Good Day from still cold and snowy Michigan,
More snow (Sat.) and the weather kids won't talk much about a "significant" storm that may arrive on Tuesday. I believe they are trying to keep the mental depression rates to a minimum in the snowy north states.
But, I digress.....
Balanced funds: Hey, lots of flavors here too, eh? One has to review this sector very close, IMO; in an attempt to discover what type of balance. I prefer to name this area as, "BWB" funds, being "balanced with bias"; IF the fund is actively managed.
'Course I suspect if I presented the question about the word balanced and its meaning to the local middle school 8th graders, the majority reply would be something along the line of "equalibrium". Their vision may be an object balanced perfect horizontal, indicating an equal weight or force on each end. All things being in perfect balance could also allow an object like a bicycle wheel and tire to rest horizontal upon its center hub on a pin head and not fall over, if in perfect balance at the multiple points made up, in part; from the numerous spokes, rim and tire.
So, a D.I.Y. balanced portrfolio (U.S. centric) could be a 50/50 of VTI and BND for a real cheap (.05 and .10 E.R.) and simple.
As one moves away from the perfect 50/50 cheap and passive; and towards the active managed funds; another world of balanced funds opens. Now anyone can rationalize their meaning of a balanced portfolio; and this is the way this should be for one's current sense of risk and reward. My initial sense tells me that balanced holdings probably indicates a 60/40 through 40/60 equity and bond range. These ranges are likely too hot for some folks and too cold for others, depending upon the old risk/reward thingy. 'Course this is where the balanced with a bias may enter a portfolio.
M* category lists do not have a defined balanced section and this is understandable. Lipper has a balanced fund guage, which consists of the 30 largest balanced funds; per their notation. The internal makeup of their list is not available to the public, and my NSA contacts
are off for the weekend, so one has to guess about the criteria/names in the list.
As expected, many active funds that are "balanced" do not contain the name in the fund. Funds using the name may be found in agrressive - conservative allocation lists. Funds that are somewhat balanced have any number of names: income, strategic/tactical allocation, equity/income, growth/income, etc. Other "balanced" funds, of course; travel outside the U.S. markets for any number of combinations.
A few reference points to the even 50/50 equity/bond, U.S. centric VTI / BND :
--- Lipper Balanced Index, YTD = -1.49%
--- VTI / BND combo , YTD = -1.65%
--- M* mod. allocation , YTD = -1.73%
Moderate allocation, active managed funds; with a presumption of a 60/40 through 40/60 mix range have
a -5.9% to +2.9% for YTD returns. Obviously, a variety of balancing methods.
M*, moderate allocation funds list Our current 40/60 portfolio may soon become a 20/80.
On the other hand, perhaps 80% of the portfolio could be the VTI / BND (or equivalent) mix and the remaining 20% of the portfolio could be for "mad" money choices. But, there we go again; setting up a balanced portfolio, with a bias.
Hey, I gotta go play outside to redistribute the 7" of new snow.
Hopefully, this short note has not been tainted by any S.A.D. (seasonal affect disorder) from this writer. More commonly known as, too much snow and cold; and very little ultraviolet light.....lack of sunshine; or "this has been a crappy winter, eh?"
As always, take care; and best wishes obtaining your investment portfolio balance.
Catch
Comments
That Morningstar list does not include some MFO favorites. I suppose because of the filter(s) or names. But, hey! Mairs and Power is not there, nor PRWCX.
MAPOX
PRWCX
And if those are missing, which other well-known, popular stand-outs are not on the list, which ought to be?
Both of the funds you note are on the list.
If your're using a pc for viewing, once the M* list is loaded, do the "ctrl and F keys" simultaneous to bring up the search window and type in the tickers and find. This is fastest, quick and dirty way to search this type of page listing.
Regards,
Ted
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/balanced
You may sort the list to your choice with clicking upon the blue headers above each list.... 1yr, etc. Ex: selecting the 1 yr list more than once will toggle between the best return to date to the worst return to date.
If you select "category name", the list will sort by alpha name.
Yes, another good list for folks to review.
Also, PRWCX, mentioned above as a balanced fund (?) and which I also own has undergone similar changes in focus and resulting volatility over the past 15 years. Currently, I perceive it somewhat more conservatively positioned than either OAKBX or DODBX. But, like the weather - wait and that will change.
My intent isn't to promote or decry any of these funds. Just to show that balanced funds sometimes alter their exposure to bonds, equities, etc, based on managers' perceptions. Perhaps contributing have been have been several manager changes at PRWCX over the years and a recent change at OAKBX. However, I'd like to think the managers are reacting to changing fundamentals (and sometimes to fund flows) as best they can. Regards
MAPOX with 33.48% bonds, 2.36 non-US stocks.
PRWCX 24% bonds, 4.74% in non-US stocks.
RPBAX 32.45% bonds and 22.06% in non-US stocks.
...Yet they are all lumped together in "Moderate Allocation" with no regard for the fact that one-fifth of RPBAX equities are foreign.
As a general rule, I try not to wander too far outside of a thread subject; but this is the easiest method from me to you (all) to view this Canuck snowblower video. This unit won't fit upon our roof tops (not the std. 16 hp unit), but does fling snow.
Enjoy, as we are living in the land of much cold and snow this year to the extreme, eh?
60/40 Wellington 1929-Present 8.28%
40/60 Wellesley 1970-Present 10.10%
Keep in mind, that I did not attempt to note problems with how anyone classifies a balanced fund. I could not offer a pure category, and especially in view of an active managed fund. The thrust of the thought is to always do the homework; and then be satisfied with the choices, until any such time you may have to rethink a portfolio mix.
"World Allocation: World-allocation portfolios seek to provide both capital appreciation and income by investing in three major areas: stocks, bonds, and cash. While these portfolios do explore the whole world, most of them focus on the U.S., Canada, Japan, and the larger markets in Europe. It is rare for such portfolios to invest more than 10% of their assets in emerging markets. These portfolios typically have at least 10% of assets in bonds, less than 70% of assets in stocks, and at least 40% of assets in non-U.S. stocks or bonds." (emphasis added)
Though they don't say what the cutoff is, there is usually a percentage boundary between similar categories, and it's apparently above 20% for non-U.S. stocks to differentiate between world and moderate allocation. Best to remember that any categorization is at least somewhat arbitrary, and the trick is to use the category ratings only as the first point of analysis and dig into the details from there.
There's a pretty thorough description of categories on M* under the glossary entry "Morningstar Category."