Tag Archives: management

There Is No Defense Of Closet Indexing

Closet indexing occurs when a high-fee mutual fund or ETF promises to be able to “beat the market”, charges a fee premium relative to its benchmark and then largely mimics the performance of the benchmark. This is a tremendous problem for investors, because they usually end up paying hefty fees in exchange for empty promises. When I review client portfolios, I find that an alarmingly high number of them hold closet index funds (before I release these demons into the netherworld). I bring this up in response to a piece today on Morningstar titled ” In Defense of Closet Indexers “. The subtitle is “They are no worse (or better) than other forms of active management”. There are two issues here I’d like to highlight: The false dichotomy of “passive” versus “active” creates confusion from the start. The financial industry seems very confused on this subject, thanks to unclear academic literature on the topic. We tend to assign the term “active” to funds that are literally more active. By this definition, Warren Buffett is a “passive” investor, because he doesn’t often change his portfolio. This is obviously ludicrous. The correct definition of passive is a strategy that tries to capture the market return, versus the active investor who tries to be able to beat the market return. But since we all deviate from global cap weighting (the one true benchmark of outstanding financial assets), we are all active investors. In a world of low-fee indexing, this distinction has become increasingly muddled by market commentators. The Morningstar article defends high-fee active management based on a false dichotomy. This debate is not about “active” and “passive”, it is about the efficiency in which we are active. The core of the defense in the article is the fact that four of American Funds’ U.S. stock funds have bested the S&P 500 over the last 15 years. This is true, but none of them have bested the S&P on an after-tax and fee basis in the last 1, 3, 5 or 10 years. In fact, many of those funds have dramatically underperformed after taxes and fees over these periods, as you can see in the figure below (I wasn’t sure which funds he was referencing, but the following six funds are US equity-heavy). So yes, if you had the foresight 15 years ago to pick those funds, then you “beat” the S&P 500, but if you were an investor who bought one of these funds at any time in the last decade, you bought a fund that gave you 95% of the S&P 500 correlation with a lower after-tax and fee return. And given the propensity for investors to chase returns, it’s almost certain that the vast majority of the people who own these funds have not captured that 15-year outperformance. In other words, most of the investors in these funds have invested in a closet index and not benefited from it. (click to enlarge) In general, I agree with the cited academic paper referring to closet index funds as a “gigantic mis-selling phenomenon”. I don’t think we should ban these funds, as the paper asserts, but I do think we need to properly assess this problem so investors can make better-informed decisions. We still siphon way too many billions of dollars into investment firm coffers for no good reason. That’s money that is directly harming your retirement and livelihood. There is no practical defense of this.

4 Top-Rated TIAA-CREF Mutual Funds Worth Adding

Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America-College Retirement Equities Fund (TIAA-CREF) has nearly $869 billion in assets under management (as of June 30, 2015). TIAA-CREF Asset Management, part of the TIAA-CREF group, seeks to offer financial services pertaining to investment advice and portfolio management to a wide range of investors including individual investors, intermediaries and institutional clients. Through its subsidiaries, TIAA-CREF invests in an array of mutual funds including both equity and fixed-income funds, and U.S. and non-U.S. funds. Below we share with you 4 top-rated TIAA-CREF Mutual Funds. Each has earned a Zacks Mutual Fund Rank #1 (Strong Buy) and is expected to outperform its peers in the future. TIAA-CREF Real Estate Securities Retirement (MUTF: TRRSX ) seeks maximum total return over the long run through growth of capital and current income. TRRSX invests a large chunk of its assets in companies primarily involved in operations related to the real estate domain. TRRSX may invest a maximum of 15% of its assets in securities issued by foreign entities. TRRSX may also invest not more than 20% of its assets in securities of companies from different sectors, other than real estate. The TIAA-CREF Real Estate Securities Retirement fund has a three-year annualized return of 11.8%. As of September 2015, TRRSX held 52 issues with 9.38% of its assets invested in Simon Property Group Inc (NYSE: SPG ). TIAA-CREF Small-Cap Equity Premier (MUTF: TSRPX ) invests the lion’s share of its assets in equity securities of domestic small-cap firms. TSRPX focuses on acquiring securities of companies with market capitalization similar to those listed in the Russell 2000 Index. TSRPX invests in securities of companies irrespective of their sectors, growth rates and valuations. The TIAA-CREF Small-Cap Equity Premier fund has a three-year annualized return of 18.5%. TSRPX has an expense ratio of 0.59% as compared with the category average of 1.23%. TIAA-CREF Mid-Cap Growth Retail (MUTF: TCMGX ) seeks a high total return. TCMGX invests the major portion of its assets in equity securities of companies having market capitalization within the range of the Russell Midcap Growth Index. TCMGX primarily invests in securities of domestic companies that are believed to provide above-average growth potential. The TIAA-CREF Mid-Cap Growth Retail fund has a three-year annualized return of 15.3%. George (Ted) E. Scalise is one of the fund managers of TCMGX since 2006. TIAA-CREF Large-Cap Value Retirement (MUTF: TRLCX ) invests the majority of its assets in securities of the U.S. based large-cap companies. TRLCX invests in companies with market capitalization identical to those included in the Russell 1000 Value Index. TRLCX invests in securities of companies that are believed to be undervalued. TRLCX may invest a maximum of 20% of its assets in securities of companies that are located in foreign lands. The TIAA-CREF Large-Cap Value Retirement fund has a three-year annualized return of 14.3%. TRLCX has an expense ratio of 0.69% as compared with the category average of 1.11%. Original Post

Forget Dividend Growth Investing: I Want My Dividends And I Want Them Now

Summary In a previous article, I featured the Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF, and my reasons for including it in my personal portfolio. In this article, I feature a different ETF, one that you may select if you wish to receive a higher level of current income. In the course of this article, I will also examine the question: “Should I perhaps hold both in my portfolio?” Towards the end, I also offer a link that will give you a peek into my own portfolio. This article is designed to be read in conjunction with the most popular article I have managed to write to-date for Seeking Alpha, with over 7,750 web and mobile views and counting. In that article, I featured the Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF (NYSEARCA: VIG ). I explained why, after considering attempting to build a little 10-stock “mini ETF” of my own, I decided instead to add to my weighting in that particular ETF. While noting that VIG carried a rather modest SEC yield of 2.19%, I featured the structural reasons that one could expect this dividend to grow over time. But what if you are an investor who says: “Forget dividend growth! I want my dividends and I want them now!” As it happens, I have just the ETF for you. This article will discuss another Vanguard ETF that forms a piece of the “bedrock” of dividend income that supports my portfolio; namely the Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (NYSEARCA: VYM ). When I say “read in conjunction with,” what I mean is that I will attempt not to bore the reader by repeating the information and concepts developed in that previous article, but rather expand on them, clarify similarities and differences between the two ETFs, and ultimately attempt to address the question: “Why might I want to have both ETFs in my portfolio?” Expense Ratio and Composition While, at times, other ETF providers make a wonderful marketing splash by being able, for example, to at least temporarily tout that they offer the world’s cheapest ETF , one of the things I admire about Vanguard is that it offers a wide variety of ETFs – including some that are specialized – at extremely low expense ratios. VYM is no exception. Like its stablemate VIG, its expense ratio is a mere .10%. In this case, what do you get for your .10%? Here’s a quick overview from VYM’s fact sheet on the Vanguard website: Right off the bat, then, we see that VYM tracks the FTSE High Dividend Yield Index and does so in passive fashion, using a full-replication approach. As it turns out, this index represents the U.S.-only component of the FTSE All-World High Dividend Yield Index . From the linked fact sheet, we find that: This index comprises stocks that are characterized by higher-than-average dividend yields. REITs are removed from this index, because they do not generally benefit from currently favorable tax rates on qualified dividends. Additionally, stocks forecast to pay a zero dividend over the next 12 months are also removed. Finally, the remaining stocks are ranked by annual dividend yield and included in the index until the cumulative market cap reaches 50% of the total market cap of the universe of stocks under consideration. The index is reviewed semi-annually, in March and September. Finally, the associated Vanguard Advisor’s page reveals that “buffer zones” are utilized during the annual rebalancing exercise, to reduce portfolio turnover. This index is a little broader than the one utilized for VIG. Currently, VIG contains 179 stocks, and VYM contains 435. The fund currently has $15.6 billion in Assets Under Management (AUM), with daily average trading of $43.41 million. It has an average trading spread of 0.02%. Finally, the fund’s current SEC yield is 3.14%. Comparing VYM With VIG. Should You Hold One? Both? In this section, I will expose the differences and similarities between VYM and VIG. Ultimately, it is my hope that it helps you to decide whether you would like to add one or the other to your portfolio or, like I do, maintain a target weighting in both. To help you conceptualize the differences, I first used the charting capabilities of Excel to visually display the differences in their sector breakdowns, with all percentages being taken directly from the Vanguard fact sheets. From that graphic, you likely noticed that VIG is much more heavily weighted in: Consumer Goods Consumer Services Industrials In contrast, VYM tends to feature: Financials Oil & Gas Telecommunications Utilities When it comes to Basic Materials, Healthcare, and Technology, the weightings are very similar. Next, have a look at the comparative Top-10 holdings of the two ETFs, to see how these themes play out in their largest holdings: There are perhaps two intuitive takeaways from this: VYM tends to feature what might be described as slightly “stodgier” companies. These are certainly not rapid growers. Rather they are established companies in low-growth businesses which deliver a large part of their earnings to shareholders in the form of dividends. VIG tends to feature companies with lower current payouts, but slightly faster growth. If you decide to include both in your portfolio, there is some overlap (3 similarly-weighted sectors, 3 stocks in the Top-10 holdings of both). However, it could be argued that there is a greater level of variance (3-4 sectors with very different exposure, 7 stocks which are not found in both Top-10 holdings). Let’s next turn to relative performance. In reviewing the comments from other Seeking Alpha articles, I have noticed some skepticism regarding dividend-paying stocks, and therefore related ETFs, on two fronts: In good times, they tend to underperform the S&P 500. Conversely, they often don’t hold up so well when the market experiences a sharp downturn. In that vein, you may find the following charts helpful to review. First, I started by laying both VIG and VYM against the S&P 500 index over the past 5 years. VYM data by YCharts Interestingly, I actually find VYM’s performance to be rather stunning. Though it has trailed the S&P 500 by roughly 6% over that time frame, as the next chart shows it has also consistently delivered a dividend in the range of 2.75-3.25%. In contrast, on both counts, VIG’s comparative performance over this period appears slightly underwhelming. VYM Dividend Yield (TTM) data by YCharts Next, though, let’s have a look at the last extended major downturn, covering the period between 10/1/2007 and the bottom on 3/9/2009: VYM data by YCharts In this drastic negative environment, VIG emerged as the clear winner, besting the S&P 500 by a full 8.5% and VYM by over 10%. However, again using the S&P 500 as our benchmark, VYM also held up comparatively well. Summary and Conclusion I am of the belief that dividends are an invaluable component of a solid, well-balanced portfolio. In my case, I have elected to maintain modest holdings in both AT&T (NYSE: T ) and Verizon (NYSE: VZ ) in my personal portfolio for the express purpose of having a solid foundation of dividends. The linked article also explains my rationale for not automatically reinvesting my dividends, and what I do instead. That is why VYM forms an integral part of my portfolio as well. Currently, it stands at 5.18%, augmenting my 7.22% weighting in VIG, for a total of 12.40% between the two ETFs. Should you hold both VYM and VIG in your portfolio? If you are interested in a steady stream of dividends while at the same time benefiting from both great diversification and a low expense ratio, I believe the above evidence suggests that you should. VYM offers a higher current dividend yield while VIG may offer both a little more growth as well as better protection in the event of a market downturn. As always, whatever your personal choices, I wish you. Happy investing!