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
Different tickers, but what's the difference? PRSAX, PRSNX
Thanks, Vert. And I suppose I'm glad that I'm in PREMX with no sales charge or whatever. I dunno why anyone would choose a fund with a 12b-1 fee when there's a clone WITHOUT the 12b-1. Eh?
Many years ago, Citibank had a discount brokerage (Citicorp Investment Services), and provided a decent suite of bank services if you had a few $K in combined accounts, including their brokerage account.
They had a very limited, mostly high ER set of NTF funds. But they did offer TRP Advisor class shares (the ones with 12b-1 fees) NTF. I did a mental calculation and figured that it was costing me just a few bucks a year (I kept just the min required for the bank services).
Seemed worth it at the time. Since then, I've left Citibank and transferred the shares to TRP. Price did a tax-free exchange of the shares into Investor class shares (no 12b-1 fees).
@msf But you did enjoy and were grateful for the extra customer service and advice you received while you were paying the extra 12b-1 fee at Citibank, didn't you?
@Crash 1. do you have any clue what the difference between PRSNX and their new Global Unconstrained Bond fund will be? I was thinking of PRSNX as a global bond fund long before it was put into that category, and it has never seemed (to me) that it has had too many constraints on its operation. I'm not clear about just which constraints they will be "unleashing" with their new offering. I guess it's just wait and see? 2. Now, don't go turning on the gas and putting your head in the oven about this, but I just went to TRP to purchase a few more shares of PREMX and PRSNX, and.... the NAV listed for both of them was lower than what I saw posted elsewhere Friday afternoon. Sure enough, I then went to my Fidelity watch list and the NAVs are listed as of 3/12. So, maybe the DBMS people broke early at Morningstar (last week) and at Fidelity (this week) for a FAC "mtg"; or.... there are some problems developing in Bond Land, whereby we just aren't going to get current NAVs in certain circumstances. [I would note last Friday there was some turbulence in MBSs, and this Friday there was some turbulence in EM bonds] Just speculating here.
@msf But you did enjoy and were grateful for the extra customer service and advice you received while you were paying the extra 12b-1 fee at Citibank, didn't you?
@Crash 1. do you have any clue what the difference between PRSNX and their new Global Unconstrained Bond fund will be? I was thinking of PRSNX as a global bond fund long before it was put into that category, and it has never seemed (to me) that it has had too many constraints on its operation. I'm not clear about just which constraints they will be "unleashing" with their new offering. I guess it's just wait and see? 2. Now, don't go turning on the gas and putting your head in the oven about this, but I just went to TRP to purchase a few more shares of PREMX and PRSNX, and.... the NAV listed for both of them was lower than what I saw posted elsewhere Friday afternoon. Sure enough, I then went to my Fidelity watch list and the NAVs are listed as of 3/12. So, maybe the DBMS people broke early at Morningstar (last week) and at Fidelity (this week) for a FAC "mtg"; or.... there are some problems developing in Bond Land, whereby we just aren't going to get current NAVs in certain circumstances. [I would note last Friday there was some turbulence in MBSs, and this Friday there was some turbulence in EM bonds] Just speculating here.
Looking at the objectives for the two funds at Price's website:
The unconstrained is, well, unconstrained as to average maturity while PRSNX expects to keep a range of "4-15 years" average maturity;
The unconstrained will likely contain less junk bonds, "up to 30%" as opposed to PRSNX having "up to 65%" junk;
And it seems the unconstrained will usually include a bit more foreign, "at least 40%" as opposed to PRSNX with "up to 50%".
In practice, I'm not sure that there will be a big difference between them.
Thank you for doing that homework, @Vert. PREMX holds more than a tiny bit of Ukraine debt, and that is getting hammered. I just saw a thing in WSJ on Friday or Saturday. The political and military junk going on over there is not helping PREMX, either, because the fund is also holding RUSSIAN bonds, too. Of course, the portfolio is pretty spread-out. I continue to own it and reinvest gains. PREMX is in the midst of quite a soft patch, and PRSNX is not lighting up the sky, either. I got into PREMX in 2010 at $13.26. Since then, I've reinvested ALL gains, and just bought a new slug of shares last month. It's never clawed its way back to $13.26, though. @heezsafe: if I attempted to intelligently engage your question, I'm afraid I'd be "in over my head" very quickly. I'm awful sorry...
Comments
Many years ago, Citibank had a discount brokerage (Citicorp Investment Services), and provided a decent suite of bank services if you had a few $K in combined accounts, including their brokerage account.
They had a very limited, mostly high ER set of NTF funds. But they did offer TRP Advisor class shares (the ones with 12b-1 fees) NTF. I did a mental calculation and figured that it was costing me just a few bucks a year (I kept just the min required for the bank services).
Seemed worth it at the time. Since then, I've left Citibank and transferred the shares to TRP. Price did a tax-free exchange of the shares into Investor class shares (no 12b-1 fees).
@Crash
1. do you have any clue what the difference between PRSNX and their new Global Unconstrained Bond fund will be? I was thinking of PRSNX as a global bond fund long before it was put into that category, and it has never seemed (to me) that it has had too many constraints on its operation. I'm not clear about just which constraints they will be "unleashing" with their new offering. I guess it's just wait and see?
2. Now, don't go turning on the gas and putting your head in the oven about this, but I just went to TRP to purchase a few more shares of PREMX and PRSNX, and.... the NAV listed for both of them was lower than what I saw posted elsewhere Friday afternoon. Sure enough, I then went to my Fidelity watch list and the NAVs are listed as of 3/12. So, maybe the DBMS people broke early at Morningstar (last week) and at Fidelity (this week) for a FAC "mtg"; or.... there are some problems developing in Bond Land, whereby we just aren't going to get current NAVs in certain circumstances. [I would note last Friday there was some turbulence in MBSs, and this Friday there was some turbulence in EM bonds] Just speculating here.
Looking at the objectives for the two funds at Price's website:
The unconstrained is, well, unconstrained as to average maturity while PRSNX expects to keep a range of "4-15 years" average maturity;
The unconstrained will likely contain less junk bonds, "up to 30%" as opposed to PRSNX having "up to 65%" junk;
And it seems the unconstrained will usually include a bit more foreign, "at least 40%" as opposed to PRSNX with "up to 50%".
In practice, I'm not sure that there will be a big difference between them.