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

David Snowball's March Commentary Is Now Available


  • How quickly we forget WOGSX, POGSX, ROGSX et. al. I guess 2000 is a long time back and now we are noticing POGSX again:-D. Well I will never go back.

    And I'm already in Polen Global Growth. Check!

    HNASX, to buy when Scottrade transfers into TD, since former does not have it NTF but later does and I could use growth fund. Hopefully I will buy after a nice correction.

  • I also was surprised by the mention of POGSX.
    I have to confess that it was probably my worst investment mistake ever.
    $10,000 invested early 2000 was transformed in less than $2,000 by September 2002.
    It has taken the fund until June 2016 to break even.
    Never again, it would take much stronger record to convince me.
  • edited March 2017
  • I remember well when "get yourself a little WOGSX" had the same role in portfolio recs as "get yourself a little POAGX" has now.

    After unwinding that position, no more oaks, red, white, black, or pin.
    But great if you have made them work for you!

    I think you meant POGSX?
  • @VintageFreak: I meant WOGSX. But as I contributed to thread drift, I have deleted my comment.
  • For what interest it holds, the manager - who came onboard in 2005 - seems entirely sympathetic to your complaints about the funds though, given that his dad founded the firm he needs to be a bit circumspect.

    His argument, I think, is that the funds were once 100% pedal to the metal: buy great, growing companies and hold them, volatility be damned. The results were great, until they weren't.

    His addition to the discipline seems to be the macro overlay: start with the question of whether you should be seeking to embrace or withdraw from risk first, then look at the best options within that strategic vision.

    If you look at 2000-02, before his time, the fund lost 88% - 5000 basis points more than its peers and took 14 years to record.

    Compared that to 2007-09, when he was in charge. The fund lost 54%, 400 basis points more than its peers but had fully recovered by April 2010.

    During the current upcycle, it's maximum drawdown was 20.8%, 100 basis points more than its peers and it bounced back far more quickly than they did.

    To be clear: the fund is more aggressive than I am, so I'm not ever likely to add it to my personal holdings. That having been said, (1) it's not his father's Pin Oak and (2) it's an interesting answer to the "where can I get market-beating returns?" question. It feels like investors put managers in an incredible bind: they flee from active funds because they don't beat the ETFs and flee from active funds because they do, apparently in the belief that ETFs offer ...


    In any case, I did approach Pin Oak with consider caution and skepticism. The combination of the numbers and the story convinced me that folks who dislike my normal conservatism (Intrepid Endurance at 70% cash, RiverPark Short-Term at 3% and FPA Crescent at 45% bonds and cash) would like the opportunity to consider the alternative.

    As ever,

  • Normally I think, high PE Ratio funds are associated with high volatility and risk, but POGSX has a PE of 16.83, 2 points less than it's benchmark and 1.5 points less than it's category average according to M*.
Sign In or Register to comment.