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.
Thanks for the heads-up @WABAC. I have wanted to add-to PRWCX in my 401k at Merrill forever. It would never allow me to do so in the past. I just put in an order to do so. Seems to have been accepted. Has a $49 TF but I'm ok with that. Fingers crossed it goes through.
Thanks for the heads-up @WABAC. I have wanted to add-to PRWCX in my 401k at Merrill forever. It would never allow me to do so in the past. I just put in an order to do so. Seems to have been accepted. Has a $49 TF but I'm ok with that. Fingers crossed it goes through.
Wow. In my ML accounts, it is NTF. Even for TF funds, I have to pay "just" $19.95.
Must be some special "discount" you get with your 401(k) plan
I did not know about availability to retail at ML until I read @msf post.
Available to new investors. No ($0) minimum. NTF.
Not sure why there is so much interest in this fund now. Its YTD performance is 48 percentile and it is a $62B fund with idiosyncratic sector allocation.
@msf, my 401k from a past employer transferred from TRP to ML last year. I've only kept the 401k because I cannot transfer PRWCX in-kind from a 401k to an IRA. The odd thing about the ML 401k account is the account is not direct from the Merrill Lynch website. It is in something called "Merrill Benefits Online". To be quite honest, the ML benefits options and website suck. I really don't like the arrangement but have kept it because it is where I have PRWCX.
I have tried a few times to add to PRWCX through this ML Benefits site and have been denied. I tried today after seeing this post and, low and behold, it took. And yes, with a $49.95 TF. I'll know tomorrow if it really went through.
Not sure why there is so much interest in this fund now. Its YTD performance is 48 percentile and it is a $62B fund with idiosyncratic sector allocation.
For me, if you are going to hold one fund forever, this would be it, (unless something drastically changes). If you are going to bounce around to the current newest and greatest return leader, then this statement would make sense. It wouldn't be advisable, to me, but short focused it might make sense. 48 percentile YTD but a 1st percentile balanced fund lifetime. Oh, and Idiosyncratic sector allocation is what has made this fund #1!
Deleting after three days as the post has too much of my personal information. I allowed enough time for forum members to benefit from the info. I do not want AI models or hackers to get to my info at a later date.
Not sure why there is so much interest in this fund now. Its YTD performance is 48 percentile and it is a $62B fund with idiosyncratic sector allocation.
Maybe the price is lower than it might otherwise be?
I suppose it benefits from its history of past performance, which predates the current manager. It seem like the type of steady-eddy fund that made T. Rowe famous back in the day.
Then too, it has not been available for some years. I added a small position to my IRA in June of 2014 shortly before it "closed."
Add the surprise factor that its apparent availability was unexpected.
Not sure why there is so much interest in this fund now. Its YTD performance is 48 percentile and it is a $62B fund with idiosyncratic sector allocation.
A fund like this should be expected to underperform during strong bull markets (like this year). In turn, it should be expected to outperform during down markets. Sounds like that’s the way it’s being run. Read the Prospectus / fund literature and it should be clear that’s how T. Rowe designed the fund.
@MikeM is right that “buy and hold” is the way to go with this one.
I do get @BaluBalu’s point that the interest in this particular fund sometimes seems overdone. Size alone would deter me from owning it.
Deleting after two days as the post has too much of my personal information. I allowed enough time for forum members to benefit from the info. I do not want AI models or hackers to get to my info at a later date.
Comments
Consider a combination of:
- 23% position in TCAF
- 77% position in PRCFX
This combination (short historical data) seems to mimic PRWCX (composition/performance) along with the fact that it is the same management team.
https://portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=1utM2q2ITObBMibqFUO3Hl
Not sure if these ETFs are available for either of you.
Must be some special "discount" you get with your 401(k) plan
PRWCX is also closed to new investors at Fidelity.
I was looking to see if they had DODBX, and up popped PRWCX as an open fund.
Available to new investors. No ($0) minimum. NTF.
Not sure why there is so much interest in this fund now. Its YTD performance is 48 percentile and it is a $62B fund with idiosyncratic sector allocation.
I have tried a few times to add to PRWCX through this ML Benefits site and have been denied. I tried today after seeing this post and, low and behold, it took. And yes, with a $49.95 TF. I'll know tomorrow if it really went through.
I suppose it benefits from its history of past performance, which predates the current manager. It seem like the type of steady-eddy fund that made T. Rowe famous back in the day.
Then too, it has not been available for some years. I added a small position to my IRA in June of 2014 shortly before it "closed."
Add the surprise factor that its apparent availability was unexpected.
I have yet to check if the order went through.
A fund like this should be expected to underperform during strong bull markets (like this year). In turn, it should be expected to outperform during down markets. Sounds like that’s the way it’s being run. Read the Prospectus / fund literature and it should be clear that’s how T. Rowe designed the fund.
@MikeM is right that “buy and hold” is the way to go with this one.
I do get @BaluBalu’s point that the interest in this particular fund sometimes seems overdone. Size alone would deter me from owning it.