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 Hussmann funds all posted nice gains and are all up YTD. Forward Credit Analysis Long/Short, under its new PIMCO team, also made a solid gain - up nearly 0.7% on the day.
I am not completely sure what Ron meant but I sort of agree. Knowing what funds did well on Friday is not helpful. If I was bearish or becoming more bearish I would probably adjust asset allocation to more in bonds and if I was worried about interest rate risk (I am a little) I would have more in short term bonds ,floating rate funds and similar.What I did notice as noted above was the relatively good performance of muni bond funds , which have been awful. I havea lot of funds and etfs in a supermarket account and only a TIPS fund and an intermediate term muni fund were up.
Reply to @jerry: Yes, even the long end of the bond spectrum had a good week. Vanguard's Long-Term Treasury Fund (VUSTX) was up 1.25% the last two trading days, and 1.74% for the week. Regards, Ted
Reply to @MikeM: My post is worthless, but your post "PRFHX up .3% yesterday, almost 1% for the week" is relevant! Give me a break ! The whole thread should have never been started. Regards, Ted
Reply to @Ted: From Casablanca "... the usual suspects"
However - I think you're being a bit too critical of the thread (which is very short term focused) - as all if us including you and our esteemed Mr. Cashin sometimes make a bigger deal out of short term market gyrations than we perhaps should. Regards
Reply to @Mark: of course. It tests the assumptions people have made about volatility and risk tolerance. This is why I am a big fan of stress testing tools over shortfall or VaR tools and suggested it for @tp2006. You don't have to wait for days like this! It is one thing to look at volatility numbers and quite another to see portfolio value movements for real events. People always overestimate their capacity for drawdowns. Experiencing it or simulating it might let them manage such things better if the portfolio is a good one for the long term. That risk of drawdowns may be necessary to meet financial goals.
DLFNX was UNCHANGED on Friday. MAINX was down just 2 cents. My worst performer was PRESX: down -2.9% on the day. A few of mine were down by over 2%. UNHAPPY. But I guess it was to be expected. Every blue moon. Stinky two days, to finish the week. Thurs and Fri combined, my portf. was down -2.18%.
Reply to @bnath001: Stress testing, shortfall and VaR are three of the techniques for risk assessment/management in finance. In the retail investment context, stress testing is only recently becoming popular with companies like hiddenlevers providing the technology to advisors. Some stress testing tools have also been included in the software used by advisors for portfolio management. It is simulating for very specific scenarios regardless of the probability of such an event. It helps better understand the risks of their investment.
The shortfall assessment is what is typically determined by the Monte Carlo simulations often mentioned here. They are designed to measure the probability of falling short of a financial goal such as sufficient money to last until death. But they don't say what the implications are in specific scenarios even if low probability. And the scenario models especially in public tools are not usually as sophisticated as those used in stress testing tools to conserve computational effort - breadth over depth.
Value at Risk or VaR Measures the risk of a specific loss in a portfolio. What is the probability that a portfolio will lose $X in T time? T is usually short. This is more useful in financial institutions where a sudden deep loss might create systemic risks so used for minimum capital requirements, etc. For retail investing, it may be useful if you are trading on margins or options trading where thresholds trigger events not much otherwise.
Greenspring GRSPX -1.24% +18% -12% Janus Balanced JANBX -1.14% +20% -15% Fpa Crescent FPACX -0.98% +22% -21% Whitebox WBMAX +0.24% +16% NA Marketfield MFADX -1.40% +17% -13% Yacktman Focus YAFFX -1.09% +27% -23% ASTON Long-Short N ARLSX -0.93% +18% NA Robeco L/S Rsrch Inv BPRRX -1.08% +17% NA Good Harbor GHUAX -3.28%?? +21% NA
So boring stocks win -why shouldn't FPACX be major part of long term portfolio?? Add in YAFFX, GRSPX, JANBX and throw in a few international from Grandeur Peak, Matthews and you are done.
Reply to @Ted: The comment was posted in the spirit of small talk around the water cooler. Sometimes off-hand comments spark worthwhile discussions. Having a variety of opening comments that are not links to articles is a plus. Those that don't strike a cord will quickly fade away.
Comments
PONDX up .08%
FXP 4.31%
Not that those gains did much to help the whole portfolio. At least, they kept the play money leveraged portfolio neutral.
All HY Muni bond funds are up - HYD is +0.32%
However HY bonds are down -JNK is -0.73%.
Short term and bank loan bonds are down.
EM bonds are down.
That may give an idea how to protect the portfolio in case of stock selloff.
David
Knowing what funds did well on Friday is not helpful. If I was bearish or becoming more bearish I would probably adjust asset allocation to more in bonds and if I was worried about interest rate risk (I am a little) I would have more in short term bonds ,floating rate funds and similar.What I did notice as noted above was the relatively good performance of muni bond funds , which have been awful. I havea lot of funds and etfs in a supermarket account and only a TIPS fund and an intermediate term muni fund were up.
Regards,
Ted
Regards,
Ted
Regards,
Ted
https://plus.google.com/+buffalobills/posts
However - I think you're being a bit too critical of the thread (which is very short term focused) - as all if us including you and our esteemed Mr. Cashin sometimes make a bigger deal out of short term market gyrations than we perhaps should.
Regards,
Ted
cman, where are those stress testing tools over shortfall or VaR tools available?
could you please share?
thanks
nath
The shortfall assessment is what is typically determined by the Monte Carlo simulations often mentioned here. They are designed to measure the probability of falling short of a financial goal such as sufficient money to last until death. But they don't say what the implications are in specific scenarios even if low probability. And the scenario models especially in public tools are not usually as sophisticated as those used in stress testing tools to conserve computational effort - breadth over depth.
Value at Risk or VaR Measures the risk of a specific loss in a portfolio. What is the probability that a portfolio will lose $X in T time? T is usually short. This is more useful in financial institutions where a sudden deep loss might create systemic risks so used for minimum capital requirements, etc. For retail investing, it may be useful if you are trading on margins or options trading where thresholds trigger events not much otherwise.
Greenspring GRSPX -1.24% +18% -12%
Janus Balanced JANBX -1.14% +20% -15%
Fpa Crescent FPACX -0.98% +22% -21%
Whitebox WBMAX +0.24% +16% NA
Marketfield MFADX -1.40% +17% -13%
Yacktman Focus YAFFX -1.09% +27% -23%
ASTON Long-Short N ARLSX -0.93% +18% NA
Robeco L/S Rsrch Inv BPRRX -1.08% +17% NA
Good Harbor GHUAX -3.28%?? +21% NA
So boring stocks win -why shouldn't FPACX be major part of long term portfolio??
Add in YAFFX, GRSPX, JANBX and throw in a few international from Grandeur Peak, Matthews and you are done.