|
Post by anitya on Dec 2, 2023 21:24:22 GMT
yogibearbull , PIMCO website updated PDX for Dec 1 information but the portfolio composition reported is still as of Oct 31, 2023. My recollection from prior years was that PIMCO updates their CEF portfolio composition once every month, a few days after the month end. I could be wrong. What has been its practice lately? I bought some PDX last week, anticipating rally for risk and increase in distribution frequency and annual amount. The anticipation on distribution fell flat and now wait for the portfolio composition. The fund keeping its quarterly distribution frequency further confirms that the fund is likely going to be more of an allocation fund (to your earlier point) than more of a fixed income fund. Their fixed income funds (even those with some equity flavors) distribute monthly. Of course, PIMCO itself classifies the fund in the "MULTI ASSET, REAL ASSET, EQUITIES, US LARGE EQUITY" category. The fund Objective says, "The Fund seeks current income as a primary objective and capital appreciation as a secondary objective." (The same Objective that PDI, PDO, & PAXS state.)
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Dec 3, 2023 8:02:33 GMT
Here is a Capecod post from elsewhere:
...I noticed that cefconnect.com updated YTD total returns through 11/30. For anyone still trapped in the 2023 has been awful camp, consider:
TOTAL RETURNS through 11/30
PDI 10.5% PHK 10.7% PAXS 8.9% PDO 6.3% PFN 9.3% RCS 27.5% PCN 14.3% PTY 27.3%
DSL 2% GOF 0.2% BHK 7.7% WDI 16.4% KIO 22.7% DMO 10% BIT 16.2% BKT 2% HPS O.7% FFC (1.3%) PTA 12.9% LDP 4.5%
Regards, Dick
----------------------------------------------------- R48
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Dec 5, 2023 3:15:57 GMT
Hmmm, PDI up 0.84% today to $18.11/share.
Seems like something may be up at PIMCO. Spcl dividend coming?? Dividend in Dec back to 100% coverage, thus no need to cut?
standby
R48
|
|
|
Post by keppelbay on Dec 5, 2023 10:04:58 GMT
It may be a bit optimistic to hope for a year end special from PDI. negatives: - NII coverage has improved, but still only about 80% as of the last release (Oct). - Monthly 19a reports show <80% coverage for the past several months.
positives: -NAV has turned upward recently, so they are probably not burning capital with the montly distributions.
-Lots of potential for non-NII income to cover the distibutions (if so, it is not yet apparent in the UNII report).
my conclusions: Although PDI has been issuing 19a's and coverage ratios have been low for months, they did not cut the distribution. I believe this means that they have the non-NII cash flow to cover it. It would not be responsible to erode NAV by distributing paid-in capital. Emphasis here is on belief, not knowledge.
I don't think we have any clear indicators to suggest a year end special for PDI. As you say, the price action may indicate that other folks have a different opinion. On the other hand, I would attribute the recent tightening of the discount on PAXS to anticipation of a year end special. We'll know soon.
Last year the announcement of year end specials was on Dec 5th...
|
|
|
Post by richardsok on Dec 5, 2023 13:36:29 GMT
I'd say it is perfectly possible PDI has non-UNII cash flow to distribute. But for long as I can remember in following Pimco monthly UNII reports, they have never issued a special distribution unless the fund in question reported large UNII late in the year. And, if memory serves, the special distribution was always significantly less than the previously reported UNII. I'll de delighted if PDI announces a spec dist for PDI this year -- but neither it, nor ANY of the Pimco CEFs report meaningful UNII as of the most recent report. I've elsewhere noted PAXS has been greatly exceeding 100% coverage for the last six months, and that the over-coverage has even been increasing in the last three months -- yet PAXS curiously reports no UNII. I'm not counting on Santa this year.
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Dec 5, 2023 13:58:34 GMT
PAXS inception was only 1/31/22, so it hasn't had time to accumulate UNII (lifetime). It started out with a conservative distribution that was bumped up in 09/2022 and there was also a special distribution in 12/2022.
|
|
|
Post by keppelbay on Dec 5, 2023 15:29:36 GMT
PAXS inception was only 1/31/22, so it hasn't had time to accumulate UNII (lifetime). It started out with a conservative distribution that was bumped up in 09/2022 and there was also a special distribution in 12/2022. I know that you know that UNII is cumulative since inception, so "hasn't had time to accumulate" doesn't really 'add up' ...
Tracking the relationship between NII and UNII over a few months makes it clear that UNII is not just the cumulative difference between NII and distribution. Some of this difference may be account for by non-NII income (eg when UNII doesn't go down even though there is a shortfall of NII in the month). But it gets worse.
At the start of the fiscal year, UNII went from 0.00 (end of June) to negative 0.15 in July - a month where NII was 0.09 and 0.1494 was distributed. At worst, overdistributing NII by 6c should have taken UNII to negative 0.06. So apparently the 9c of NII went into something other than the cumulative calculation of UNII (swaps, whatever...). The next month, NII increased by 22c of which 0.1494 was distributed. UNII could have gone up 7 cents from -0.15 to -0.08. But, it went up only 1c to -0.14... (all this ignoring non-NII income).
It seems odd that funds can be taken out of a pool which is meant to be cumulative since inception, but that clearly can happen. money moves in and out of NII and UNII in ways that we cannot track.
Such fun!
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Dec 6, 2023 5:13:05 GMT
The possibility exists that PIMCO/PDI entered into swaps six months ago, which have a December expiration and capital gains ensues. Potential cap gains cannot be counted in UNII along the way.
Not concerned if a special disty is voted; but would be huge IMO if PDI does not cut the dividend.
|
|
|
Post by anitya on Dec 6, 2023 17:44:43 GMT
When the Yahoo Finance NAV symbol for PDX becomes available, may be someone can post here. I have XPDXX as a placeholder for it but not sure if that would work. That is good first guess for CEF NAV tickers, but CEFConnect is showing it as XPDX only. That is also not recognized yet by Yahoo Finance. Two weeks and no YAhoo NAV symbol? I have been using M* for NAV but M* has been inaccurate. PIMCO website shows a two day NAV loss of about 1.5%.
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Dec 6, 2023 18:04:17 GMT
anitya , both M* and CEFConnect are showing PDX NAV as 23.52 as of 12/4/23 (why not 12/5/23?). CEFConnect still says that NAV ticker is XPDX but Yahoo doesn't recognize it.
|
|
|
Post by anitya on Dec 6, 2023 20:21:05 GMT
anitya , both M* and CEFConnect are showing PDX NAV as 23.52 as of 12/4/23 (why not 12/5/23?). CEFConnect still says that NAV ticker is XPDX but Yahoo doesn't recognize it. PIMCO site shows NAV at $23.22 as of 12/5 but PIMCO site usually does not update until the next day AM which caused me to look for a more timely site like Yahoo. The limitation of CEFConnect is it draws information from M* and thus we are at the mercy of M*. M* on 12/4 showed NAV lost about 0.3% on that day but then revised it yesterday to unchanged from 12/1. If one takes M* NAV as of 12/4 as accurate and uses PIMCO NAV as of 12/5, one gets a 1.3% loss of NAV on 12/5. PIMCO site clearly says the loss is only 0.98%. Basically, M* reverted back to 12/1 datum for 12/4. For now, the best information is PIMCO site, though it is delayed by a one half a day. Just use "Historical Prices and Distributions" on PIMCO site for daily NAV and price changes.
|
|
|
Post by anitya on Dec 6, 2023 23:12:28 GMT
anitya , both M* and CEFConnect are showing PDX NAV as 23.52 as of 12/4/23 (why not 12/5/23?). CEFConnect still says that NAV ticker is XPDX but Yahoo doesn't recognize it. PIMCO site shows NAV at $23.22 as of 12/5 but PIMCO site usually does not update until the next day AM which caused me to look for a more timely site like Yahoo. The limitation of CEFConnect is it draws information from M* and thus we are at the mercy of M*. M* on 12/4 showed NAV lost about 0.3% on that day but then revised it yesterday to unchanged from 12/1. If one takes M* NAV as of 12/4 as accurate and uses PIMCO NAV as of 12/5, one gets a 1.3% loss of NAV on 12/5. PIMCO site clearly says the loss is only 0.98%. Basically, M* reverted back to 12/1 datum for 12/4. For now, the best information is PIMCO site, though it is delayed by a one half a day. Just use "Historical Prices and Distributions" on PIMCO site for daily NAV and price changes. It is XPDDX
|
|