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.
@WABAC : "Did some minor tax-lost harvesting selling FYLD and IHDG while I still had a little to the plus side." One ETF on the plus side & one on the minus side ? Or had sold a previous winner(s
@WABAC : "Did some minor tax-lost harvesting selling FYLD and IHDG while I still had a little to the plus side." One ETF on the plus side & one on the minus side ? Or had sold a previous winner(s
Just curious, Derf
One was up 5%, and the other was up 4%, since purchase. Lots of dividends down the drain obviously, but I don't see much prospect for improvement in those funds for some time to come.
MOAT position sold; I had owned this etf in various amounts since 2012, but have been shifting away from it for several months. Beneficiaries have been CGDV, PVAL, and TCAF.
MOAT position sold; I had owned this etf in various amounts since 2012, but have been shifting away from it for several months. Beneficiaries have been CGDV, PVAL, and TCAF.
Did you get a chance to write to VanEck about the comprehensive index?
Pfizer (PFE) is now yielding nearly 7% dividend (if they do not cut!), in case you are into return on investment. How fortunes have changed in such a short time for this company that presumably saved us from near extinction!
Pfizer (PFE) is now yielding nearly 7% dividend (if they do not cut!), in case you are into return on investment. How fortunes have changed in such a short time for this company that presumably saved us from near extinction!
Pfizer (PFE) is now yielding nearly 7% dividend (if they do not cut!), in case you are into return on investment. How fortunes have changed in such a short time for this company that presumably saved us from near extinction!
Viagra?
You mean it saved us from near extinction? Interesting thought.
Income investors in this forum do not seem to be drawn to PFE; may be they are more concerned about return of investment than we give them credit for.
"President-elect Donald Trump announced on Nov. 14 that he is nominating Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services under his new administration in 2025. RFK Jr. has strong views on public health and, if confirmed, could use his position to make changes at several of the 13 HHS divisions. In our Nov. 8 note, we discussed the potential tailwinds of a Trump administration, including possible repeal of the Medicare negotiation provision in the Inflation Reduction Act, less Federal Trade Commission scrutiny of acquisitions, and a likely continuation of lower corporate taxes. However, if RFK’s nomination is confirmed, we expect more “wild card” headwinds to the industry will come to fruition. As the HHS covers the US Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an HHS secretary skeptical of vaccine and obesity drug benefits could work to erode public trust, put up roadblocks for approval of new vaccines, and prevent the CDC from recommending any vaccines that make it through the approval process. With less federal guidance, we think it is possible certain states could waver in support of broad mandates for childhood vaccines. All of these could weigh on sales of vaccines in the US, including covid vaccine makers Moderna and BioNTech and big biopharma vaccine makers like GSK (we model 14% of GSK revenue from US vaccine sales in 2024), Pfizer (12%), Merck (9%), and Sanofi (6%)."
Comments
One ETF on the plus side & one on the minus side ? Or had sold a previous winner(s
Just curious, Derf
Good luck to all
Decisions, decisions.
Income investors in this forum do not seem to be drawn to PFE; may be they are more concerned about return of investment than we give them credit for.
"President-elect Donald Trump announced on Nov. 14 that he is nominating Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services under his new administration in 2025. RFK Jr. has strong views on public health and, if confirmed, could use his position to make changes at several of the 13 HHS divisions. In our Nov. 8 note, we discussed the potential tailwinds of a Trump administration, including possible repeal of the Medicare negotiation provision in the Inflation Reduction Act, less Federal Trade Commission scrutiny of acquisitions, and a likely continuation of lower corporate taxes. However, if RFK’s nomination is confirmed, we expect more “wild card” headwinds to the industry will come to fruition. As the HHS covers the US Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an HHS secretary skeptical of vaccine and obesity drug benefits could work to erode public trust, put up roadblocks for approval of new vaccines, and prevent the CDC from recommending any vaccines that make it through the approval process. With less federal guidance, we think it is possible certain states could waver in support of broad mandates for childhood vaccines. All of these could weigh on sales of vaccines in the US, including covid vaccine makers Moderna and BioNTech and big biopharma vaccine makers like GSK (we model 14% of GSK revenue from US vaccine sales in 2024), Pfizer (12%), Merck (9%), and Sanofi (6%)."