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.
Nearly identical in most metrics (duration, credit quality, credit breakdown, number of bonds/bonds in top 10%, country breakdown). TIORX is long and short in cash, but with same net cash as BCOIX (no shorts).
Differences that pop out include: - TIORX has more securitized bonds and less corporate (as discussed in article) - TIORX has high turnover (308%, mentioned in article) vs. 34% - TIORX costs twice as much (0.62% vs. 0.30%) - TIORX has lower SEC yield (2.31% vs. 2.61%)
With the notable exception of 2008, BCOIX generally outperforms. In 2008 it underperformed by 4.64%, but made that up and more with its 2009 9.08% outperformance. In all other recent years, performance figures were much closer.
It is fair to look back this far, as BCOIX's management started in 2000. Though the article implies that Higgins (starting in 2011) is the only manager of TIORX, the prospectus says: "The following persons manage the Fund on a day-to-day basis: ...Higgins ... since 2011 [and] ... Cerra ... since 2003." Both are listed as "Managing Directors". Neither the prospectus nor M* says anything about 13 managers.
Below is intermediate term bond funds listing link. TIORX is down on the list a bit for YTD return of 6.12%. For reference for a few in this area that I monitor and YTD: LQD = 9.5% FBND = 7.5% FTBFX = 7.2% FBNDX = 7.1% NOTE: the corp. bond area has been one of the stronger bond sectors, YTD; for investment grade bonds.
Nearly identical in most metrics (duration, credit quality, credit breakdown, number of bonds/bonds in top 10%, country breakdown). TIORX is long and short in cash, but with same net cash as BCOIX (no shorts).
Differences that pop out include: - TIORX has more securitized bonds and less corporate (as discussed in article) - TIORX has high turnover (308%, mentioned in article) vs. 34% - TIORX costs twice as much (0.62% vs. 0.30%) - TIORX has lower SEC yield (2.31% vs. 2.61%)
With the notable exception of 2008, BCOIX generally outperforms. In 2008 it underperformed by 4.64%, but made that up and more with its 2009 9.08% outperformance. In all other recent years, performance figures were much closer.
It is fair to look back this far, as BCOIX's management started in 2000. Though the article implies that Higgins (starting in 2011) is the only manager of TIORX, the prospectus says: "The following persons manage the Fund on a day-to-day basis: ...Higgins ... since 2011 [and] ... Cerra ... since 2003." Both are listed as "Managing Directors". Neither the prospectus nor M* says anything about 13 managers.
msf,
BCOIX over DBLFX (less Corportate Bond and more US Treasury)?
Interesting choice. It looks like you've highlighted the key difference between the two funds. Though I might add that as a consequence, DBLFX's broad allocations (government, corporate, securitized) hew much more closely to that of the typical fund.
It may come down to what you think of Treasuries. Bogle is not a lover of Treasuries, having stated that the index is too heavily weighted that way. On the other hand, Buffett has suggested that his heir divide investments between an S&P 500 index fund and short term Treasuries.
Personally, I prefer underweighting. Long term treasuries are IMHO only good for speculating on interest rates (1/6 of DBLTX's mature in over 25 years). Short term, and currently intermediate, Treasuries yield so little that they're effectively cash. (They yield as little or less than an individual investor could get insured in a bank account.)
Also, when I buy an actively managed fund, I look for a fund where the managers take positions that deviate significantly from the herd. Maybe Gundlach has with this fund; all I'm looking at is the current snapshot in time. He certainly does go his own way with some of his funds.
Disclaimer: I think that he is very sharp, though not as sharp as he thinks himself. So I expect this fund to be well managed and worth owning. Beyond that I can't say.
A little Oranges and Tangerines ,but... Performance Trust Strategic Bond Fund PTIAX 1 $5,000/$500 N/L No Transaction Fee @ Fidelity Multisector Bond Inception Date 08/31/2010 Multiple Managers 6 years Assets $590.06 Ex Ratio 0.89% 1. No Transaction Fee funds are available without paying a transaction fee. No Transaction Fee funds will also be offered without a load or on a load waived basis. However, the fund may charge a short term trading fee or a redemption fee
Interesting choice. It looks like you've highlighted the key difference between the two funds. Though I might add that as a consequence, DBLFX's broad allocations (government, corporate, securitized) hew much more closely to that of the typical fund.
It may come down to what you think of Treasuries. Bogle is not a lover of Treasuries, having stated that the index is too heavily weighted that way. On the other hand, Buffett has suggested that his heir divide investments between an S&P 500 index fund and short term Treasuries.
Personally, I prefer underweighting. Long term treasuries are IMHO only good for speculating on interest rates (1/6 of DBLTX's mature in over 25 years). Short term, and currently intermediate, Treasuries yield so little that they're effectively cash. (They yield as little or less than an individual investor could get insured in a bank account.)
Also, when I buy an actively managed fund, I look for a fund where the managers take positions that deviate significantly from the herd. Maybe Gundlach has with this fund; all I'm looking at is the current snapshot in time. He certainly does go his own way with some of his funds.
Disclaimer: I think that he is very sharp, though not as sharp as he thinks himself. So I expect this fund to be well managed and worth owning. Beyond that I can't say.
msf,
Thanks for your thoughts.
I am thinking of pairing DBLTX with BCOIX. One heavily mortgage oriented, the other corporate. One with higher rated bonds, the other with lower. Both unfortunately sport yields on the lower side, but BCOIX TR has been quite good in 2016. Can't say the same for DBLTX and hopefully the cause has been the type of mortgages, which can be adjusted, and not the large AUM (which may speak to more difficulty in adjusting).
TSP_Transfer, I own PTIAX and am pleased with the yield, TR, and stable NAV. While heavily mortgage based like DBLTX, obviously a different animal.
Comments
Nearly identical in most metrics (duration, credit quality, credit breakdown, number of bonds/bonds in top 10%, country breakdown). TIORX is long and short in cash, but with same net cash as BCOIX (no shorts).
Differences that pop out include:
- TIORX has more securitized bonds and less corporate (as discussed in article)
- TIORX has high turnover (308%, mentioned in article) vs. 34%
- TIORX costs twice as much (0.62% vs. 0.30%)
- TIORX has lower SEC yield (2.31% vs. 2.61%)
With the notable exception of 2008, BCOIX generally outperforms. In 2008 it underperformed by 4.64%, but made that up and more with its 2009 9.08% outperformance. In all other recent years, performance figures were much closer.
It is fair to look back this far, as BCOIX's management started in 2000. Though the article implies that Higgins (starting in 2011) is the only manager of TIORX, the prospectus says: "The following persons manage the Fund on a day-to-day basis: ...Higgins ... since 2011 [and] ... Cerra ... since 2003." Both are listed as "Managing Directors". Neither the prospectus nor M* says anything about 13 managers.
Below is intermediate term bond funds listing link. TIORX is down on the list a bit for YTD return of 6.12%.
For reference for a few in this area that I monitor and YTD:
LQD = 9.5%
FBND = 7.5%
FTBFX = 7.2%
FBNDX = 7.1%
NOTE: the corp. bond area has been one of the stronger bond sectors, YTD; for investment grade bonds.
http://news.morningstar.com/fund-category-returns/intermediate-term-bond/$FOCA$CI.aspx
msf,
BCOIX over DBLFX (less Corportate Bond and more US Treasury)?
Mona
It may come down to what you think of Treasuries. Bogle is not a lover of Treasuries, having stated that the index is too heavily weighted that way. On the other hand, Buffett has suggested that his heir divide investments between an S&P 500 index fund and short term Treasuries.
Personally, I prefer underweighting. Long term treasuries are IMHO only good for speculating on interest rates (1/6 of DBLTX's mature in over 25 years). Short term, and currently intermediate, Treasuries yield so little that they're effectively cash. (They yield as little or less than an individual investor could get insured in a bank account.)
Also, when I buy an actively managed fund, I look for a fund where the managers take positions that deviate significantly from the herd. Maybe Gundlach has with this fund; all I'm looking at is the current snapshot in time. He certainly does go his own way with some of his funds.
Disclaimer: I think that he is very sharp, though not as sharp as he thinks himself. So I expect this fund to be well managed and worth owning. Beyond that I can't say.
Performance Trust Strategic Bond Fund PTIAX 1
$5,000/$500 N/L No Transaction Fee @ Fidelity
Multisector Bond
Inception Date 08/31/2010 Multiple Managers 6 years Assets $590.06
Ex Ratio 0.89%
1. No Transaction Fee funds are available without paying a transaction fee. No Transaction Fee funds will also be offered without a load or on a load waived basis. However, the fund may charge a short term trading fee or a redemption fee
$5,000/$500 N/L No Transaction Fee @ Fidelity
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/summary/89833W394
Performance Trust Strategic Bond Fund (PTIAX)
FUND INSIGHTS
What Sets Us Apart:
JUNE 30, 2016
http://ptiafunds.com/documents/ptam-difference_ptiax_final.pdf
msf,
Thanks for your thoughts.
I am thinking of pairing DBLTX with BCOIX. One heavily mortgage oriented, the other corporate. One with higher rated bonds, the other with lower. Both unfortunately sport yields on the lower side, but BCOIX TR has been quite good in 2016. Can't say the same for DBLTX and hopefully the cause has been the type of mortgages, which can be adjusted, and not the large AUM (which may speak to more difficulty in adjusting).
TSP_Transfer, I own PTIAX and am pleased with the yield, TR, and stable NAV. While heavily mortgage based like DBLTX, obviously a different animal.
Mona