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

I’ll never understand CEFs

edited June 13 in Fund Discussions
Several weeks ago I opened up a good sized position in Gabelli’s GDL fund. Had owned a much smaller amount for a couple months. Thinly traded with only a $95.7 Mil asset base. Took hours to acquire the desired number of shares. The CEF is an arbitrage fund that skims small profits from pending or nearly completed mergers & acquisitions. It’s the tamest CEF Gabelli offers with a record dating back 15+ years and which I’d expect to outpace cash by a percent or two over longer periods. (Gabelli himself is reported to own a big chunk.)

Averaging in at $8.32, the fund has gone nowhere in the short time I owned it. Held steady around $8.32. Today’s the ex-dividend date (12-cents per share). While the fund opened lower as expected ($8.26) it quickly bounced to $8.35, well above its average price in recent days. I would not have expected it to go x-dividend and then jump in price over what it closed the day before - especially with the present Mid-East turmoil.

I really don’t understand the logic here in a fund jumping higher on ex-dividend date after the dividend has been declared / pulled out. It would make more sense for investors to be pushing the price up in the days before the dividend is declared. Would be instructive to better understand investor behavior & psychology is these matters.

I

Comments

  • What trading securities do after ex-div is unpredictable - they may even go up enough to make up for distributions. CEFs are no exceptions.

    For GDL (high discount of 20%) that's involved in M&A arbitrage, there could be news related to one of its holdings. In looking at its portfolio holdings at M*, nothing jumped out, but I don't follow GDL in detail.

    BTW, GDL has managed-distribution policy, so some of the distribution can be ROC (18.75% in 2024).
  • edited June 13
    Thanks @yogibearbull. Yes, one common criticism of this one is the ROC portion of dividends. But that can be said of a lot of CEFs. If I ever hear that Gabelli has sold his big chunk I’ll head for the exit. Forsyth did a (mostly complementary) piece on the fund in Barron’s a few years ago. Mentioned Gabelli’s personal investment.

    PS - I spoke too early. The CEF pulled back to $8.29 late morning, which makes perfect sense. I can’t account for the brief spike in price that was reflected on several different pricing platforms. But CEFs do behave in erratic ways!
  • I've actually noticed a similar phenomenon with Pimco CEFs that I own. Like Yogi said, I never know if it is due to news about internal holdings, market gyrations in general, or if the drop in price triggered "value" buying.

    For instance, how do you separate today's drop from the overall equity fall on ME events?
  • edited June 13
    I guess the real lesson is not to watch daily price fluctuations. In hindsight the small AUM & thin trading may have led to price distortion. Seriously doubt I could have sold at the high reported price had I wanted to.

    The war (Iran) seems out for a long run. Knee jerk in equities today. Little consequence for long term investors.
  • Unlike OEFs or ETFs, CEFs price is purely determined by investor sentiment and not the underlying value of its holdings. As you may be aware, investors like to buy/sell around distribution dates, which drives the potential for price fluctuation.

    I tend to say away from thinly traded CEFs for the reasons described in this thread. I prefer CEFs with 6-9% distributions, at minimum $1B AUM, and 125,000 daily traded shares.
  • edited June 13
    Good points @PressmUP. It was just the unexpected price swings around X-dividend date that puzzled me. And I’ve noticed the same with other CEFs. You helped by noting these strange price swings are common.

    I’m aware CEFs are priced by sentiment and do not often trade at NAV. I owned 15-16 a month or so ago and commented proudly on my ”CEF basket” here a few times. Many of them were doing very well. But when I pulled up the 2008 performance (where it was available) I learned that several of my “hottest” ones had lost between 50% and 65%* in 2008 alone. So, I pulled back out of caution. At age 79 I’m not going to go chasing anything lower as I did in ‘08.

    Still own 11 CEFs. Most are somewhat sedate and income oriented - even though I realize they aren’t the “hottest rods” on the block! BTW - GDL held up well in 2008 losing just 8%.

    Yes - Best to avoid thinly traded holdings. Tough to get on the fire escape when needed! :)

    * UTF is the one that lost 65% in 2008. Yet, I’ve come across well meaning financial articles describing the fund as an excellent “conservative” choice ”for older investors”. Obviously those writers hadn’t bothered to pull up its past performance.
  • Agreed, good points.
  • 2008-09 was a tough year overall. UTF is a solid fund, if purchased at the proper point...which goes for many funds. I've owned it for the last 5 years and it's done well, though it's richly valued currently.
  • Hopefully, what happened to CEFs during the GFC won't be repeated.

    At the time time, many CEFs relied on auction-rate preferreds (ARPs) for debt. These preferreds had weekly, biweekly or monthly auctions to reset their floating rates. ARP sponsors were to make last bids if other investors didn't show up at any auction.

    Nice theory!

    GFC was a debt crisis. Even big banks needed federal rescues.

    First, investors didn't show up at ARP auctions to bid.

    Second, ARP sponsors refused to make last bids.

    Third, CEFs couldn't arrange any replacement of bridge financing and were in violation of their debt covenants.

    Fourth, under the SEC regulations, several CEFs were forced to deleverage - i.e. sell at bottom prices. Results were just disastrous.

    Now, the ARP financing has disappeared. CEFs rely on better and more stable financing now.

    But the next crisis may show other problems.
  • edited June 13
    Absolutely correct Yogi. I don’t expect another ‘08. But it’s a great “stress test” I think to apply to different kinds of investments if you are very risk averse. 2022 wasn’t a typical year either in that bonds and equities do not normally fall out of bed together. But I also check a fund’s ‘22 performance just to see how it held up against other products under really adverse conditions.

    I owned UTF for a while after the March / April selloff but sold it recently. No. I don’t think it will have another year like ‘08. I also like Cohen & Steers a lot. Still own 2 of their OEFs (RAPAX & LPXAX) plus FOF.
Sign In or Register to comment.