Tag Archives: investment

Vanguard Dividend Growth Fund: A Solid Core Holding

Summary VDIGX has low expenses and has outperformed its peers over the years. Don Kilbride looks for stocks that can pay a steady and growing stream of dividends. Vanguard also offers a Dividend Appreciation Index fund which will compete with VDIGX. Overall Objective and Strategy: Growth and Income The Vanguard Dividend Growth Fund (MUTF: VDIGX ) seeks to provide a growing income stream along with long term capital growth by investing in high quality companies that not only pay a dividend, but also have good prospects for growth in both earnings and dividends. Dividend yield is expected to be above the market average, but stocks with very high dividends but no growth are avoided. Stays diversified across all market sectors. Can allocate up to 25% of assets to foreign securities. Benchmark: the NASDAQ U.S. Dividend Achievers Select Index. Fund Expenses The expense ratio for VDIGX is 0.32% which is very low for an actively managed equity fund. Morningstar has computed the average expense ratio of similar funds to be 1.04%, so you pick up over 70 basis points of relative outperformance through lower expenses alone. Vanguard does not offer a lower cost Admiral share class for this fund. Vanguard does offer a passively managed index fund with similar goals to VDIGX – the Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund (MUTF: VDADX ) which requires a $10,000 minimum investment with an expense ratio of only 0.10%. VDADX is weighted more to mega-cap companies and has a higher allocation to the Consumer Staples sector than VDIGX. Minimum Investment VDIGX has a minimum initial investment of $3,000. Past Performance VDIGX is classified by Morningstar in the “Large Blend” or LB category. Compared with other mutual funds in this category, VDIGX has performed quite well, largely because of its low expenses and consistent stock selection. These are the annual performance figures computed by Morningstar since inception in December 2013 (as of September 14, 2015). Investors who compare their performance to the S&P 500, might be a little disappointed with the recent performance of VDIGX, since its five year performance of 13.56% lags the 14.13% performance of the S&P 500. But I wouldn’t blame the fund for this, since its Dividend Appreciation strategy has been a bit out of favor for the last five years. I believe the fund should outperform the S&P 500 over a full market cycle including some bear market periods. VDIGX Category (LB) +/- Category Percentile Rank in Category YTD -3.85% -4.48% +0.63% 41 1 Year +1.08% -1.58% +2.66% 17 3 Year +11.79% +11.37% +0.43% 48 5 Year +13.56% +12.58% +0.97% 34 10 Year +8.42% +6.25% +2.17% 4 15 Year +5.07% +3.97% +1.10% NA Source: Morningstar Mutual Fund Ratings Lipper Ranking : Funds are ranked based on total return within a universe of funds with similar investment objectives. The Lipper peer group is Equity Income. 1 Yr #21 out of 509 funds 5 Yr #23 out of 299 funds 10 Yr #5 out of 192 funds Morningstar Rating : Overall 4 Stars (out of 1,388 funds) 3 Yr 3 Stars (out of 1,388 funds) 5 Yr 4 Stars (out of 1,225 funds) 10 Yr 5 Stars (out of 872 funds) Fund Management The fund has been managed by Donald Kilbride since February 2006. Kilbride seeks to build a portfolio that produces a steady and growing stream of dividends. He looks for companies that have the ability and the willingness to increase their dividends over time. Kilbride does not buy non-dividend paying companies that may begin to offer a payout in the future- he wants the dividends now. Volatility Measures Beta: 0.91 (less volatile than the S&P 500) R- Squared: 0.93 (fairly high correlation with S&P 500) Sharpe Ratio: 1.39 Standard Deviation: 9.27 Comments VDIGX is a concentrated fund and is not an index hugger. It has $24 billion in assets invested in only 46 securities. These are the top ten holdings as of June 30, 2015: Top 10 Holdings % Weight United Parcel Service (NYSE: UPS ) 3.21% Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT ) 2.92% UnitedHealth Group Inc (NYSE: UNH ) 2.90% TJX Companies (NYSE: TJX ) 2.87% Honeywell (NYSE: HON ) 2.74% Nike Inc (NYSE: NKE ) 2.69% ACE Ltd (NYSE: ACE ) 2.68% Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO ) 2.60% Accenture PLC (NYSE: ACN ) 2.60% Praxair Inc (NYSE: PX ) 2.49% VDIGX is an excellent mutual fund that can serve as a core holding, especially in a retirement account. In 2008, it held up relatively well losing only 25.57% versus a 37.79% loss for its category peers and a 37% drop in the S&P 500. In times of severe financial stress, VDIGX is a good way to continue investing, since its holdings are very solid and unlikely to go into bankruptcy. Vanguard has set up an interesting competition between VDIGX and VDADX (which is pegged to the Dividend Appreciation Index). These two funds are good test vehicles for active versus passive management using the same basic strategy and it will be interesting to see whether Kilbride can outperform over the longer term. Last year, there was a friendly controversy here on Seeking Alpha between Geoff Considine and Larry Swedroe. Considine listed reasons why dividends are a valid basis upon which to select stocks, while Swedroe disagreed citing some research from DFA. Take a look at this Seeking Alpha article from last year for more information- ” Why Dividends Matter: A Review of Recent Research “. Considine later published a summary on Advisor Perspectives- ” Understanding the Controversy over Dividend‐Based Investing “. I believe that dividend-based investing has a place in any diversified portfolio, especially in retirement accounts. But for those in a higher tax bracket, I think it also makes sense to hold some non-dividend paying stocks (like Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A )) in taxable accounts. Over time, the tax savings will add up. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, but may initiate a long position in VDIGX over the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

How I Created My Portfolio Over A Lifetime – Part III (A)

Portfolio News Articles StockTalk Marketplace PRO Seeking Alpha WHERE DO YOU WANT TO GO? Seeking Alpha home page » My portfolio page » Latest Financial Analysis & Opinion » TOP NEWS Futures flat as globe rallies Mortgage applications dip again Shanghai surges 4.9% in last hour of trade Fiat Chrysler, UAW reach tentative labor deal HP Enterprise cutting 25K-30K jobs Microsoft hikes dividend by 16% Bloomberg: AMC in talks to acquire Starz network See latest news » TOP ARTICLES Top Authors   |      RSS Feeds   |  Sitemap   |  About Us   |  Contact Us Terms of Use | Privacy | Xignite quote data | © 2015 Seeking Alpha

FLOT Vs. FLRN: The Best Floating Rate ETF

The Fed rate hike may be just around the corner and investors have started probing every possible safe option in a likely rising rate environment. A barrage of solid economic data, including a more-than-seven-year low unemployment rate in August, an improving service sector, decent consumer confidence, and a pretty strong housing market raised speculations over the first rate hike in more than nine years. Investors should note that while fixed income investing underperforms in a rising rate environment, there are several plays, even in the bond market, that could ward off rising rate worries. A floating rate instrument is such an option. Floating rate notes are investment grade bonds that do not pay a fixed rate to investors but have variable coupon rates that are often tied to an underlying index (such as LIBOR) plus a variable spread depending on the credit risk of the issuers. Since the coupons of these bonds are adjusted periodically, these are less sensitive to an increase in rates compared to traditional bonds. Unlike fixed coupon bonds, these do not lose value when the rates go up, making the notes ideal for protecting investors against capital erosion in a rising rate environment. Below we highlight two popular floating rate bond ETFs and try to figure out which one is a better bet at the current level: iShares Floating Rate Note ETF (NYSEARCA: FLOT ) This is the most popular fund in the floating rate securities market space that follows the Barclays US Floating Rate Note < 5 Years Index. Holding 458 securities, the fund has an average life of 1.78 years and effective duration of 0.14 years. The product has amassed over $3.60 billion in its asset base while trades in volume of 650,000 shares per day on average. Sector-wise, the fund invests over half of its assets in banking followed by 8.4% weight in areas with no guarantee. Companies like JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM ) (4.12%), Goldman (NYSE: GS ) (4.07%) and Citigroup (NYSE: C ) (3.49%) are top three holdings of the fund. Bonds with 1-2 years of maturity have the highest exposure of 33.17% in the fund while bonds with 0-1 years take the second position with 28.69% weight. Expense ratio comes in at 0.20%. The fund is off 0.02% so far this year (as of September 11, 2015) and yields about 0.48%. SPDR Barclays Capital Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (NYSEARCA: FLRN ) This ETF tracks the Barclays U.S. Dollar Floating Rate Note < 5 Years Index with average maturity of 1.73 years and modified duration of 0.12 years. It holds 445 securities and has been able to accumulate $387 million in its total asset base. The fund charges 15 bps in annual fees while volume is moderate at under 30,000 shares. Sector-wise, the product is tilted toward the financial sector with 61% exposure followed by the industrial sector (25.43%). Individual holding-wise, no stock holds more than 1.60% in the fund. Goldman gets the top priority followed by Kommunalbanken (0.97%) and Toronto-Dominion Bank (NYSE: TD ) (0.91%). Here also, bonds with 0-1 years and 1-2 years of maturity hold top positions with 30.88% and 36.21%, respectively. It has lost 0.3% in the year-to-date timeframe and has a dividend yield of 0.59% (as of September 11, 2015). Which One is the Better Bet? While both options are pretty intriguing in a rising rate environment and quite similar in nature, there's a subtle difference between the two that might give one ETF an edge over the other in a rising rate environment. The chart below details the two bond ETFs: FLOT FLRN Effective Maturity 1.78 years 1.73 years Effective Duration 0.14 years 0.12 years Default Risks Slightly higher FLRN Slightly lower than FLOT Interest Rate Risks Slightly higher FLRN Slightly lower than FLOT Concentration Risks Slightly High Slightly Low Expense Ratio 0.20% 0.15% Yield 0.48% 0.59% To sum up, both FLOT and FLRN both have high exposure in the better-performing financial sector. Both handle around 450 bonds and certain international exposure, but are dollar-denominated in nature. Yet, FLRN appears a less risky product compared with FLOT going by various risk matrixes. FLRN is cheaper too. Link to the original article on Zacks.com