|
Post by chang on Jul 25, 2021 2:52:28 GMT
I'm using PHMIX to "barbell" with VWALX - both within the HY muni category - the former aggressive, the latter conservative (and cheap). Why not ORNYX? It has a similar ER (0.7%/0.52% gross/adjusted) as PHMIX (0.63%/0.55% gross/adjusted), and a lead manager with 19 years tenure and >$1M invested (but also five new, young co-managers, which suggests that Mr. Cottier may be preparing to retire?) versus 2 managers with an average 4-year tenure and almost none of their own money in the fund. I don't have M* Premium, but I can see they do a Quant Analysis on ORNYX with a neutral rating and portfolio management concerns, and a human analysis on PHMIX with some concerns as well. Stick with PHMIX? Change? Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Jul 25, 2021 3:37:56 GMT
In previous life, "Rochester" funds under OppenheimerFunds went for junkiest of HY munis and even got involved in the workout processes in PR and elsewhere (now 11.32% in PR). After Invesco bought OpenheimerFunds in 2019, I don't know if things have changed much - after all, "Rochester" is still in the name and former team has stayed. This is one example where chart alone may not tell the whole story and a deep dive may be necessary. These types of funds can be great in good times but terrible in bad times. BTW, its 3-yr SD is high at 8.53, PHMIX 6.70, VWALX 5.67. Just for fun, I clicked on 15-yr, and SD are ORNYX 12.16 (something terribly blew up in its past), PHMIX N/A, VWALX 5.25 only.
|
|
|
Post by chang on Jul 25, 2021 4:30:45 GMT
Wasn't aware of all this history. I will be making a simpler move tomorrow to step up my HYMB exposure by folding my remaining IGMB fund (VWLUX) into VWALX. Holding VWLUX is just flushing yield down the loo, it seems.
|
|
|
Post by Chahta on Jul 25, 2021 16:14:08 GMT
All of these funds are expensive now. They are at all time high prices. I would not think about putting new money in them until the Fall when price traditionally fall back. I don't see why VWLUX is so bad, but not as good as PHMIX.
|
|
|
Post by anitya on Jul 25, 2021 19:52:31 GMT
chang , When I consider your recent bond enquiries in totality, I think you are trying to figure out whether currently it is better to take duration risk or credit risk or both, even though you did not frame the questions that way. I certainly struggle with that question. P.S.: We all have been wrong more than a few times a year - not because our thinking and analysis was incomplete each time we were wrong but because there is no set time within which market incorporates information we have considered. A
|
|
|
Post by chang on Jul 26, 2021 0:59:15 GMT
chang , When I consider your recent bond enquiries in totality, I think you are trying to figure out whether currently it is better to take duration risk or credit risk or both, even though you did not frame the questions that way. I certainly struggle with that question. Sort of. I am generally where I want to be; my "moves" for quite some time have been minor tweaks. My general bond AA reflects this structure: - Light to zero Treasuries (no yield - not paid for the interest rate risk)
- Easy on the IT/LT corporates - limited to DODIX and whatever they keep in Wellesley/Glob. Wellington
- Maintain a HY allocation - can think of this as "stocks lite", with a healthy dividend
- "Cash" is in UST (Medium credit risk, <1 year duration)
- Munis are LT - interest rate is definitely there, but history shows it is rewarded
- Munis are 5:1 HY:IG - again, history shows it is rewarded (and I believe the Government will bail out failing municipalities)
This thread was started because I was thinking, if you're going to barbell, you might as well put the weights at the end of the bar. I wasn't specifically focusing on changing my AA with respect to duration or credit risk (although, indirectly, I might have implied/questioned whether I should increase the credit risk, noting yogi's comment about Rochester owning "the junkiest" bonds). You are right, that in another thread I wondered aloud whether my UST ("cash") holding is too conservative ... and should I move that to S/T corporates (like VCSH) instead to capture a little more yield. But there again, since I'm barbelling why not just move some UST (=VUSFX) directly to HY (=VWEAX) and accomplish the same thing?
|
|