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.
Does anybody have an idea what is in PIMIX's portfolio? Their website doesn't offer this info, and M* is usually out of date. Maybe somebody reading this is in the know?
@Soupkitchen: On the fund web page, click or scroll down to "Documents," and press "See More" to see all the pieces they put up on the portfolio. Pimco Income page.
I've always found the (monthly updated) Portfolio Statistics spreadsheet, "Detailed Stats" option, to be most helpful for what I've wanted to know. There are plenty of other options there, too, including complete individual holdings if that's what you're after.
One thing they used to not publish was the credit quality breakdown, although a CSR would cheerfully read them to you over the phone for whatever fund(s) you wanted. I see M* has a quarterly credit quality breakdown on their site now, so maybe that's changed.
You probably noticed this from looking thru their fund pages, but the one thing to keep in mind with the portfolio sector breakdown figures is whether what you're looking at is the market value or the duration for each asset class. They give both; for some reason, the "Composition" area on the fund pages shows only duration.
Happy Pimco reading ...
P.S. No surprise, it's 74% securitized in the most recent reporting.
Thanks Andy. I was looking for the credit quality breakdown, which I couldn't find. On M* they have 35% of their bonds as being non rated, so who knows what that means? I was trying to find out what % of high yield bonds the fund owns.
Pimco filed its latest report with the SEC just two weeks ago (Dec 8, 2022). That's almost surely as current as there is. That's the date of the data on M*'s page, and it's the date of the individual holdings in the holdings report on Pimco's Income Fund page.
The holdings portfolio stat spreadsheet, dated Nov 30th, does report the securitized bonds constituting 74% of the fund's portfolio by Market Value (MV exposure as percentage of NAV).
The Sector Allocation Chart, also dated Nov 30th reports "just" 53% in securitized bonds: Agency MBS (21%), Non-agency MBS (21%), ABS (3%), CMBS (3%), Non-US RMBS (5%).
That chart describes its percentages as market value exposure including notational value. (There's no mention of notational value in the spreadsheet.) Whether that is the source of the discrepancy, or whether Pimco is itself confused over what it holds, I can't say. Nevertheless, I would be more inclined to be guided by figures that include the multiplicative (notational) effect of derivatives.
Comments
I've always found the (monthly updated) Portfolio Statistics spreadsheet, "Detailed Stats" option, to be most helpful for what I've wanted to know. There are plenty of other options there, too, including complete individual holdings if that's what you're after.
One thing they used to not publish was the credit quality breakdown, although a CSR would cheerfully read them to you over the phone for whatever fund(s) you wanted. I see M* has a quarterly credit quality breakdown on their site now, so maybe that's changed.
You probably noticed this from looking thru their fund pages, but the one thing to keep in mind with the portfolio sector breakdown figures is whether what you're looking at is the market value or the duration for each asset class. They give both; for some reason, the "Composition" area on the fund pages shows only duration.
Happy Pimco reading ...
P.S. No surprise, it's 74% securitized in the most recent reporting.
The holdings portfolio stat spreadsheet, dated Nov 30th, does report the securitized bonds constituting 74% of the fund's portfolio by Market Value (MV exposure as percentage of NAV).
The Sector Allocation Chart, also dated Nov 30th reports "just" 53% in securitized bonds:
Agency MBS (21%), Non-agency MBS (21%), ABS (3%), CMBS (3%), Non-US RMBS (5%).
That chart describes its percentages as market value exposure including notational value. (There's no mention of notational value in the spreadsheet.) Whether that is the source of the discrepancy, or whether Pimco is itself confused over what it holds, I can't say. Nevertheless, I would be more inclined to be guided by figures that include the multiplicative (notational) effect of derivatives.