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


Fidelity rep just now, when asked why their database shows a quote (but only a quote) for these two funds:

In researching the fund further, it appears that DSEUX is a proprietary fund to Doubleline Shiller. That means that it can be traded only through Doubleline Shiller. Some companies will do this with certain funds.

Phooey. Would rather not open any new accounts .... This surely is the case at Merrill as well, where you cannot buy these new (month-old) funds either. Thus far, M* shows nothing under Purchase, Brokerage.


  • @davidmoran

    For what interest it holds...

    I spoke with a gentleman from the DL Advisory Group on Jan. 13th about brokerage availability. He said that the plans are to have DLEUX/DSEUX available on every platform possible, that it should be available for purchase at Schwab very shortly, that Fidelity typically takes reverse inquiry, and after that they make it available. He was unsure about how long it will take for Vanguard or Scottrade to approve the fund for purchase.

    He added that fund availability works two ways: It is DL and the custodian. He said that DL is able to get on most of them within the first three months of the year.

  • Wow, thanks for further digging. We shd be all set, then.
  • @davidrmoran,

    According to a test trade I just made in my TDAmeritrade retirement account, DSEUX is available for a $5K minimum with a TF. Since I am grandfathered into the ThinkorSwim commission structure, the TF is only $15 each for buys and sells. For some reason, DLEUX is not available at TDAmeritrade.

  • edited January 2017
    TDA appears to be the first (but the $100k min one only !), then. Perhaps Fido and Merrill will follow this month, or so. Thanks.
  • edited January 2017
    According to my test trade at TDAmeritrade, DSEUX has a $5K not a $100K minimum for retirement accounts with a TF.

  • I guess I'll wait for DLEUX. I do have an IRA at TDA, but the TF deters me. It would require a big position held for a long time to equal the .25% lower ER for DSEUX.
  • Understood, but not sure that's the right way to think of it, at least how I try not to think of it. I want to get in, period. I do avoid TFs where possible. But I still hold a lot of DSENX because Merrill simply doesn't offer DSEEX.
  • Same here. DSENX at Merrill. If they offer DLEUX at Merril NTF, I might buy it, else not.
  • I bought DLENX and DSENX near the offering date and am still negative on DLENX although positive on the combo.
    This seems to offer global bonds and European stocks. Correct me if I'm wrong. Global bonds, I understand. European stocks in the time of Brexit I understand (if they are really smart). But why limit the fund to European stocks later?
    Enlighten me. Is this a short term play?
  • Know nothing about DLENX and EM in general except how speculative / risky most deem it to be for the short term; sorry.
  • @davidrmoran,

    I listen to Meb Faber's podcasts, which are flat-out excellent. He is very down to earth and in no way is he influenced by celebrity. In show #36, he was particularly bullish on non-US developed equities, as they have lagged US equities for the trailing 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods, which is apparently a very unusual period of underperformance. And he said that the CAPE method of investing beats the market 60% of the time, which is pretty decent as I see it. So DSEUX is now on the top of my potential buy list.

  • Thanks. That is one usual argument for foreign investment. But do study that Waggoner article I have now posted 2-3 times.
  • I don't get the attraction to this fund. What am I missing. There are a lot of pretty decent EM bond funds.
  • Two different funds are being conflated here now, a DL EM bond fund and their new CAPE-like auto-value-trading DLEUX / DSEUX one.
  • edited January 2017

    I reread the Waggoner Article, and I think that one must dig a little deeper than he does.

    Ferri's Take

    Israelsen's Quantitative View (1970-2006)

    Israelsen's Analysis 2001-2015

    Forbes Article on the Israelsen Model

    From the Israelsen data, I'm inclined to believe that it is beneficial to own foreign developed and EM equities.


  • Thanks. Kinda weak articles and arguments, seemed to me, except the middle Israelsen one that starts in 01, bad case for US LC.

    But sure for the 7Twelve. He is like Merriman and his Lazys.

    Not sure how much deeper most need to go than this, though (Waggoner updated, from 2015):
    ... do international funds help your portfolio? In terms of return, it's hard to argue that they have, at least within most investors' experience. The past 25 years, large-cap U.S. funds have gained an average 691%, vs. 338% for international funds. U.S. funds have beaten international funds the past five, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years.
    You could argue that European stocks are cheap, relative to U.S. stocks, which is quite true. But then again, they nearly always are, because they don't grow as rapidly. You could also argue that there are more foreign companies than there are U.S. companies, and that investing in them gives you broader market exposure. That's also true. Then again, companies in the S&P 500 get 46.2% of their earnings from overseas, and that's enough international exposure for anyone.
    Why have U.S. investors rushed to international funds? In part because much of U.S. mutual fund purchases are controlled by financial advisers, and conventional wisdom is that a stock portfolio should have about 20% of its assets in international stocks. As of the end of November, about 25% of all garden-variety mutual funds were in international stocks, up from about 8.6% in 2000. Advisers have been doing their jobs.

    Israelsen is one of those advisers, and his 01-15 data do look compelling. But who do you know (and who here?) who would want the same small amount in US LC as in REIT, cash, commodities, or NR?

    Much less stick with it.

    Not I.

    And his is really an arg for very broad diversification, not for foreign, which is 17% of total (and note that that total = 93% of egg) and half of that foreign is EM.

    (Trying to think what EM, NR, and commod vehicles there were in 2001.)
  • The Israelsen analysis is quantitative and he clearly shows the added benefit of the sequential addition of developed foreign equities. Waggoner's superficial analysis disregards risk parameters, which clearly benefit from the addition of developed foreign equities. Risk parameters have always mattered and will always matter, and must be considered in evaluating whether or not to include various asset classes in a diversified portfolio.

  • edited January 2017
    I must have missed something. What sequential? (What was the sequence?) How much developed foreign? Where more than his wee sliver? Quantify and specify the risk reduction you say is taking place with their addition. Or do you just mean some volatility reduction / smoothing? I found only the 7Twelve stuff of interest, not the other equivocal articles, which actually seemed to mildly make Waggoner's point. What have I missed?

    Also, go to M* and put in TWEIX, OAKIX, and LV. Compare the three from 1994 (max) and then 15y-14-13-10-5-3-1y. Note that only the 01-02-03 start points (= Israelsen) show foreign outperformance. Maybe there are other mfunds or etfs that would make the case better? I somehow doubt it. I guess this too is superficial, though.
  • Please take a look at page 25 of this Article. I am not attacking Waggoner, but I prefer a quantitative approach which includes risk parameters. No worries.


  • edited February 2017
    That article is 10y old. I think we probably are close to violent agreement. I do not argue against diversification in principle, and have been reading about the Lazy portfolios forever, longer than my following Israelsen, which has been a long time also. Defa likewise. I also hold no particular brief for Waggoner, and even he does not push the point too strongly. The thread got diverted because someone introduced EM a la DL.
    So my point was only that foreign has not added a lot good or value for anyone's US equities portfolio in a looong time, which is indisputable. (See Bogle.) Whether one should do it anyway is almost a separate question, and based on their beliefs. When DLEUX becomes available to my accounts, assuming it does, I will certainly throw some money at it. But DSEEX / CAPE / auto-rebalancing SP500 does fine for many, has plenty of foreign exposure built in, as does say FLPSX, and therefore adding more foreign is a personal choice, as you say involving risk tolerance. If I were interested in rulebook quant approaches I would do Vang total market or total world approaches, or one of the handy AO_ family, as I have posted about before (AOA, AOR,AOM, AOK).
  • @davidmoran DSEUX is available at Fido with TF. DLEUX is not (yet) available.
  • openice said:

    DSEUX is available at Fido with TF. DLEUX is not (yet) available.

    $5K min in IRAs, but $100K min in taxable accounts.

  • and $50 in all cases
Sign In or Register to comment.