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

International Version of PRWCX

2»

Comments

  • AMZN reports after the market close TODAY. That will be the real drama - whether it would be uplifting or add further to new-tech sinking.
  • maybe he'll write a put or a call against it, or whatever the hell it's called, when you do that.
    He is known to "juice" returns a bit by doing just that.
  • edited February 3
    MikeM said:

    I think golub1 is correct. The only way to get there is to build your own. But it sure would be nice to have 1 well managed international balanced/allocation fund doing the work for you.

    Still unbelievable to me that a 60:40 balanced type fund using international equity and international bonds exclusively doesn't exist. Seems like that would be something easy for Vanguard to market using their index funds. Would it ever match PRWCX? Oh I doubt it, unless that cloning Giroux thing hank mentioned pans out.

    A few very good world or global funds mentioned in this thread seem to be the closest thing available.

    Vanguard does offer the Global Wellington fund.
    The fund invests in international equities and international bonds.
    Its allocation is approximately 65% stocks / 35% bonds.

    Edit: You were referencing international balanced funds but I provided a global fund.
    My mistake!
  • edited February 3
    Well, AMZN had good earnings report and it also raised Prime membership. Its stock is up in double-digit % in after-hours. So, it was UPLIFTING.
  • hank said:

    Mr. Giroux’s 2nd largest holding, Amazon (AMZN), is down 7% today. (Maybe in sympathy with Facebook?) Lipper lists AMZN as 5.5% of his portfolio.

    “Too smart by half” is an old saying that might apply.:)

    AMZN is up 15% in the aftermarket following earnings...
  • hank said:

    :(

    PRWCX down -1.16% today.

  • Amazon tied me to a trial 30 day membership to {prime} after a recent purchase. I don't remember requesting the trial . Took a bit of work to end 30 day trial !! No one button to push to end membership. Sorry about interrupting this thread.

    Didn't enjoy that ride, Derf
  • edited February 3
    Crash said:

    hank said:

    :(

    PRWCX down -1.16% today.

    I don’t care if PRWCX is up or down. Just tired of Giroux being worshiped at the alter!

    Over 10 years, it leads DODBX by only 1.5%. The gap has been narrowing for a year or more. And DODBX did slightly better today.

    10 year performance from Lipper as of yesterday:

    PRWCX +13.01%

    DODBX +11.50%

    Not to trash PRWCX (I own it). Just don’t believe in hero (or fund) worship.

  • Roy
    edited February 3
    For 15 years PRWCX outperforms DODBX by 2.44% PER YEAR, that's a substantial difference.

    9.87% vs 7.43%.
  • To say “Over 10 years, it leads DODBX by only 1.5%” annualized and assume that is a small amount I would suspect misunderstands the power of compounding. But I haven’t done the math in this case.
  • edited February 4
    For 10-yr, (1.1301/1.1150)^10 = 1.1440, or 14.40% difference in final value.

    For 15-yr, (1.0987/1.0743)^15 = 1.4006, or 40.06% difference in final value.
  • edited February 4
    I'm fairly certain the difference between a 13.01% annualized return and a 11.50% one over ten years is more than 14.4% cumulatively, more like 40 percentage points if this is correct: https://investor.gov/financial-tools-calculators/calculators/compound-interest-calculator I think it is the difference between a 239% cumulative return and a 197% cumulative one from the base investment, although I'm tired and my math could be off.
  • @Derf- re your Amazon comment, yes- they can be real slime-balls too, and frequently are.
  • edited February 4
    Feb. 2012 - Jan. 2022
    ------------------------------------
    PRWCX__12.92%_CAGR
    DODBX__11.48%_CAGR

    13.64% difference in final balance
    Link


    David Giroux start date: 06/30/2006

    Jul. 2006 - Jan. 2022
    ------------------------------------
    PRWCX__10.35%_CAGR
    DODBX___7.88%_CAGR

    42.31% difference in final balance
    Link
  • edited February 4
    For 10-yr, $100 becomes $296.99 and $339.76 (by Investor. gov), respectively. So, that is +$42.77 extra for initial $100, and +14.40% over $296.99.

    For 15-yr, $100 becomes $293.01 and $410.38 (by Investor. gov), respectively. So, that is +$117.37 extra for initial $100, and +40.06% over $293.01.
  • edited February 4
    Thanks for the fact checking. Remember the old Avis commercial from the 70s?

    “We’re #2. So we try harder!”

    In another year after DODBX has pulled ahead for 10 years, please run those numbers again.
  • The ten year numbers are also the difference between a 197% cumulative return and a 240% one. Both calculations are correct, just a difference in perspective, one cumulatively from the initial investment, and one the percentage of difference—14.4%—between the end investment numbers. For a $10,000 investment, it would be the difference between a $34,000 end investment after ten years and a $29,700 one. The more money you invest, the worse those differences seem.
  • edited February 4
    If one could reliably predict that variance (1.51%) 10 years in advance (as in the case of fixed rate mortgages) I’d be moved.

    But I don’t know how to forecast that far out. I find the two funds’ returns over a full decade remarkably similar considering all the unknowns that exist over that long a period. I’ll continue to hedge my bets by holding both in roughly equal amounts. Should those past numbers hold into the future, I’ll see a difference (loss) of roughy $2,150 over the next decade for every $10,000 invested. Averaged out over 10 years that’s approximately $215 per year or 60-cents a day on a combined $10,000 investment - the added cost of spreading out risk.

    Great number crunching from everyone. The visual from @Observant1 is very impressive.

    Afraid I couldn’t even name the current manager of DODBX today. (Low in celebrity status). Am aware that fund may soon be undergoing some revision by D&C.
  • Reason people cannot remember DODBX "manager" is that there are 17 people listed - a crowd. I think that only the oversight of this crowd of 17 is changing, not the people themselves. FWIW, I can remember dozens of my user IDs and passwords - all in my head, not written down anywhere, but I cannot remember that many people.
    http://financials.morningstar.com/fund/management.html?t=DODBX&region=usa&culture=en-US
  • edited February 4

    Reason people cannot remember DODBX "manager" is that there are 17 people listed - a crowd.US

    I'm Nobody! Who are you?
    Are you – Nobody – too?

    How dreary – to be – Somebody!
    How public – like a Frog –
    To tell one's name – the livelong day –
    To an admiring Bog


    - Emily Dickinson
  • Crash said:

    hank said:

    :(

    PRWCX down -1.16% today.

    Compared to some other balanced funds, PRWCX/TRAIX performed pretty well yesterday.

  • I can remember 17 players from the 1977 Twins or Red Sox roster, but that's a whole 'nother story!
  • Square away, sailor!! This is serious stuff!! :)
  • @carew388 - I was going to ask if your handle had anything to do with Hall of Famer Rod. Those were the days.
  • Yes it does. We had a dice and cards baseball league senior year in high school, and the 1977 Twins , led by MVP Rod Carew, were my team in that league.
  • @carew388 ; Did you win the league ?
  • beebee
    edited February 5
    Oh Yeah...Loved that game!
    image

    Still available for purchase:
    https://strat-o-matic.com/product/1977-baseball-game/
  • Derf-no I didn't win the league;one of my best friends did, by making a number of one-sided trades. He had the Texas Rangers-traded Jim Sundberg for Bruce Sutter and somehow got Mike Schmidt from the Phillies owner ! bee-We played the Play Ball game which didn't have two-sided cards for lefty-righty factor, nor did it have a defensive range factor like Strat-o-matic did. There's a big difference between having a 1 shortstop vs a 3 or 4 !
Sign In or Register to comment.