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.
In indexing, completion index is that complete the total beyond something selective. So, there is SP500 (VFIAX / VOO) and completion index (VEXAX / VXF) that add up to the total stock market (VTSAX / VTI).
One can say that VEXAX = VTSAX - VFIAX, or VXF = VTI - VOO.
Thanks yogi. That blurb has just enough verbiage beyond the page I cited to make things click. The way I read it (YMMV) is that PIA's center of attention is individual clients (separately managed accounts).
For those clients (not for fund investors) it is difficult to include higher risk classes of securities. That is because each separate account does not allocate enough dollars to those riskier asset classes to adequately diversify them. So instead of adding a few junk bonds to each SMA, PIA pools those dollars into mutual funds such as PIAMX.
PIA offers these mutual funds to retail investors because it can, not because they were created for the retail market.
From that perspective, "completion" makes sense, sort of. PIA is "completing" the SMA accounts with asset classes that would otherwise be inaccessible or poorly diversified for those investors.
So I believe the answer to crash's question about including IG bonds is yes, PIA does include IG bonds in the SMA portfolios. They don't seem to have much interest in retail investors per se.
I'm getting an education. Very late last night, I also uncovered the fact that PIAMX is CLOSED---- though wonderful M* asserts it is open. Horsefeathers, stinky poopy. Wasted time. Thanks for the explanations. Lessons learned, as I go sliding down the Razor Blade of Life.
I'm getting an education. Very late last night, I also uncovered the fact that PIAMX is CLOSED---- though wonderful M* asserts it is open. Horsefeathers, stinky poopy. Wasted time. Thanks for the explanations. Lessons learned, as I go sliding down the Razor Blade of Life.
Take for what it is worth, IMO, when you are retired, the only good use of your time, other than to look after your physical health, is to learn new things whether that results in making more money or not is not as important. You are doing good.
"Take for what it is worth, IMO, when you are retired, the only good use of your time, other than to look after your physical health, is to learn new things... whether that results in making more money or not is not as important."
@Crash If you were intrigued by PIAMX, you might want to investigate PHYSX. According to MFO Premium, the two funds have the same managers and very similar portfolios, although PIAMX has an expense ratio of .20% versus .86% for PHYSX.
@Crash If you were intrigued by PIAMX, you might want to investigate PHYSX. According to MFO Premium, the two funds have the same managers and very similar portfolios, although PIAMX has an expense ratio of .20% versus .86% for PHYSX.
Glad for all the inputs. I'll check out PHYSX. ...Surprised Institutional shares cab be had with $1k minimum. ...But Schwab lists minimum entry at $2.5k.
And there is the transaction fee. The yield is about a half percent higher than my largest junk holding. Not worth it. But "keep those cards and letters coming." ---Dean Martin.
@Crash If you were intrigued by PIAMX, you might want to investigate PHYSX. According to MFO Premium, the two funds have the same managers and very similar portfolios, although PIAMX has an expense ratio of .20% versus .86% for PHYSX.
Glad for all the inputs. I'll check out PHYSX. ...Surprised Institutional shares cab be had with $1k minimum. ...But Schwab lists minimum entry at $2.5k.
And there is the transaction fee. The yield is about a half percent higher than my largest junk holding. Not worth it. But "keep those cards and letters coming." ---Dean Martin.
Portfolio Visualizer shows the two funds very much in sync, though there is a distinct drop in correlation (still at the 99%+ level) in the first half of 2023. It's as if one fund dropped a particular holding or swapped one out for another.
PV also shows that the two funds' returns over the lifetime of PIAMX (the shorter-lived fund) differ by 0.66%, exactly the difference in the funds' ERs. Though PHYSX is slightly more volatile and has a worse max drawdown.
PHYSX is available NTF with a $100 min at Firstrade. At least that's what it says on my trade entry page (I've a closed account so I can't enter a test trade).
Comments
MACS = Managed Account Completion Shares
Page on MACS (not very helpful IMHO): https://www.pacificincome.com/mutualfunds/completion-funds/
Fund page: https://www.pacificincome.com/mutualfund/pia-high-yield-macs/
Prospectus: https://www.pacificincome.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/PIA-BBB-MBS-HY-MACS-Fund-prospectus-2024-1.pdf
In indexing, completion index is that complete the total beyond something selective. So, there is SP500 (VFIAX / VOO) and completion index (VEXAX / VXF) that add up to the total stock market (VTSAX / VTI).
One can say that VEXAX = VTSAX - VFIAX, or VXF = VTI - VOO.
For other examples, see https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/345/thread
But from the description of PIA-MACS, it look like they are evaluating the "complete" universe of something and then selecting a subset. IMO, they should have found a better terminology or description.
https://www.pacificincome.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/MACS-White-Paper-12-23.pdf
For those clients (not for fund investors) it is difficult to include higher risk classes of securities. That is because each separate account does not allocate enough dollars to those riskier asset classes to adequately diversify them. So instead of adding a few junk bonds to each SMA, PIA pools those dollars into mutual funds such as PIAMX.
PIA offers these mutual funds to retail investors because it can, not because they were created for the retail market.
From that perspective, "completion" makes sense, sort of. PIA is "completing" the SMA accounts with asset classes that would otherwise be inaccessible or poorly diversified for those investors.
So I believe the answer to crash's question about including IG bonds is yes, PIA does include IG bonds in the SMA portfolios. They don't seem to have much interest in retail investors per se.
@ BaluBalu- Words for us older folks to live by!
...Surprised Institutional shares cab be had with $1k minimum.
...But Schwab lists minimum entry at $2.5k.
And there is the transaction fee. The yield is about a half percent higher than my largest junk holding. Not worth it. But "keep those cards and letters coming." ---Dean Martin.
M* also asserts that DFA OEF funds are open. And they are. Though you need to go through a DFA-approved financial advisor. At a cost, of course.
Similarly, you can buy the PIA MACS funds through wrap accounts that are subadvised by PIA. "PIA currently participates in approximately 30 Retail Wrap-Fee Programs as a sub-adviser or under a dual contract arrangement."
https://www.morganstanley.com/content/dam/msdotcom/en/wealth/investmentsolutions/pdfs/adv/pacificincomeadv.pdf
M* doesn't say that buying shares is easy or cheap. Just that new positions can be opened. Portfolio Visualizer shows the two funds very much in sync, though there is a distinct drop in correlation (still at the 99%+ level) in the first half of 2023. It's as if one fund dropped a particular holding or swapped one out for another.
PV also shows that the two funds' returns over the lifetime of PIAMX (the shorter-lived fund) differ by 0.66%, exactly the difference in the funds' ERs. Though PHYSX is slightly more volatile and has a worse max drawdown.
PHYSX is available NTF with a $100 min at Firstrade. At least that's what it says on my trade entry page (I've a closed account so I can't enter a test trade).