance back then was somewhat overshadowed by the big gains in equities and bullish sentiment among investors. That is far from the case today following a series of rapid Fed rate hikes coupled with a poor prior year (2022) for both stocks and bonds.
  • AAII Sentiment Survey, 4/5/23
    Both gold-miners (majors GDX, majors/minors GDXJ) and gold bullion (GLD, lower ER IAU) peaked in July 2020; another attempt was in early-2022.
    Now, gold is approaching those highs, but gold-miners are still far from those highs. Chart shows GDX and GLD (bottom panel) for 1-yr (default) - can change timeframes.
    https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=GDX&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p53247840045
  • AAII Sentiment Survey, 4/5/23
    Yes, a good time to add a bit more IAU? I think so.

    @MikeM - I can’t comment on that. I know you’ve held some precious metals and nearly asked you in another thread if you’d made any money on them. :)
    They can be fun and exciting, but can also plunge rapidly and unexpectedly. If you add in my
    indirect exposure through PRPFX - plus some more concentrated holdings - I’d say I’m in the 5-6% 7-9% (of portfolio) range on precious metals / miners, plus have another 1-2% invested in a predominately industrial metals miner. You’ll find strong gold bulls and strong gold bears among the pundits. So, I don’t have any strong opinion.
    My guess is that like every other market that has already advanced retail investors will start throwing money at the precious metals. Then, after a bubble forms those markets will fall precipitously. Last in will get hurt the most. Albeit, we’re still in the early stages.
  • Buy Sell Why: ad infinitum.
    Seeking alpha has a pretty good analysis of the impact on SCHW earnings of people moving to higher yielding MMF etc. Not good
    https://seekingalpha.com/article/4592585-charles-schwab-not-in-charge
  • AAII Sentiment Survey, 4/5/23
    As they say it’s “a market of stocks” rather than a “stock market”. Always opportunity somewhere if you can find it. There’s an important jobs report out tomorrow which is Good Friday. The stock market will be closed so traders will need to wait until Monday to react. May account for some of the turbulence today. Gold finally broke through the $2,000 barrier on the upside but has backtracked today. Silver, of course, has been hotter - but has a reputation for higher volatility.
    The major market indexes (ie “the market”) have really confounded a lot of prognosticators I follow. Few foresaw the nice advance in the major indexes since the first of the year. I pulled in my risk exposure slightly last week (as mentioned in the BS thread). But would add to equities after any significant sell off. Bonds don’t excite me with the 10-year under 3.5%. However, if we get into a really serious recession rates will likely decline even further.
    Added: From a recent issue of the F/T: “Retail trading reached record levels earlier this year, accounting for almost a quarter of all market activity on some days in late January according to JPMorgan analysts.”
  • AAII Sentiment Survey, 4/5/23
    For the week ending on 4/5/23, bearish remained the top sentiment (35.0%; above average) & neutral became the bottom sentiment (31.6%; average); bullish became the middle sentiment (33.3%; below average); Bull-Bear Spread was -1.7% (below average). Investor concerns: Inflation (moderating but high); economy; the Fed; dollar; cryptos; market volatility (VIX, VXN, MOVE); Russia-Ukraine war (58+ weeks, 2/24/22- ); geopolitical. For the Survey week (Th-Wed), stocks were up, bonds up, oil up strongly (OPEC cut production), gold up, dollar down. A huge improvement in the Sentiment this week, possibly a trend change? #AAII #Sentiment #Markets
    https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/thread/141/aaii-sentiment-survey-weekly?page=9&scrollTo=1002
  • Pioneer Global High Yield Fund to be reorganized
    https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1140157/000027677623000068/ghy040523reorgsupp.htm
    497 1 ghy040523reorgsupp.htm SUPPLEMENT FOR GHY REORG
    April 5, 2023
    Pioneer Global High Fund
    Supplement to the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus
    and Statement of Additional Information
    each dated March 1, 2023
    The Board of Trustees of Pioneer Global High Yield Fund has approved the reorganization of the fund with and into Pioneer High Yield Fund (the “Reorganization”). Each fund is managed by Amundi Asset Management US, Inc. (“Amundi US”). The Reorganization, which does not require shareholder approval, is subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions, and is expected to be completed in the third quarter of 2023...
  • TCAF, an ETF Cousin of Closed Price PRWCX
    ...I can’t wait either.
    Great. On July 5th we will both be placing orders!
  • Buy Sell Why: ad infinitum.
    Got stopped out of SCHW at 50. It is down to $48 now. Don't think I will jump back in until it is much lower
  • Vanguard servers down April 5?
    I've been receiving "unable to connect to server" messages when attempting to log onto my (sole remaining) account at Vanguard since yesterday. Just me or a general issue? Of course they no longer provide actual, real-time contact info on the website.
  • Buy Sell Why: ad infinitum.
    I bought GS, JPM and MTB last week. I see longer term opportunities in financials.
    I'm feeling the same way, though it's difficult to stay convinced, right about now.
    In my financials fund PRISX, I'm down since inception of the account by -17%.
    I'm faring better with my single-stock bet, BHB. Down since inception by -7.5%.
    I thought a regional bank serving those quiet places in northern New England might be immune. But, no. Knock-on effect, surely. The stock is down by -21% at the moment, YTD. I smell bargain.
  • Question about TSLS OARK
    I don't get fascination in yield for its own sake. Why would one pay (in the form of negative total return) just to get some of one's own money back as divs?
    Lifetime total return of TSLY (using Yahoo's adjusted NAV figures) -1.6%
    Nov 23 - Apr 3, 16.45/16.72 - 1 = -0.0161 = -1.6%
    https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TSLY/history?p=TSLY
    Lifetime total return of OARK (using Yahoo's adjusted NAV figures) -5.1%
    Nov 25 - Apr 3, 14.46 / 17.35 - 1 = -0.0513 = -5.1%
    https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/OARK/history?p=OARK
    A very quick glance at OARK suggests it is using a strategy similar to principal protected (structured) notes, but with additional risks.
    It clearly isn't achieving its stated goal of providing long exposure to ARKK via derivatives while generating income with covered calls. ARKK is up about 11% Nov 25 - Apr 3 (36.00 to 39.58, price movement). OARK not only failed to capture any part of this gain, it lost money even after generating income with "covered" calls and Treasuries.
    Even YTD, OARK is up 4.57% (total return). ARKK (price) is up over 25%. (OARK's gains are capped; how much of the shortfall is explained by this cap, and how much by its strategy and/or poor execution?)
    Gut feeling is that its failure to meet objectives is due in part to daily pricing as opposed to point-to-point pricing generally used by structured notes coupled with a volatile underlying security. But that's really just a superficial reaction.
    Note: the subject line has a typo: TSLY, not TSLS
  • TCAF, an ETF Cousin of Closed Price PRWCX
    Giroux just moved GE from his Top 5, even Top 10, but GE +GEHC (spinoff) combo still had the weight of 1.84% of AUM on 12/31/22. So, that was down from 2.00-2.25% of AUM earlier (Edit: GE topped at 4.7% of AUM in early-2022) . I think that he will stick with GE until the last spinoff happens next year (Power Vernova). Since October low, GE has done quite well when mid-December spinoff GEHC is taken into account. When GE was his #4 or #5, it was just too much distraction for him in the media as he was asked about it in almost every media interview.
    Yes. And frankly I think him (or anyone) holding GEHC and their Aviation group spinoff (whenever it happens) will do well in the long term. I'm interested in them myself.
  • Question about TSLS OARK
    Hello good morning
    What do you folks think about
    TSLY OARK monthly dividend very high
    50% annuallly
    Very volatile
    Good hold long terms?
  • TCAF, an ETF Cousin of Closed Price PRWCX
    Giroux just moved GE from his Top 5, even Top 10, but GE +GEHC (spinoff) combo still had the weight of 1.84% of AUM on 12/31/22. So, that was down from 2.00-2.25% of AUM earlier (Edit: GE topped at 4.7% of AUM in early-2022) . I think that he will stick with GE until the last spinoff happens next year (Power Vernova). Since October low, GE has done quite well when mid-December spinoff GEHC is taken into account. When GE was his #4 or #5, it was just too much distraction for him in the media as he was asked about it in almost every media interview.
  • Heading for Recession? Two WSJ Reports
    I thought so too that they were different, until I reread the WSJ article (April 2, 2023) that I cited and that was referenced in the Daily Mail piece (via MSN).
    Check the dates. The Kyodo News piece is dated Nov 23, 2022. It says that the price cap would go into effect on Dec 5, 2022, and that the Sakhalin-2 exemption would last until Sept 30th. That must be Sept 30th of 2023, since it didn't start until Dec 2022.
    The referenced WSJ piece is reporting Japanese oil imports from Russia in January and February of this year, under that Dec 5, 2022 - Sept 30, 2023 exemption.
    In the first two months of this year, Japan bought about 748,000 barrels of Russian oil for a total of ¥6.9 billion, according to official trade statistics. At the current exchange rate, that translates to $52 million, or just under $70 a barrel. Russia exports millions of barrels of oil a day, making Japan’s purchases a minuscule share of total Russian output.
    This was a Saturday piece in the WSJ, not picked up by most major news sources. No independent source. These facts indicate that the WSJ story is background material, not breaking news.
  • Heading for Recession? Two WSJ Reports
    The price cap is no longer a real cap if the 2nd richest economy needs an exception.
    Here’s a look at every country’s share of the world’s $101.6 trillion economy:
    Rank Country GDP (Billions, USD)
    #1 United States $25,035.2
    #2 China $18,321.2
    #3 Japan $4,300.6
    #4 Germany $4,031.1
    #5 India $3,468.6
    https://www.visualcapitalist.com/countries-by-share-of-global-economy/
    The 2nd and 5th richest economies never participated in Russian sanctions.
    China and India, both of which have declined to condemn Russia or impose sanctions over the war, became the biggest buyers of Russian crude oil last year as Western countries restricted imports and imposed sanctions.
    China’s imports of Russian crude oil spiked 8 percent in 2022, the equivalent of 1.72 million barrels per day (bpd), according to Chinese customs data, making Russia the East Asian giant’s second-biggest supplier.
    Al Jazeera, How China and India’s appetite for oil and gas kept Russia afloat, February 24, 2023.
    https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/2/24/how-china-and-indias-appetite-for-oil-and-gas-kept-russia-afloat
  • Heading for Recession? Two WSJ Reports
    Also helping Europe is an accelerated shift to renewables as well as an offsetting return to coal.
    European Union leaders said the war has had a silver lining in terms of moving the bloc forward on targets for renewable energy. Countries that were previously reluctant to get on board with expanding renewables are finally doing so, and those on the wagon are investing more. As a result, as part of its REPowerEU package, the EU agreed to increase its targets for renewable energy to 45 percent by 2030 this week, up from a prior target of 40 percent. (The EU gets just over 20 percent of its total energy from renewables right now.) A new report from the International Energy Agency suggests the world could add as much renewable energy in the next five years as it did in the last 20 years.
    ...
    But you can’t make silver without getting some dross. In an effort to replace Russian oil and gas in the short term, countries like Germany are reactivating some old coal-fired power plants to fill the energy gap. Countries including France, Austria, the Netherlands, and Italy are putting mothballed coal plants back into service. And EU countries are negotiating long-term contracts for gas with countries like Qatar, which policymakers said could ultimately lock these countries into buying more gas than they hope to need by the time 2030 rolls around.
    https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/12/21/europe-russia-energy-climate-change-policy-renewable/
    See also World Economic Forum, Can Europe’s rush for renewables solve its energy crisis?, Feb 10, 2023.
    https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/02/eu-renewables-energy-crisis/
    Second, G7 recently issued an exception on G7-ban to Japan because it needs oil badly - so 6 more exceptions to go?
    Does Japan really need oil badly?
    [Japanese] Government data released on Thursday [Jan 19, 2023] showed that oil imports from Russia fell around 56% last year, while coal imports were reduced by 41%.
    But imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) were up more than 4% in 2022.
    Sakhalin-1 produces oil, while Sakhalin-2 produces both crude and LNG, and experts say access to Russian gas is what Japan is most concerned about protecting.
    Last year, 9.5% of Japan’s total LNG imports came from Russia, up from 8.8% in 2021 — most of it from Sakhalin-2.
    So when Japan joined a price cap on Russian oil last year with its G7 allies, the European Union and Australia, it obtained an exemption for Sakhalin-2.
    https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/sakhalin-exception-the-russian-energy-japan-cant-quit/
    Japan has almost no fossil fuel of its own and relies on imported natural gas and coal for much of its electricity.
    ...
    “It’s not as if Japan can’t manage without this. They can. They simply don’t want to,” said James Brown, a professor at Temple University’s Japan campus. Prof. Brown, who studies Russia-Japan relations, said Japan should move to withdraw from the Sakhalin projects eventually “if they’re really serious about supporting Ukraine.”
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/japan-breaks-with-u-s-allies-buys-russian-oil-at-prices-above-cap-1395accb
  • I bonds and tax refund
    TD has told me (on the phone) that one can buy I-bonds electronically with refunds. I have no doubt one is able to purchase bonds electronically this way. But I remain skeptical about this procedure enabling one to purchase additional $5K in savings bonds above and beyond one's $10K/year limit.
    What you quoted sounds like the standard way of buying electronic savings bonds. One deposits money into a TD account. Then one uses the money in that account to purchase electronic savings bonds.
    Here's a two page piece from TD on "Buying Savings Bonds ..."
    https://www.treasurydirect.gov/forms/mar0023.pdf
    On the first page is a description of how you fund your TD account to buy savings bonds:
    "How do I buy savings bonds? ... Have your bank or employer send funds directly to your TreasuryDirect account, or send IRS Form 8888 with your federal tax return and direct your refund to your TreasuryDirect account."
    There's no verbiage in this section about actually buying savings bonds with this money. This is the way you buy any electronic savings bonds, Series I or Series EE. Nor is any distinction drawn between money in your account that came from your bank, your payroll department, or the IRS.
    On the second page is a box that reads:

    Series I Bonds                             Series EE Bonds
    Sold electronically at face              [sold $25 to $10,000]
    value in any amount from
    $25 to 10,000. Sold in
    paper at face value, in
    multiples of $50, up to
    $5,000. Use IRS Form 8888.
    ...

    Each year, buy as much as $10,000 of electronic Series I,
    $10,000 of electronic Series EE, and $5,000 of paper Series I.

  • Heading for Recession? Two WSJ Reports
    This morning's Wall Street Journal contained two reports- unrelated, but each sharing suggestions of a coming recession.
    Following are heavily edited excerpts from those two reports... emphasis in text was added –
    Saudi-Led Oil Producers to Lower Output Further
    A group of large oil producers led by Saudi Arabia said Sunday they would cut more than a million barrels of output a day starting next month, a surprise move that upset Washington and led to a jump in crude prices amid concerns about the global economy. The output cuts amount to about 3% of the world’s petroleum production taken off the market in seven months.
    The production cut will hit an oil market that was widely seen as tightly balanced between supply and demand, meaning it could lead to a longer-term rise in prices. If higher prices last, they could stoke inflation and complicate decisions for central bankers, who are caught between trying to tame rising prices and propping up a teetering banking system.
    According to people familiar with the decision, it was negotiated primarily between the Saudis and Russian to get ahead of a global slowdown and raise prices to fund Saudi Arabia’s ambitious domestic projects and replenish Russia’s reserves.
    Oil prices had been trending downward since late last year on global recession fears [and] some in OPEC see oil demand taking a hit in a recession. The price moved beyond $85 a barrel after the announcement, before falling slightly.
    “Given the preventive nature of OPEC decisions, there is clearly something OPEC knows about demand trends and inventories that we have yet to discover fully in overall supply and demand balances,” said [the] global head of energy strategy at JPMorgan Chase & Co.
    An oil analyst at Denmark’s Saxo Bank said the decision to cut production again reflected concerns over the U.S. economy, where interest rates are widely expected to increase.

    World Bank Warns of Lost Decade for Global Economy
    The World Bank is warning of a “lost decade” ahead for global growth, as the war in Ukraine, the Covid-19 pandemic and high inflation compound existing structural challenges.
    The Washington, D.C.-based international lender says that “it will take a herculean collective policy effort to restore growth in the next decade to the average of the previous one.” Three main factors are behind the reversal in economic progress: an aging workforce, weakening investment and slowing productivity.
    “Across the world, a structural growth slowdown is under way: At current trends, the global potential growth rate—the maximum rate at which an economy can grow without igniting inflation—is expected to fall to a three-decade low over the remainder of the 2020s,” the World Bank said.
    Potential growth was 3.5% in the decade from 2000 to 2010. It dropped to 2.6% a year on average from 2011 to 2021, and will shrink further to 2.2% a year from 2022 to 2030, the bank said. About half of the slowdown is attributable to demographic factors.
    Weakness in growth could be even more pronounced if financial crises erupt in major economies and trigger a global recession, the World Bank report cautions.
    Earlier this year, the World Bank sharply lowered its short-term growth forecast for the global economy, citing persistently high inflation that has elevated the risk for a worldwide recession. It expects global growth to slow to 1.7% in 2023.
    The World Bank identifies a number of challenges conspiring to push down global growth: weak investment, slow productivity growth, restrictive trade measures such as tariffs and the continuing negative effects—such as learning losses from school closures—because of the pandemic.
    Some view the World Bank’s projection for a lost decade as too pessimistic. Other organizations, such as the International Monetary Fund and the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington-based think tank, expect global GDP growth to expand a more robust 2.9% in 2023.
    Harvard University economist Karen Dynan said that aging populations in nearly every part of the world will be a drag on global growth, but she was more optimistic on raising productivity—output per worker.