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.
It's a great fund for the right environment but during the 2008-09 crash not so much. It lagged both the S&P 500 and large value funds pretty badly then. So maybe close to the peak of an economic cycle, longest bull market in history today, might not be the best time.
Yeah, always with the 'excellent record'. I myself never saw and still don't see a really compelling reason to own it over 30-, 20-, and 10y spans in preference to say TWEIX and FCNTX. Not even a smoother ride, particularly. And there must be more than one Vanguard fund to hold as well, if not in preference to all.
The linked article reads like an Ad from D&C. While the praise is well deserved, it also strikes me as the anthesis of how they’ve always operated. They place no ads as far as I can tell. Despite their size, they offer only 5 funds. And all are team managed. No star managers. No interviews on CNBC, Bloomberg and the likes. Fund reports are detailed and analytical - but far from flashy or promotional. And they trade little. Some of the latter is due to having such a large footprint in the investment community that any significant buys or sells would drive the security up or down in price. And they offer no money market fund. They’re privately owned (though they seem to shun publicity). Fees are dirt low for active management. I suspect, but don’t know, that compared to other houses their investors are more stable, probably older, and less likely to flee on a downturn. And they’re headquartered in SF - about as far away as you can get from Wall Street and the big East Coast investment houses. In short, they operate differently from most of the fund managers we’re used to hearing about.
I can’t think of DC’s operation but that some salient lines from A Tale of Two Cities come to mind. Here Dickens describes Tellson’s of London, the most trusted financial institution of the day:
“Tellson’s Bank by Temple Bar was an old-fashioned place, even in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty. ... Tellson’s was the triumphant perfection of inconvenience. After bursting open a door of idiotic obstinacy with a weak rattle in its throat, you fell into Tellson’s down two steps, and came to your senses in a miserable little shop, with two little counters, where the oldest of men made your cheque shake as if the wind rustled it, while they examined the signature by the dingiest of windows .... Your money came out of, or went into, wormy old wooden drawers, particles of which flew up your nose and down your throat when they were opened and shut. Your bank-notes had a musty odour, as if they were fast decomposing into rags ...”
That they don't advertise or have star managers doing CNBC hits is to me a good thing. As are the rest of the items you mention. My only concern w/D&C is they tend to be a bit too dogmatic in their views and are very slow to change .... they never lightened up on financials as the GFC was getting going, and took a larger-than-expected hit as a result. (I held DODFX at the time - my worst performer then)
I think their DODWX looks kind of interesting as a world stock fund, though.
I thought same thing! Does the record justify the "missteps."
I guess with all the resources available at M* (vast), I would expect a more in-depth analysis given D&C is receiving the M* gold metal.
What really makes D&C tick?
How is it they are grandfathered into distribution platforms, enabling them to charge a pretty low er for an "active" fund.
Are they closet indexers (despite the "contrarian" title) ... or, is does their record reflect the value premium? If so, why have they done so well lately, when many value funds are not?
Was their extraordinary record in 2000-2002 luck? Like perhaps Dr. Hussman in 2008-2009?
Bottom-line: Why does DODGX (and the whole D&C family of funds actually) have a superior record?
Comments
More thoughtful commentary on board, like here:
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/45550/all-dodge-cox-funds-trending-down#latest
c
I can’t think of DC’s operation but that some salient lines from A Tale of Two Cities come to mind. Here Dickens describes Tellson’s of London, the most trusted financial institution of the day:
“Tellson’s Bank by Temple Bar was an old-fashioned place, even in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty. ... Tellson’s was the triumphant perfection of inconvenience. After bursting open a door of idiotic obstinacy with a weak rattle in its throat, you fell into Tellson’s down two steps, and came to your senses in a miserable little shop, with two little counters, where the oldest of men made your cheque shake as if the wind rustled it, while they examined the signature by the dingiest of windows .... Your money came out of, or went into, wormy old wooden drawers, particles of which flew up your nose and down your throat when they were opened and shut. Your bank-notes had a musty odour, as if they were fast decomposing into rags ...”
That they don't advertise or have star managers doing CNBC hits is to me a good thing. As are the rest of the items you mention. My only concern w/D&C is they tend to be a bit too dogmatic in their views and are very slow to change .... they never lightened up on financials as the GFC was getting going, and took a larger-than-expected hit as a result. (I held DODFX at the time - my worst performer then)
I think their DODWX looks kind of interesting as a world stock fund, though.
"The linked article reads like an Ad from D&C."
Yes, exactly.
@davidmoran
"Yeah, always with the 'excellent record'."
I thought same thing! Does the record justify the "missteps."
I guess with all the resources available at M* (vast), I would expect a more in-depth analysis given D&C is receiving the M* gold metal.
What really makes D&C tick?
How is it they are grandfathered into distribution platforms, enabling them to charge a pretty low er for an "active" fund.
Are they closet indexers (despite the "contrarian" title) ... or, is does their record reflect the value premium? If so, why have they done so well lately, when many value funds are not?
Was their extraordinary record in 2000-2002 luck? Like perhaps Dr. Hussman in 2008-2009?
Bottom-line: Why does DODGX (and the whole D&C family of funds actually) have a superior record?
Some quick questions that come to mind.
c