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.
With John Osterweis and Carl Kaufman leading this fund, it is no wonder it has done well. M* pans its fees, and I understand that. But they know that as assets increase, Osterweis will reduce fees. It has a record of that in their other two funds. For small accounts, this may be an ok option. It will always have a concentrated portfolio if its parent funds are any indication. That COULD give it an advantage over RPBAX, DODBX, VWELX, which are all huge and are most definitely not concentrated.
I need and would appreciate a bit of clarity on your post.
When you say " For small accounts, this may be an ok option", are you referring to OSTIX? If so, why not for large(er) accounts?
Then you said "That COULD give it an advantage over RPBAX, DODBX, VWELX, which are all huge and are most definitely not concentrated". Again assuming we are talking about OSTIX, should we be comparing a multisector (junk) bond fund to Moderate Allocation funds?
I read the Reuters article. Either that article used the wrong symbol and the Morningstar symbol was incorrect. The article was about the Strategic Investment fund and not the Strategic Income fund which is a bond fund while the Strategic Investment fund as described in the article is a moderate allocation fund, and apparently a very good one.
Mona, thanks for waking me up. I re-read my post, and now I see I was clear as mud.
OSTIX - Strategic Income, managed by Kaufman and team OSTFX - Osterweis Fund, managed by Osterweis and team OSTVX - Strategic Investment, managed by Kaufman, Osterweis and team
I misread the initial post, thinking it was about OSTVX. So my comments relate to OSTVX, not to OSTFX.
We use both OSTIX and OSTFX in many of our client portfolios. My comment was that newer fund OSTVX might be a good option for smaller accounts that want a balanced-type holding.
I hope this cleared up my senior moment. Thanks for the post.
One thing that has struck me as I followed Osterweis over the past few years (reading historical iterviews, etc.) is that they seemed to have had plans to cap the AUM and chop fees for their Strategic Income fund when they hit a specific base. When the pre-determined moments arrived, Osterweis stuck with the status quo.
I have nothing against the firm (and am not a shareholder), BTW, just passing along something I noticed a while ago when I was giving them a once-over.
Comments
Hi Bob,
I need and would appreciate a bit of clarity on your post.
When you say " For small accounts, this may be an ok option", are you referring to OSTIX? If so, why not for large(er) accounts?
Then you said "That COULD give it an advantage over RPBAX, DODBX, VWELX, which are all huge and are most definitely not concentrated". Again assuming we are talking about OSTIX, should we be comparing a multisector (junk) bond fund to Moderate Allocation funds?
Thanks,
Mona
OSTIX - Strategic Income, managed by Kaufman and team
OSTFX - Osterweis Fund, managed by Osterweis and team
OSTVX - Strategic Investment, managed by Kaufman, Osterweis and team
I misread the initial post, thinking it was about OSTVX. So my comments relate to OSTVX, not to OSTFX.
We use both OSTIX and OSTFX in many of our client portfolios. My comment was that newer fund OSTVX might be a good option for smaller accounts that want a balanced-type holding.
I hope this cleared up my senior moment. Thanks for the post.
I have nothing against the firm (and am not a shareholder), BTW, just passing along something I noticed a while ago when I was giving them a once-over.