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

Left Morningstar and came here.

edited March 2020 in Fund Discussions
I cancelled my M* subscription after their recent "upgrade" gutted the information I used to get.

I find the screens at this site very useful for comparing fund risk and track record. Better than M* ever was.

One thing I miss is the tax-cost information for funds. I haven't seen it here. The only place I can get it at M* is in the portfolios they still let you create.

I miss the granularity of detail on the portfolios that they used to have. I liked being able to see what the funds were buying and selling. That's gone. I'm not sure how critical it really was though. Strangely enough the CEF's are the same as they ever were.

Comments

  • Some of the information is provided on their new pages, some isn't, but can still be found on their legacy pages.

    For example, if you click on the price "tab" on a new page, at the lower right you'll find the three year tax cost ratio for a fund. But I don't believe that you can find the 1, 5, 10, or 15 year tax cost ratio as you would on a legacy page, e.g.
    http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/tax-analysis.action?t=VFINX&region=usa&culture=en-US

    OTOH, the legacy page doesn't give the category three year tax category tax cost ratio that's provided on the new page.
  • Yep, Tax Cost Information is a bit inconsistent between various sites. At M*, on their front page, I just type in the fund symbol in their search and quote box, get the Fund specific information to come up, click on the Price icon under the specific fund, and get the Tax Cost Ratio information for the last 3 year period. At Schwab, I pull up the Fund Symbol in their Research category, and when the fund comes up, I go to the Risk and Tax Analysis section where I can get Tax Cost Ratios for both the 1 year and 3 year periods. I suspect it is available at other sites, but I tend to depend on M* and my brokerage for fund information.
  • msf said:

    Some of the information is provided on their new pages, some isn't, but can still be found on their legacy pages.

    For example, if you click on the price "tab" on a new page, at the lower right you'll find the three year tax cost ratio for a fund. But I don't believe that you can find the 1, 5, 10, or 15 year tax cost ratio as you would on a legacy page, e.g.
    http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/tax-analysis.action?t=VFINX&region=usa&culture=en-US

    OTOH, the legacy page doesn't give the category three year tax category tax cost ratio that's provided on the new page.

    Thanks for the tips. I still have portfolios over there, especially for shopping.

    Is there an easy way to reliably get to the legacy pages?

  • Reliable? Yes. Easy? No.

    Take the URL above and swap in the ticker for your fund. Most of the tabs for other pages (e.g. purchase, expense, portfolio, analyst) will bring you to the respective legacy pages. The filing tab no longer works (you'll have to go to the fund site or to the SEC for those), and the quote tab brings you to the new overview page.

    If you're lucky, you can use the search box to move from fund to fund instead of tinkering with the URL. That's easy but not reliable. It works for some funds but not for others.
  • That's great. Thank you.

    It's really crazy they don't have the old purchase tab.
  • The old purchase tab was really useful as was the info about the manager(s), especially the other funds under same management, past and present.
  • edited January 2020
    @WABAC I stopped reading after I read "Left Morningstar". Good for you. I left when I still had hair.
  • @WABAC I stopped reading after I read "Left Morningstar".

    You picked a good place to stop.
  • edited January 2020
    The Financial Times has very useful and (may I say) beautifully designed set of tools, at their markets.ft.com minisite, which includes both Morningstar and Lipper fund metrics.

    Here - for example - is link to T Rowe Price Capital Appreciation Fund:

    https://markets.ft.com/data/funds/tearsheet/summary?s=PRWCX
  • I have not completely left M*. I greatly value its Portfolio section, where I have numerous watch lists of funds, in which I can set up a large array of fund components,that I monitor on an ongoing basis. The Portfolio section provides easy access to a large amount of fund analytical data, and comparative capabilities, which I use extensively in due diligence processes. I do believe that changes in the M* platform, have made it more difficult to access data that I previously valued, but even with many flaws there, it still is very valuable to me.

    I previously more valued the Discussion section of M*, but have become disillusioned with that section of M*--allows too much poster misconduct that is unpleasant and threatening to other posters. M* also allowed posters to completely take over and hijack threads, completely change the subject of the thread, and take it in a completely different direction than the original post topic. I chose to come to MFO, for hopefully a more civil and non-contentious thread discussion experience. I don't choose to start threads at M*, and I have limited my participation in their Discussion section to a very limited role. I hope that MFO will be a good platform for civil and non-contentious discussion, but MFO has its shortcomings as well. In some respects the M* Discussion platform is far better in design to MFO, but in some ways MFO is better. So, lots of "apples and oranges" issues in trying to compare both M* and MFO discussion platforms.
  • edited January 2020
    dtconroe said:

    I have not completely left M*. I greatly value its Portfolio section, where I have numerous watch lists of funds, in which I can set up a large array of fund components,that I monitor on an ongoing basis. The Portfolio section provides easy access to a large amount of fund analytical data, and comparative capabilities, which I use extensively in due diligence processes. I do believe that changes in the M* platform, have made it more difficult to access data that I previously valued, but even with many flaws there, it still is very valuable to me.

    The useful features at M* are free. I have found the data here worth paying for.

    And you can create portfolios and watch lists here that are useful compliments to the ones at M*. The risk information that is easily filtered on, and displayed, here goes well beyond that which is available at M*.

    OTOH this site does not track daily share movements, so doesn't display what percentage of your portfolio an asset is. You have to set your portfolio according to the target percentage. Portfolios are also limited to 25 tickers. That worked well enough for my wife's IRA, but not at all for a collector like me.

    Here are the data the site tracks: https://www.member.mfopremium.com/definitions/

    Here is a small sample sans formatting in the original. So it looks a little rough:
    Here are the specific Capture Metrics:

    Upside Capture compares the positive return of a fund, comprised of positive month ending returns, to one of four indexes, over evaluation period specified, measured in percentage. So, compared to SP500, an Upside Capture of 120% means the fund retuned or "captured" 20% more positive return than SP500 over the evaluation period specified.
    Downside Capture compares the negative return of a fund, comprised of its negative month ending returns, to one of four indexes, over evaluation period specified, measured in percentage. So, compared to SP500, a Downside Capture of 80% means the fund retuned or "captured" only 80% of downside that the SP500 over the evaluation period specified.
    Capture Ratio is simple the ratio of Upside To Downside Capture. Values greater than 1.0 means that a fund capture more upside than downside compared to its reference fund ... a good thing!
    Up Months is simply number of months with positive returns of index over evaluation period specified.
    Down Months is simply number of months with negative returns of index over evaluation period specified.
  • edited January 2020
    Welcome @dtconroe and others that have come over from M*.

    I use to venture over to the M* boards from time-to-time. However, I have not visited since Junkster left.

    Although we have had some good debates among members we have, for the most part, been civil towards one another.

    From my perspective ... it is pretty simple ... it's the people that make the community.

    And, yes ... I use M* Portfolio Manager and Instant Xray along with their mutual fund reports as an aid in following my mutual funds. But, I never did take to their forums.

    Old_Skeet
  • edited January 2020
    @dtconroe - for the benefit of all please expand on this statement: "In some respects the M* Discussion platform is far better in design to MFO, but in some ways MFO is better."

    I tend to disagree especially with respect to "far better in design" but then I don't know exactly what you are referring to. The new M* design has been lambasted from nearly all corners as clunky, unsearchable, unnavigable by many and just a plain serious debasement of their prior system/format, albeit they now have 'badges'. I'm sure if you have suggestions for design improvements the folks in charge here at MFO would love to hear about them although I have no right to speak for them.
  • WABAC: "The useful features at M* are free. I have found the data here worth paying for.
    And you can create portfolios and watch lists here that are useful compliments to the ones at M*. The risk information that is easily filtered on, and displayed, here goes well beyond that which is available at M*. OTOH this site does not track daily share movements, so doesn't display what percentage of your portfolio an asset is. You have to set your portfolio according to the target percentage. Portfolios are also limited to 25 tickers. That worked well enough for my wife's IRA, but not at all for a collector like me."

    There are so many websites, that offer an array of valuable information. I use to run portfolios, with varied portfolio details, at M*, CNBC, and Yahoo finance. I did not have to pay anything for those available options. However, I found I had to continually update the portfolios, and decided I would just choose the best portfolio manager option. I decided to use M* for that portfolio management information, as I can set up watch lists with all kinds detailed information, that is continually updated there--total return performance data, ER information, Credit rating information, duration, standard deviation, and all kinds of data that would overwhelm a portfolio monitoring screen. M* provides the information that is most valuable to me without a cost. I was a premium subscriber at M* for many years, but found that I did not get anything additional that I found valuable enough to pay for. I also use the Research section of Schwab, which offers some data details, that I cannot easily access at M*. Of course, you can also to the websites of various fund companies, and you can gain additional details there, as part of your due diligence investigations. At any rate, I have not found a compelling reason to pay for information, that is available without cost at other sites.

    However, discussion forums are different. I have not found many that are popular enough to get sufficient poster input, to make them useful. However, the platform for providing discussion, varies greatly. The process of moderating and ensuring civil and non-contentious posting, varies greatly. Again, it is all apples and oranges, with pros and cons, at each site. I will continue to evaluate MFO, compared to M*, and other sites, and eventually determine how much to participate in discussion at each site, but for me, I have not formed a strong final opinion, about the discussion forums available.
  • I'm not trying to be snarky (I know, I'm shocked along with everyone else here who knows me) but you responded like a politician. I asked specifically about your 'discussion board' comment which you mostly if not entirely dodged around. I'll wait until you're ready.

    As for the rest of your response, MFO doesn't even pretend to offer all of the things you find appealing about M* so yes, comparing the two sites on that basis is apples to oranges.
  • dtconroe said:

    WABAC:
    However, discussion forums are different. I have not found many that are popular enough to get sufficient poster input, to make them useful. However, the platform for providing discussion, varies greatly. The process of moderating and ensuring civil and non-contentious posting, varies greatly. Again, it is all apples and oranges, with pros and cons, at each site. I will continue to evaluate MFO, compared to M*, and other sites, and eventually determine how much to participate in discussion at each site, but for me, I have not formed a strong final opinion, about the discussion forums available.

    They're not hard to set up. You can run one on opensource software. Hosting would be a trivial expense for a forum on investing in bonds. Administration can take some time until people get what's going on.

    Anyway, best of luck finding your community of posters. It's fun, and educational, to share interests with a good group.
  • Mark: "I'm not trying to be snarky (I know, I'm shocked along with everyone else here who knows me) but you responded like a politician. I asked specifically about your 'discussion board' comment which you mostly if not entirely dodged around. I'll wait until you're ready.

    As for the rest of your response, MFO doesn't even pretend to offer all of the things you find appealing about M* so yes, comparing the two sites on that basis is apples to oranges."

    Mark, I have been out for a few hours and just got back home. I am sorry my absence has led to your conclusion that I somehow have "mostly if not entirely dodged around", and somehow you are calling my response "like a politician". I am a bit confused by your choice of words and the tone of your response.

    At M*, the Discussion section is divided into various subcategories, called Investing Forums. When you start a thread, you go to the appropriate Investing Forum, that fits your Thread Topic. So, if I want to start a thread, or read someone else's thread, associated with Bonds, then I simply go to that section of the Discussion section, and I can avoid threads associated with other Investing Forum topics, not related to Bonds, that I have no interest in. Among the many Investing Forums, where you can focus your posting and reading interest, include: Dividend and Income Investing, Investing in Retirement, Mutual Funds, Fidelity Funds, Vanguard Funds, Off Topic discussions, Market Insights, etc. etc. etc.

    At MFO, there is only one Discussion section, with no subcategories. Every conceivable thread topic gets introduced daily and goes to the beginning of the Discussion Section. Older threads get buried under an avalanche of new threads, with many thread topics that I have no interest in. There is one particular poster, John, who introduces about 4 or 5 or more new threads every day, that goes straight to the beginning of the Discussion section. I have a few Bond related threads, in addition to the one I started, that I try to find, but they are often on the 2nd or 3rd page of the Discussion Section, buried under a large number of new threads I have no interest in.

    I simply like the M* platform, because it is kind of like a newspaper, divided into a variety of sections, found in the newspaper index on the front page. In the newspaper, I don't have to go through massive sections of the newspaper I am not interested in, to ultimately find the section I am interested in. If I want to read the Sports section of the newspaper, I can find where that is by just looking at the index to find where it is located. At MFO, you have no subdivision of similar thread topics---you have to dig through all the other stuff, to hopefully find what you are interested in.

    I hope this explanation meets your criteria for directness and clarity!
  • WABAC: "They're not hard to set up. You can run one on opensource software. Hosting would be a trivial expense for a forum on investing in bonds. Administration can take some time until people get what's going on.

    Anyway, best of luck finding your community of posters. It's fun, and educational, to share interests with a good group."

    WABAC, regarding your comment above, regarding setting up Discussion Forums, that has been attempted by a couple of other posters who had discontent at M*. It has not worked out well for them. On M*, there is a Discussion Thread about other Discussion Forums, outside of M*, and the most frequently mentioned are MFO and Fidelity. So, many M* posters have left M* for one or both of these other options. I can no longer access Fidelity, because I am no longer an investor there, so I decided to try MFO. I will keep trying available Discussion Forums to find the one I most like, but I have not been on MFO long enough to reach a final conclusion.

  • edited January 2020
    @dtconroe - there, now we have a start. You said "At M*, the Discussion section is divided into various subcategories, called Investing Forums."

    MFO has such a thing although it is not as sharply separated as you seem to prefer. When you login to the site if you look under your name you will see a number of categories. If you click on them

    "My discussions" will present you with a list of all the discussions that you have started.
    "My bookmarks" will do likewise for all of the discussions that you bookmark.

    Moving down to the bold CATEGORIESsection:
    "All categories" is obvious. There have been 47K discussions posted to date.
    "Fund discussions" subtracts out the off topic, technical and bullpen discussions.
    "Off topic" discussions may be financially related but usually not pertaining to mutual funds specifically.
    "The Bullpen" is for discussions which were posted but have had no followup comments. They may/may not be fund related. They are the ones which tend to clutter up the "all categories" list.

    I would suggest that you select one of the above categories and see if they are more to your liking.

    I have a second suggestion also. Your discussion post "Bond OEF investing for more conservative investors" is a fine, fine post and holds a great deal of interest for many of the visitors to the MFO discussion board, me included. However, you will note that one must now move through 5 (at last count) pages to read the whole thing. Might I suggest that in the future you initiate new discussion topics such as your "Bank Loan/Floating Rate OEF's", "Non Traditional Bond OEF's" and "Muni Bond Investing" as entirely new discussion threads rather than as one continuous stream as they are now situated. I recognize that they are all about bond OEF investing but I also think it's easy for folks to get lost as more comments are posted along the way attempting to discern which of the introduced topics the comment pertains to. Just a thought.
  • Mark said:

    @dtconroe -
    I have a second suggestion also. Your discussion post "Bond OEF investing for more conservative investors" is a fine, fine post and holds a great deal of interest for many of the visitors to the MFO discussion board, me included. However, you will note that one must now move through 5 (at last count) pages to read the whole thing. Might I suggest that in the future you initiate new discussion topics such as your "Bank Loan/Floating Rate OEF's", "Non Traditional Bond OEF's" and "Muni Bond Investing" as entirely new discussion threads rather than as one continuous stream as they are now situated. I recognize that they are all about bond OEF investing but I also think it's easy for folks to get lost as more comments are posted along the way in attempting to discern which of the introduced topics the comment pertains to. Just a thought.

    That's a good suggestion. Most threads begin to suffer from drift after three pages. Sorting out the back and forth between posters becomes more tedious. And it's not like threads are being rationed.
  • Mark and WABAC, thanks for your comments and suggestions. I have looked at the "categories" that MFO offers, and they are still very general and encompass a large number of varying kinds of posts, in each "category". You are correct in that the categories are still very general, and are not as sharply separated, as you will find at M*. At M*, you can choose to look at all categories in a combined section, similar to MFO, or you can go to many more Investing Forum Subcategories, to find a much more focused places, to find or post, a relevant thread topic. The bookmarking system will help me just go to the threads I am interested in, but it will not help a new poster, or a poster who has not visited MFO for a longer period of time, find a thread they are interested in. At M*, new posters or occasional posters, can bypass all of the topical areas they want to avoid, and go to a much more focused section of related thread topics.

    Regarding your comments, that it is better to post multiple more specific threads, as opposed to one larger thread, that is more encompassing, I found the posters on M* had varying opinions. However, it seemed that at M*, the larger and more encompassing thread, became almost a separate category of the Bond Investing Forum. I found posters quickly going to the larger thread, to see the latest discussions, as opposed to hunting down multiple more specific threads, that often disappeared for lack of interest, much more quickly.
  • dtconroe said:


    Regarding your comments, that it is better to post multiple more specific threads, as opposed to one larger thread, that is more encompassing, I found the posters on M* had varying opinions. However, it seemed that at M*, the larger and more encompassing thread, became almost a separate category of the Bond Investing Forum. I found posters quickly going to the larger thread, to see the latest discussions, as opposed to hunting down multiple more specific threads, that often disappeared for lack of interest, much more quickly.

    Theoretically there is a topical limit on your post about conservative bond fund investments. Is it a good idea to drag it off topic with subjects that might die for lack of interest if they were in the cruel world on their own?

    Well. There are no thread police here. And it is your thread.;-)

    I think the chances of the forum breaking down into sub-categories are nearly non-existent. The community has been operating this way since 1996. You might get an interesting explanation if you asked why.

    I share your opinion about spamming the board with clickbait links. The locals seem to regard it as eccentric, but harmless. So . . .
  • edited January 2020
    “ There is one particular poster, John, who introduces about 4 or 5 or more new threads every day, that goes straight to the beginning of the Discussion section.”

    That’s the way it’s supposed to work. The most recent new threads go to the top. Most who post here have a broadspread appreciation of many different facets of investing. We’ve never felt a need to compartmentalize. What you might be missing, however, is the “Discussions +” link which appears to the left side of the screen when you’re logged in. By clicking on that you can view just the threads which have received comments by others. (If you login using that saved link, it will take you directly there.) That’s the link I generally use - though it’s helpful occasionally to scan all of the threads, whether commented on yet or not. Also, you can easily bump to the top of the stack any thread farther down that you want to promote by making brief comment in that thread,

    As you must be aware, we recently lost Ted Didesch “the Linkster” who for many years posted dozens of helpful links virtually every day. We all miss Ted. John it seems is trying to help compensate for that loss with some fresh threads every day. I’ll criticize his formatting or choice of topics occasionally (fair game), but I would never disparage what he’s attempting to do for the rest of us. The simple answer to “not liking” the topics that are posted is to post a few of your own.

    We have (or have had in the past) some excellent posters here who also post on M* or other forums. No need for exclusivity that I’m aware of. Hopefully everyone can find a forum somewhere that they enjoy and benefit from. The Discussion board here is but a “side show” to all that MFO has to offer investors. David’s monthly commentaries are top notch - required reading IMHO for mutual fund investors: https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2020/01/january-1-2020/ And it doesn’t stop with David. There’s over a half dozen knowledgeable / experienced investors who contribute to that publication every month, including Ed Studzinsky, former manager of OAKBX, whom I particularly enjoy reading. The research tools available here to those who want to dig deeper into funds are of high repute as well.

    Best wishes @dtconroe to you wherever you eventually decide to land.
  • hank, thanks for the information you have provided. The thread I started, is my effort at becoming familiar with how the MFO Discussion Forum works. I don't have any intentions at starting any new threads, at least not anytime soon. My impression is this thread has been well received by most MFO posters, and the 5.4K views. I intend to continue supporting it as long as MFO posters are interested in it. That is about all I intend to commit to for now.
  • @dtconroe,

    My comments were well meaning (as you took them) and pertained only to the topic under discussion: “Left Morningstar and came here”. To be honest, I’d forgotten about the other thread (on closed end bond funds) you mention, and wasn’t aware you had authored it, That’s not uncommon. Generally, in longer running threads the topic comes to dominate and the author is forgotten.

    While I started to take an interest in that thread many weeks ago, I left when it turned angry. My recall is there was some kind of personal fund going on that had carried over from M* resulting in bitter accusations and veiled threats. Hopefully those perpetrators have ceased the unwelcome (and potentially damaging to this community) conduct. On another note, as @Mark noted earlier in this thread, the problem with longer threads (that exceed 5 pages) is that it’s hard to have any continuity. If I were to read page 5 or 6 today, I’d not remember what you or someone else said on page 2 three weeks earlier.

    Please don’t take this as my trying to pass judgement on you or dictate how you choose to post. As I defended John earlier, I defend your right to post investment related threads of choice and to promote them as long as you feel they are of value to members of the community and they remain civil. Where I would perhaps disagree would be what seemed to be a suggestion earlier that posts by John or others didn’t deserve to be placed at the top of the Discussions page when new. Of course they do.

    Regards
  • hank, I have nevered authored a thread on "closed end bonds". I have only started ONE thread at MFO, and that was on "open end bond funds". I don't invest in, or follow, closed end bonds. I only mentioned John, as an example, of how existing threads get buried under the avalanche of new threads each day. I have not decided if I will ever start any additional threads on MFO.

    With that said, I do not intend to make any additional posts on this thread.


  • edited January 2020
    hank said:

    @dtconroe,

    My comments were well meaning (as you took them) and pertained only to the topic under discussion: “Left Morningstar and came here”.

    I started this thread in the MFO Premium section to extol the virtues of MFO Premium. I thought it might be useful to have such a discussion for people wondering whether to subscribe.

    I've been online too many years to get upset about thread drift. It happens all the time. I have contributed my fair share to the drift in this thread. And I understand that there will always be a certain amount of navel-gazing about the forum on any forum that has stayed healthy enough to survive at an active level.

    But after a long conversation about the forum, I might have to start a new thread about MFO Premium. There are at least as many people unhappy with M*'s changes to their premium accounts as there are those upset with the forums at that site.

    I don't care about M*'s forums. We'll see how long I last in this one after pitchers and catchers report in a couple of weeks.

    I suppose that non-subscribers that are active in the forums find a way to support this site by their donations. I am primarily here for the data. After using the free quick search tool I decided to subscribe to full access.

Sign In or Register to comment.