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

T Rowe Price Capital Appreciation & Income is live

2»

Comments

  • edited December 2023
    I was just now able to place a trade for PRCFX at Schwab:) NTF at Schwab.
  • edited December 2023
    I also verified that for PRCFX, Schwab test allows $100+ orders NTF/no-load.

    But Schwab info on it is conflicting.
    https://www.schwab.com/research/mutual-funds/quotes/fees/prcfx

    Edit/Add. Test at Fido has $49.95 fee.
  • @yogibearbull, what part do you see as conflicting?


  • edited December 2023
    MikeM said:

    @yogibearbull, what part do you see as conflicting?


    Status still says, "Not Available for Purchases at Schwab"

    Transaction fee Field just has "-- (blanks)", not "$0".

    Quote pages don't show green button "No Load/No Fee".

    They may be fixing it as we discuss this.

    Also strange is that Fido and Schwab differ on NTF/no-load status. Typically, they differ only in min and short-term holding requirements/fees.
  • Schwab seems to waive loads on a variety of fund class A shares where Fidelity still charges a load. I agree this isn't typical, but it isn't uncommon. For example, SHDAX has a load a Fidelity but is offered NTF at Schwab. Likewise BCAAX carries a load at Fidelity but is NTF at Schwab.

    Among the T. Rowe Price funds, Fidelity charges a transaction fee for PATAX while Schwab does not. You'd have to be doubly masochistic to buy this more expensive share class instead of the cheaper PRTAX and pay a TF for the privilege. PRTAX is NTF at both brokerages.
  • Order I placed a few minutes ago went through.
  • So. Are y'all buying a lot of this fund?

    Do we even know what's in it yet?
  • Does not seem available (yet) at Vanguard..
  • WABAC said:

    So. Are y'all buying a lot of this fund?

    Do we even know what's in it yet?

    Good question. Even the TRP website shows zilch about holdings. There is a general statement about the fund's purpose and strategy, which includes monthly dividend distributions.
  • edited December 2023
    I am just testing and canceling at the last order step.

    I recently started simulating PRWCX (closed; NA to me) with 62% TCAF + 20% PYLD + 18% USFR. I am using that mix for VG domestic hybrids too that I dumped recently. I can tinker with that mix to adjust for PRCFX, may be 38% TCAF + 30% PYLD + 32% USFR.

    Edit/Add. The idea is to combine a blend/value equity fund with a multisector bond fund and an ultra-ST/ST bond fund (to control volatility inherent in equity and multisector bond). Many OEF alternatives can be found for longer runs of PV, but I haven't found a good mix yet.
  • edited December 2023
    I'm due to make my annual $10K contribution to PRWCX this month and was going to fork it into this new pup as an exploratory foothold at Schwab, but I'd really like to see the holdings and a touch of performance before doing so....which obviously is hard to do with newly-launched funds. Ergo I'll probably just watch it over the coming year, read the literature as it comes out, and then start forking some contributions into it next December if I feel good enough about it.
  • When the kids were young, and used to ask what was for dinner, I would say "Lizard lips."

    Let me know if y'all find lizard lips in the portfolio. :)
  • So. Are y'all buying a lot of this fund?

    Do we even know what's in it yet?

    Answer to both question , no.
  • edited December 2023
    So. Are y'all buying a lot of this fund?
    .....Yes
    Do we even know what's in it yet?
    .... How does the specific break down of stock choices and income matter? Ok, it doesn't matter much to me but I can understand many would like specific holding details. For me, it's the stated goals, the managers investment process and track record that matter most. I trust Giroux knows what to put in the portfolio more than I trust looking at a list of assets and giving my judgment that he's right or wrong.

    Maybe I'm too trusting of the manager and TRP itself, but I'm comfortable with the stated goals and discussions on the fund. I've had way too much in cash since late summer after transferring money out of my Schwab robo. I've been slowly putting that $ into conservative to moderate allocation/balanced funds. This is one of those horses in the stable.
  • edited December 2023
    @MikeM, not trying to be critical, just exercising my curiosity, and my weird sense of humor.

    And I agree with you about putting cash back to work that was formerly invested.

    But I wouldn't buy something I haven't looked at. My grandfather would roll over in his grave. Given the weight Giroux intends to give to fixed income, I would want to see information on the duration and quality. Bonds make me nervous.
  • I didn't take it as critical @WABAC. Not a bit. And of course you need to stay true to your comfort zone (and grandfather:) ). I'm sure more people feel the same as you.

    For me, and I know I may be in the minority, looking under the hood at specific equity or income investments just isn't going to change my opinion on management and their proven process and style. Do I think my opinion on equity and income holdings would be more correct than Giroux's and Farris Shuggi's? Answer to that one - no. I think I understand the fund goals so I'm investing in management.

    Someone here made the comment that the combination of PRCFX and PRWCX might be similar to the combination of Vanguard Wellington and Wellesley Income funds. Makes sense to me. That's a pretty nice combination for an old guy like me. 20% of my self managed portfolio is in PRWCX already.
  • T Rowe Price has posted more information about PRCFX on its website. Although detailed holdings are not yet available, the asset allocation is posted. Currently, it’s holding 51% in domestic bonds, 40% in domestic stocks, 5% cash, 4% foreign bonds and less than 1% in foreign stocks. Dividends will be paid monthly and capital gains annually.
  • Fidelity website now lists PRCFX as no transaction fee.

    I might just give it a shot. The largest single investment in our taxable account has been TAIFX, which has a similar asset allocation except it uses municipal bonds. It has been a decent fund and it’s supposedly managed to be tax efficient. However, its returns have significantly lagged Fidelity’s FMSDX, more so than can be explained by the lower yields of munis. I have been thinking about replacing TAIFX with FMSDX but might split the difference with PRCFX.




  • Tarwheel said:

    T Rowe Price has posted more information about PRCFX on its website. Although detailed holdings are not yet available, the asset allocation is posted. Currently, it’s holding 51% in domestic bonds, 40% in domestic stocks, 5% cash, 4% foreign bonds and less than 1% in foreign stocks. Dividends will be paid monthly and capital gains annually.

    I like that distribution scheme. On my larger IRA stakes I reinvest the dividends and realize the cap gains for shopping around.
  • If one already has PRWCX which has 40% in bonds, why would I select PRCFX which is 50% in bonds? I am just trying to understand
  • edited December 2023
    Per @Tarwheel's post, PRCFX is currently (51%+5% or) 56% in bonds.
    Per Fido and M*, as of the latest data on 09/30/23, PRWCX holds 32% bonds.
    Not enough detail yet on the current PRCFX stock and bond holdings to do a more detailed comparison of them.

    But the pairing of them appears to be more of a 70/30 fund and a 40/60 fund combo. In that respect only so far, it would be similar to holding VWENX and VWIAX. That's a pairing that used to be very common amongst investors given their respectively different stock/bond allocations and very different stock/bond strategies and holdings.

    Given what we know, including that PRWCX is a LG fund, IF PRCFX turns out to be a Blend or Value fund and/or has significantly different LC/MC/SC splits or bond holdings, pairing them would be all the more similar to the pairing of VWENX and VWIAX.
  • Even though the paint is still drying on it, it still would be nice to see its top-10 stock holdings and/or at least be presented a more granular breakdown of stock/bond sectors/types -- even in a general way.

    That said, contrary to my comment yesterday, I'm still on the fence about whether or not to toss this year's PRWCX contribution into it and see what happens. I mean, after holding PRWCX for well over a decade, I do have some idea about the PM's investing style and temperment...
  • edited December 2023
    @rforno,
    Agreed. We are LT holders of PRWCX as well. Very interested in PRCFX as a possible companion holding to PRWCX, but NOT if its stock/bond holdings and strategy are highly comparable to PRWCX. IF they are more the likes of a VWENX/VWIAX pairing, we're all in!
    Disclaimer: We used to hold both VWENX and VWIAX but hold neither now.
  • It will be interesting to see what yield PRCFX produces since bonds main focus.
  • If you include the 4% foreign bonds, then the bond allocation is 60% for the fund.
  • Roy said:

    If you include the 4% foreign bonds, then the bond allocation is 60% for the fund.

    I previously stated,
    "Per @Tarwheel's post, PRCFX is currently (51%+5% or) 56% in bonds."
    How are you getting to 60%?
  • Not quite: 51 +4 = 55%, yes? And 5% cash, per Tarwheel.
  • Oops, my bad for the confusion. Yes, I was including the 5% cash and 4% foreign bonds to make 60%.
Sign In or Register to comment.