All Asset, All Authority.... All Out?

heezsafe

"Investors last year pulled a combined $15.8 billion from two mutual funds run by 61-year-old Rob Arnott -- Pimco All Asset and All Asset All Authority-- as their returns trailed most peers for the third straight year. They had Pimco’s most redemptions in 2015 except for Gross’s old fund, the Pimco Total Return Bond Fund, with $54.6 billion in withdrawals."

"Redemptions from All Asset All Authority surpass even Pimco Total Return in percentage terms when looking at their peaks. All Asset All Authority assets are down 76 percent from their 2013 high, to $8.6 billion, compared with Total Return’s 70 percent drop from its all-time high the same year."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-05/bill-gross-investors-aren-t-the-only-ones-pulling-pimco-money

Old_Skeet

If Mr. Arnott had been achieving his stated goal he would have been gaining investment dollars rather than loosing them. I left more than a year ago for, by my thinking, poor performance. Seems, after review of the chart, it was poorer than I first thought.

willmatt72

I left his fund about two years ago, thankfully.

rforno

But no worries, when it comes roaring back 40% (at some point TBD) and gets you back to breakeven, Arnott will crow about how, see? Dogmatic adherence to a strategy come hell or high water is a good idea and see -- I was right. No thanks.

I bailed in 2012 (I think) and never looked back. Sounded good on paper, but keeping a 20% equity short position on in the face of Fed intervention and a raging, if not artificially-produced bull market, was inexcusable. Sure, you could by his PAAIX instead that didn't have the short position, but still. The very nature of PAUIX coupled with his dogmatic operation of it, led to this situation. Good riddance!

Arnott's QOTD is pure comedy gold: "“Now that these strategies are a bargain, we’re seeing outflows. It’s human nature.” No, it's your sub-par multi-year performance that lost people money who now can't buy into these 'bargains' and/or are simply fed up with you.

willmatt72

rforno said:

But no worries, when it comes roaring back 40% (at some point TBD) and gets you back to breakeven, Arnott will crow about how, see? Dogmatic adherence to a strategy come hell or high water is a good idea and see -- I was right. No thanks.

I bailed in 2012 (I think) and never looked back. Sounded good on paper, but keeping a 20% equity short position on in the face of Fed intervention and a raging, if not artificially-produced bull market, was inexcusable. Sure, you could by his PAAIX instead that didn't have the short position, but still. The very nature of PAUIX coupled with his dogmatic operation of it, led to this situation. Good riddance!

Arnott's QOTD is pure comedy gold: "“Now that these strategies are a bargain, we’re seeing outflows. It’s human nature.” No, it's your sub-par multi-year performance that lost people money who now can't buy into these 'bargains' and/or are simply fed up with you.

I remember reading many posts on *M about how Arnott was the best thing since sliced bread. I bought into it. Luckily, I didn't lose a lot of money but the fund was very stagnant and didn't sit well with me over time. I'm glad to have bailed out.

vkt

These funds were sold as providing the flexibility to go anywhere where gains could be made. Which is fine if the manager had the ability and the skills to manuever as such. Turns out Rob Arnott is just Hussman in a corporate suit with a rigid philosophy waiting for the market to come to him.

In my baseball analogy earlier, a hitter that waits for a specific ball to send it out of the park as opposed to one who takes every ball as it comes and manufactures a hit. The team can lose while the former is waiting.

rforno

willmatt72 said:

I remember reading many posts on *M about how Arnott was the best thing since sliced bread. I bought into it. Luckily, I didn't lose a lot of money but the fund was very stagnant and didn't sit well with me over time. I'm glad to have bailed out.

Same thing happening now with AQR funds. They've got some great performance now, but I posited in a m* forum yesterday whether or not AQR was the next RA in terms of online infatuation with a 'unique' and proprietary strategy. I was tempted to buy some shares before it soft-closed next month, but as I couldn't get into it at TDA, I figure no big deal and probably didn't need it anyway, even as an experiment.

MikeM

Yes, I remember drinking the cool-aid after this fund was so highly praised on this board 3 or 4 years ago. Luckily I didn't stay in long. I still remember Ted saying no one needs this fund or funds like it - they're losers. Good old Ted is right more times then not. I think it is still true about most of these 'alternative/market neutral/long short' funds out there today. They aren't going to beat a good balanced fund over time.

hank

MikeM said:

Good old Ted is right more times then not.

Yes - Can't wait to hear his Super Bowl pick.

Sven

I try to stay away from funds that I don't understand the strategy, that include Rob Arnott's funds. Glad I stay with plain vanilla TRP Capital Appreciation and Vanguard Wellington.

Old_Skeet

For information purposes ... Although their long term performance numbers suffer PASAX (All Asset) is down year-to-date -1.7% while PAUAX (All Asset All Authority) is down -0.9%.

Still, I will pass on buying them back.

BobC

One might think that PAUIX has become less risky, since it has had such a dog of performance. But that is not the case at all. EM and other out-of-favor allocations have in many ways been increased, since management finds these even more 'under-valued' than previously. So the fund has actually become riskier, not something anyone should want from a fund designed to smooth out the rough places.