Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

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.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

M*: How To Get The Most From Bucket 1: The Cash Bucket: Text & Video Presentation

FYI: Hi, I'm Susan Dziubinski for Morningstar. Retirees using the Bucket system probably put a lot of thought in how they invest their long-term buckets, but the cash bucket, Bucket 1, may get less attention. Joining me to share some tips for getting the most out of bucket one is Christine Benz, our director of personal finance at Morningstar.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.morningstar.com/videos/921196/how-to-get-the-most-from-bucket-1.html

Comments

  • edited April 2019
    My cash area consist of two sleeves. A demand cash sleeve where I hold enough cash to meet my income distributions needs plus some for new investment purposes. Generally, this sleeve holds a sum equal to about one years worth of portfolio income generation. In my investment cash sleeve are found mine and my wife's bank savings accouts, our brokerage held money market mutual funds and a one to three year cd ladder. At one time, I considered holding the 1 to 3 year US Treasury etf SHY; but due to its current yield of 1.87% I scuttled this thought since my CD ladder is paying out north of 2.5% and my current money market funds are paying out north of 2.25%. We hold a sum equal to about three years worth of cash draw needs in the investment cash sleeve. Probally more than we should; but, there again, should we get into a protracted market decline I don't want to have to sell investments in other portfolio areas should the need arise to raise some cash especially in a down market.
  • edited April 2019
    1-2y true cash may be a little scant, though I just commenced moves to result in 5y cash or bonds and that seems excessive, some days
  • @Old_Skeet- As FISCX is closed to new investors, I was wondering if you might have any suggestions for similar funds?

    Thanks- OJ
  • Hi @Old_Joe
    This is Morningstar's convertibles funds list.
    Numerous duplicates among fund families due to the "R" type for dedicated retirement accounts and some institutional that may not be available to us regular folks.
    You can sort the return list with a click upon the "year".
    Course, I don't know what you may have access to via Schwab. I've not used their web site for a long time; but wondering what they show for a search list or investment style list.
    Being a Fidelity acct. I chose their similar fund to chart against The Franklin fund, which appears to have the edge over other similar funds for the past several years......

    Chart here

    If you find something available at Schwab, use this active chart and add a comma and the ticker and click GO. The time frame should remain the same if the new add has long enough time frame.
  • edited April 2019
    @Old_Joe: At one time I use to own a complete sleeve of convertible securities funds. The three that it held were FISCX, PACIX & LACFX. My second choice that I feel is noteworthy is ANZAX but it has a soft close on it as does FISCX so both of these funds are not crrently taking new investors.

    I have enclosed a link below that will take you to Morningstar's category of funds currently set for convertibles. You might search through it. Notice you can sort by 1 month, ytd, 1 year, 3 year and 5 year returns plus their tickers.

    A good monthly distribution fund that I own that holds about a third in convertibles is AZNAX. It is open and pays a monthly distribution of $0.0775 which equals an annual distribution yield of better than 8%. You might check it out as well as it has good total returns. It is held in my hybrid income sleeve along with my convertible securities fund FISCX. Another fund held in this sleeve that genrates good income is my commodity strategy fund PCLAX with a TTM yield of better than 11%. And, yet another good income producer is my real estate income fund FRINX with a yied of about 4%. It has some convertibles and perferreds in it as well.

    http://news.morningstar.com/fund-category-returns/convertibles/$FOCA$CV.aspx

  • @Old_Skeet and @Catch22- Thanks much to both of you. Some work for tomorrow!
  • edited April 2019
    ADD, relative to market melt: both funds chosen for the chart had their high price near May, 2008 and both found their lows near Nov. 2008, with the Franklin fund dropping about -45% and Fidelity about -57% in this time frame.
    During the fall, 2018 mini-melt, convertibles dropped about 11.5% versus about 20% for SPY..........the period for this measure is Sept. 20 - Dec. 24
    K. Good evening.
  • edited April 2019
    I use Morningstar's performace tab to do my mutal fund comparisons. Here is the picture I get through their total return charting of FISCX vs. FCVSX. Once you open the link click on compare and add FCVSX into the entry box then click compare. Over a 5 year period the total return of FISCX is 8.97% vs. 4.29% for FCVSX. If you scroll down from the graph then you can see a performace comparison for different time periods under the Trailing Total Return section.

    http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/performance-return.action?t=FISCX&region=usa&culture=en_US

    You can open the performance tool from Morningstar's Fund Quote Report. Just locate the performance tab and then click to open the performance tool.
  • Yes- and when I checked out all of the best long-term performers it turns out that virtually all of them are closed to new investors in one way or another. That's a good thing for those already in, and I have to admire the various funds for that.
  • edited April 2019
    @Old_Joe: Some convertible funds have a higher yield than others. For the two that I noted that were open PACIX has a yield of 1.94% while LACFX has a yield of 3.75%. Some may favor a higher yield over a higher total return. I know I look a good bit at yield, being retired and seeking income, with some growth of principal to offset inflation. Both of these two funds should also pay out year end capital gain distributions. I consider that bonus money.
  • Thanks @Old_Skeet- I've more work to do tomorrow looking at all of this. I noted that most of the best long-term performers had nice low ERs also.

    OJ
  • edited April 2019
    @Old_Joe, FWIW, this article was posted a few days ago. An ETF convertible bond fund. I looked at it quickly but not interested at this time.

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-bond-etf-with-an-equity-feel-2019-03-29-1246451/print
  • 1-2y true cash may be a little scant, though I just commenced moves to result in 5y cash or bonds and that seems excessive, some days
    @davidrmoran, I've gone back and forth with myself what that 'number of years' cash bucket should be also. I was initially pretty conservative with a plan to hold 4 years living expenses in cash. I've reduced that # in my plans. The object for me is make sure I don't have to sell equity funds in a bear market. I think from what I've read the typical bear lasts about 14 months. Average recovery about 5 months. So given that, a 2-3 year bucket should be more than efficient.

    The other part of that safety bucket I'd like to incorporate is that all dividends earned in my portfolio would continuously go into that safety-cash bucket. That would safely stretch out that 2-3 years need for replenishment even longer.

    Good luck with your planning.
  • @MikeM: Is that where your dividends are going now ? Or is that to start when the BEAR shows ?
    Derf
  • Derf, I'm haven't retired yet so haven't implemented this plan. All dividends are re-invested now.
  • edited April 2019
    Food for thought - I’ve never subscribed to this popular notion of maintaining a separate “bucket” of cash to “tide you over” during temporary declines. My approach has been to create a (1) reasonably stable portfolio with growth potential and to (2) take small enough distributions so as not to deplete significantly the overall portfolio. Yes - you lose some ground by taking distributions from the investment pot during bear markets. But you’re farther ahead during up markets by having 100% invested (includes allocations to cash / bonds). Decision making related to how much cash to hold and trying to time when to dip into that bucket are substantially reduced. Albeit - you may also lose ground during bull markets as well because you’re not as aggressively invested as you might be (having a sizable bucket of cash in reserve). Since Ms Dizubinski and a number of smarter people here than me favor this bucket approach, I’ll defer to their judgement. No intent to give investment advice. Not an expert (Only “C“ s in math).

    Proponents of the approach Dizubinski advocates often point to the duration (in month’s) of a bear market. However, a more accurate way to examine this is to look at the number of months from market peak to full recovery. Since the bull market always begins at the bottom of a bear market, the climb back up to the earlier high can be long. I suppose the proponents of the cash bucket approach intend to rely on the bucket during the full recovery period?



    image

    Just estimating here -

    - Looks like it took about 10 years for the S&P to fully recover from its high reached in 1906 (Dividends / compounding aren’t included* / A world war transpired).

    - About 25 years elapsed before full recovery from the 1929 S&P peak (A world war intervened).

    - After the 1968 peak, nearly 20 years elapsed before all the S&P losses were recovered.

    - The S&P partially recovered from the 2000 sell-off (in 7 years) by around 2007. Than the “big fall” we’re most familiar with occurred.

    - From that interim high in 2007, the market recovered in just 5 years. To some extent, that rapid recovery may have taught us the wrong lesson.

    - Full S&P recovery, however, from its 2000 high took something in the vacinity of 15 years.

    Admittedly, the above analysis is at least partially flawed: *(1) It doesn’t account for compounded dividends paid investors along the way, (2) It assumes (suggests) that investors dipped into their cash bucket immediately after a significant decline from “peak” occurred and relied on it until full market recovery, (3) It fails to acknowledge most investors are diversified into domestic equities, international holdings and debt instruments in addition to the S&P. To this last point ... If you own an actively managed fund of just about any sort you’re automatically exposed to some fixed income (typically cash) held by the manager for liquidity purposes.

    Here’s the source of the chart and some accompanying analysis:
    https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2019/04/01/a-perspective-on-secular-bull-and-bear-markets
  • @hank; Wouldn't it be nice to have some dry powder to throw at the market, say with a drop of 20,25, or 30 % ? Maybe a spiff play or two as Old_Skeet does from time to time.
    Good topic.
    Derf
  • But you’re farther ahead during up markets by having 100% invested (includes allocations to cash / bonds).
    @Hank, I don't disagree with that statement. Just some thoughts: buckets for me are really just a frame of mind, a way to delineate. The cash bucket is still part of the total portfolio. If you are say 50% equity funds (which may include some cash, but not bucket cash), 40% bonds and 10% "cash (CDs, MM, and maybe some low risk equivalents) and you call that 10% your cash bucket that you use to withdraw from, your still "fully invested". Right? Fully invested meaning to your appropriate age, needs and risk tolerance.

    I agree you need to stay invested, as you said, while the stock market is rising, but also I see advantages to be able to not pull from those equity funds in a bear, when you are cashing in on a loss. The equity drop is just on paper unless you have to withdraw low.

    Good discussion. I enjoy this topic.
  • @MikeM- Your way of looking at the situation is very similar to mine. But I have to concede that @hank has a couple of good points too. We've been told that we could have done much better over the years had we not been so conservative. Probably true, but on the other hand, we never lost much sleep, even during major downturns.
  • edited April 2019
    Thanks both for the input. Having deliberated this a while, I want to concede that my analysis is quite distorted in that it may suggest only taking from investments near market peaks. Of course that’s not realistic. So, proponents of the bucket approach need to plan ahead as to when something would “trigger” withdrawals from said bucket - as well as to when they would begin “refilling” it.

    What I’d fear most with this approach would be that when my bucket had dropped below the “25% remaining” level (maybe 4 years after I began withdrawing from it), I’d panic and sell some securities at very depressed levels to add to that bucket (similar to noticing your gas tank is below quarter-full and not knowing how far away the next gas station is).

    Those with good memories will remember that by the end of ‘08 almost everyone was expecting things to get even worse. Of course, 2 months later the recovery began.

    @MikeM - Yes, you make good sense. By pulling from your cash bucket (as you explain it) you are in effect increasing your allocation to equities & other risk assets. Generally, that’s a smart thing to do in a falling market (but psychologically difficult).

    @OldJoe - Yep. I sleep well too. Always something in the basket that increases in worth - even on the worst days - (but sometimes only the cash portion):)
  • edited April 2019
    Agree @Old_Joe, we sometimes have to pay for a restful sleep:) Yes, Hank always makes good points.

    I mentioned the 50-40-10 mix in my earlier note, but that was just a random choice to present my point. Another good reason to hold that 2, 3 or 4 year safe-bucket, I think, is that the rest of the portfolio can be more aggressive since you have given yourself time to recover any market-drop loss.
  • "the rest of the portfolio can be more aggressive since you have given yourself time to recover any market-drop loss"

    @MikeM- Yes, that was the way I looked at things also. While working, our "cash bucket" was mostly insurance against a protracted job loss. Because that never occurred, the unused reserve could , in hindsight, be regarded as a lost opportunity for wealth increase. Depends entirely upon the comfort zone of each individual.
  • edited April 2019
    Derf said:

    @hank; Wouldn't it be nice to have some dry powder to throw at the market, say with a drop of 20,25, or 30 % ? Maybe a spiff play or two as Old_Skeet does from time to time.
    Good topic.
    Derf

    Agree @Derf. But what you suggest is easier said than done. One’s phychology (as well as that of our “news/ information” sources) gets distorted during bear markets. (Would take a Stephen Hawkins to explain it well).

    But, yes - Ol’Skeet has a very definitive concrete plan. That’s what one needs. I used to do that (add during declines). The hardest thing was knowing when to “hold fire” and when to begin committing the dry powder. Tough because when markets start to fall you don’t know how far or for how long.

    BTW - John Templeton used to say - “It’s very rare” for a market to fall by more than 50% (peak to bottom) and remain there for long (but it is certainly possible). If I recall correctly he was alluding in particular to some of the emerging markets of the day. I’ve always taken that to heart. So, for a long term investor, when you come across a market you’d like to own that has sustained a 50% or greater loss from its peak it isn’t a bad time IMHO to stake out a hold. Doesn’t always work. Example - Oil peaked at over $100 in 2015 and than fell to as low as $26. However, today at $60-$70 it’s getting back nearer to its all time highs.
  • Hi guys,

    I found all of your comments of good value.

    This has been a good discussion which I chose to step back from an observe until I felt that it was about to conclude. I'll say this about my all weather asset allocation its purpose is to provide sufficient income, maximizes diversification, minimizes volatility, and provides long-term returns. Thus far from running a back test of the portfolio it seems to accomplish these goals.

    Should my portfolio begin to trail the Lipper Balanced Index by a reasonable amount (let's say 10 % to 15% range) then I plan to revisit my allocation and my needs to see if any adjustment might be wise. Just because it is this way now ... does not mean that it will always be this way.

    One of the things I now plan to do after monitoring this discussion is to trim the amount of cash now held within my demand cash sleeve down to a sum equal to about one fourth of my portfolio's annual income generation. I'll most likely split position this sum between my Income and Growth & Income Areas as Hank made a good point about opportunity loss by not being more fully invested.

    Old_Skeet

  • @MikeM, thanks

    One other lucky thing --- we are all just insanely lucky to live in these long bull times --- is that this company Pimco has made it possible to invest in bond vehicles which offer much cashlike safety combined with much equitylike performance.

    So I can divide my non-equity moneys among MINT, PONAX, and PCI, and over some patient periods the latter two do match or even outperform such stalwarts as JABAX and TWEIX. (This is why I have often posted that my 'balanced fund' is simply varying proportions of DSEEX and PONAX.)
  • @davidrmoron You said: ( we are all just insanely lucky to live in these long bull times)
    +2
    Derf
Sign In or Register to comment.