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
FPA Crescent Fund Annual Report - December 31, 2015
The report looks at several topics including the performance of the fund in 2015 and their current view towards the high yield bond market. (I hope the link works for anyone who is interested....I accessed it via a brokerage account after being notified the report was available.)
"At first glance, it appears that we’ve declined as much as the market — down 11.71% since May 2015’s market peak against the S&P 500’s 11.30% decline — but that’s looking at the market only through the lens of the S&P 500. However, roughly half of our equity holdings (totaling almost a third of the Fund’s equity exposure) are not included in the S&P 500 index. Our quest for value has increasingly taken us overseas and our portfolio is more global than it has been in the past. We therefore consider the MSCI ACWI a pertinent alternative benchmark."
What?
"We look pretty good compared to a global all-equity benchmark"?
Uhhh ... the fund is 37% cash and 8.5% international stocks. That's way less global than either its Morningstar benchmark or Morningstar peer group.
Do some dd on JABAX, GLRBX (less equity), OAKBX (about the same recently), MAPOX, selected Vanguards people like, ICMBX, FPURX, even AOR, and decide. Be aware this may be a classic bailing too soon and not sticking longterm.
I have OAKBX along with AMRMX and others in my 401. OAKBX compared to AMRMX has worse numbers than the LV fund over the last year. In a downturn I would think the allocation fund would do better than a stock fund. I am considering culling OAKBX and splitting between stocks and bond fund choices myself. It seems as if the bond portion has added to the loses, not acted as a buffer of late. MAPOX and JABAX have both had recent manager changes while GLRBX has better performance numbers in the short term it is not considered a moderate allocation fund. Maybe the managers of FPACX and OAKBX have seen their best years.
Not a melt down, but I share everybody's concern of how a fund with Romick's cash component can barely stay even with any index he may want us to consider as a benchmark. @Mark said on January 17 in Off-Topic Then I thought of some other fairly noteworthy melt downs involving esteemed managers: Bill Miller (LMVTX), Bill Nygren (OAKLX) and Ken Heebner (CGMFX) who I thought at one time or the other were the sharper tools in the box; and I recalled folks hanging on through the storm and vowing to sell once they got back to the even plateau. Hence the question - does that work or do you just take your chips off the table and is there any studies that have delved into the matter. I'm quite aware of the sell decision thought process for mutual fund holdings yet sometimes leeway is granted. http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/73903/#Comment_73903 A comparison/alternative ? Value investing vs value-based investing.I'll take some divinity with that monthly dividend,please ! I started a position with the latter earlier this year.Crescent is top 5 holding in my portfolio.Tend to appreciate @davidrmoran comment "Be aware this may be a classic bailing too soon and not sticking longterm."
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND STRATEGY: The Fund seeks to generate equity-like returns over the long-term, take less risk than the market and avoid permanent impairment of capital. PHILOSOPHY: Absolute value investors. We seek genuine bargains rather than relatively attractive securities. FPACX http://www.fpafunds.com/crescent
A young and smaller go anywhere contender . Investment Objective: The Fund seeks current income while maintaining the potential for capital appreciation. The Fund has significant flexibility to achieve its investment objective by primarily investing in a broad universe of income-producing securities. These securities include debt and equity securities of companies in the U.S. and other markets around the world.
Values-based investing: We aim to analyze each potential investment’s ability to operate with integrity and create value for customers, employees, the environment, and other key stakeholders. While few companies may reach these ideals in every area of their business, these principles articulate the Advisor’s ideal characteristics of good corporate behavior. The Advisor makes no guarantee that fund investments will meet any or all of these characteristics. ETNMX http://eventidefunds.com/our-products/#!income http://eventidefunds.com/wp-content/uploads/Eventide-Multi-Asset-Income-Fund-Fact-Sheet-12-31-2015.pdf
Comments
What?
"We look pretty good compared to a global all-equity benchmark"?
Uhhh ... the fund is 37% cash and 8.5% international stocks. That's way less global than either its Morningstar benchmark or Morningstar peer group.
Underperformance doesn't bother me. Obfuscation does.
David
Romick going into CYA mode gives me serious pause about FPA (wife and I both invest with them).
Be aware this may be a classic bailing too soon and not sticking longterm.
Not a melt down, but I share everybody's concern of how a fund with Romick's cash component can barely stay even with any index he may want us to consider as a benchmark.
@Mark said on January 17 in Off-Topic
Then I thought of some other fairly noteworthy melt downs involving esteemed managers: Bill Miller (LMVTX), Bill Nygren (OAKLX) and Ken Heebner (CGMFX) who I thought at one time or the other were the sharper tools in the box; and I recalled folks hanging on through the storm and vowing to sell once they got back to the even plateau.
Hence the question - does that work or do you just take your chips off the table and is there any studies that have delved into the matter. I'm quite aware of the sell decision thought process for mutual fund holdings yet sometimes leeway is granted.
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/73903/#Comment_73903
A comparison/alternative ?
Value investing vs value-based investing.I'll take some divinity with that monthly dividend,please ! I started a position with the latter earlier this year.Crescent is top 5 holding in my portfolio.Tend to appreciate @davidrmoran comment "Be aware this may be a classic bailing too soon and not sticking longterm."
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND STRATEGY:
The Fund seeks to generate equity-like returns over the long-term, take less risk than the market and avoid permanent impairment of capital.
PHILOSOPHY:
Absolute value investors. We seek genuine bargains rather than relatively attractive securities.
FPACX
http://www.fpafunds.com/crescent
A young and smaller go anywhere contender .
Investment Objective: The Fund seeks current income while maintaining the potential for capital appreciation. The Fund has significant flexibility to achieve its investment objective by primarily investing in a broad universe of income-producing securities. These securities include debt and equity securities of companies in the U.S. and other markets around the world.
Values-based investing: We aim to analyze each potential investment’s ability to operate with integrity and create value for customers, employees, the environment, and other key stakeholders. While few companies may reach these ideals in every area of their business, these principles articulate the Advisor’s ideal characteristics of good corporate behavior. The Advisor makes no guarantee that fund investments will meet any or all of these characteristics.
ETNMX
http://eventidefunds.com/our-products/#!income
http://eventidefunds.com/wp-content/uploads/Eventide-Multi-Asset-Income-Fund-Fact-Sheet-12-31-2015.pdf