Indexor

Total Rating:
0 / 0

79 Comments

    • Thu Oct 30th 10:13 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Two Ways to Gain Exposure to Option Selling Funds
      "Although I wouldn't invest in one of these funds at all, if I HAD to,"

      stocks: Did you read this line?
      View article »
    • Thu Oct 23rd 00:05 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Falling TED Spread Indicates Safer to Re-Enter Market
      Matt:

      The only data I can find on the TED Spread is on stockcharts.com and it only goes back to late September. Yahoo doesn't cover it nor does Bloomberg.com. Any ideas on a source to find it?
      View article »
    • Wed Oct 22nd 15:43 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      What Happens After Two Bad Months in a Row?
      So Mebane, will you take positions for your clients based upon this info, even if the price is below the 200-day trend, or is that a hard and fast rule that you won't re-enter an asset class until the price rises above it?
      View article »
    • Wed Oct 22nd 12:18 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Muni Bonds: Constructive in Current Portfolio Asset Allocation
      Excellent information. Thank you for your efforts.
      View article »
    • Wed Oct 15th 12:06 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      You Can't Trust Bond ETFs for the Time Being
      Jim: iShares Muni Bond ETF (MUB) had the same problem. It appears the iShares fixed-income department is broken and may even be signaling that ETFs are not the right vehicle for fixed-income products. They have never proven liquid enough to trade more than a few hundred shares without moving the price, sometimes substantially. Of course recently, the spreads were not only a joke but the inability to sell positions even at the current bid was impossible. The discount to NAV problem was never addressed by iShares, it was simply abandoned. MUB lost 3% in the final two hours of trading one day last week while the NAV saw little change.

      Sadly, after a negative experience with the iShares High Yield Bond ETF in July of '07, and now both AGG and MUB as well as BND, I'm done with fixed-income ETFs. I stopped using all Closed-End Funds several years ago for the exact same reasons. And If equity ETFs don't stop loaning out shares and start replicating their indices, there will no longer be any reason to use them going forward either.

      What a sad way to destroy a fast growing industry which offered so much promise.
      View article »
    • Tue Oct 14th 10:49 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Dangers of Timing the Market
      David, I simply grin when these same old stale statistics, created by the mutual fund industry, who only earn fees as long as investors REMAIN FULLY INVESTED in their funds (no conflict of interest there), show that "It's time IN the market, not timing the market."

      Or DALBAR (who make their living consulting to the mutual fund industry) updates their "If you only miss the 40 best days" argument. Punk_Ash already gave you a perfect answer. Why look at only HALF the equation? Instead of only missing the 40 BIGGEST UP days, also add to that missing the 40 BIGGEST DOWN days as well. The numbers will surprise you.

      Both DALBAR and the mutual fund industry have misled the general investing public on this topic for a very long time. Even after yesterdays largest ever one-day gain of 936-points, wouldn't you (and your clients) be better off if you had sold your mutual funds in early January, as the market began selling off? Yes you both would be SUBSTANTIALLY better off.

      I suggest you look up the name Mebane Faber. Find an article he published here within the last six months in which he provides a link to a study he conducted that was titled: "A Quatitative Approach to Tactical Asset Allocation." Using a very similar methodolgy, our real world experience allowed us to sidestep the carnage beginning in October of 2000 and got us back in during March of 2003. Again, we exited early in January of 2008 and remain on the sidelines until the markets tell us to return.

      Please take a another step forward and get beyond the boiler plate mutual fund "educational research" that is so widely available. Think for YOURSELF and do your OWN research and you may find there really are better and safer returns available to you and your clients than from the "Buy-and-Hold&quo... methodology that only guarantees profits to the mutual fund, in good markets AND bad. As Mebane stated in his article, it is possible to achieve "equity-like returns with bond-like volatility and drawdown" which is what most mutual fund/ETF investors strive to achieve.



      View article »
    • Thu Oct 9th 10:04 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Beware Small ETFs
      I agree. Yesterday the iShares National Muni Bond ETF lost 3% in the final two hours of trading, starting precisely at 2:00PM. This is pure price manipulation and has nothing to do with tracking the index. I have lost all confidence in Barclay's iShares. Once I am out, I'll never use another iShares ETF again.
      View article »
    • Fri Oct 3rd 11:36 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Post-Bailout Investing: The Big Picture
      As always, good information.
      View article »
    • Mon Sep 29th 00:25 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      A Peek Under the Wisdom Tree
      Thank you Ray. I greatly appreciate your efforts in re-posting this info.
      View article »
    • Sat Sep 27th 15:30 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Bad Idea: A Tax on Trading
      This whole credit crisis started in 1999 under the Clinton administration when everyone was focused on Y2K. That year the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed. This Act, established in 1933 during the Great Depression, prohibited commercial banks from collaborating with stock brokerage firms or participating in investment banking activities. Soon every bank was doing investment-banking deals and either buying or starting their own broker-dealers. A hunger for new financial products to sell was quickly established.

      The same year Fannie Mae, the quasi-government mortgage lender, under pressure from the Clinton administration, instituted a pilot program to increase low-income homeownership by granting mortgages to people who were bad credit risks. With no regulatory oversight, the sub-prime mortgage market was born. This market grew from 2% of total loans in 2002 to over 30% of total loans in 2006, thanks in part to the artificially low interest rates Mr. Greenspan provided during that time frame.

      As the television commercials and newspaper advertisements quickly spread the word, people without jobs, with bad credit histories and no down payments were welcomed to the world of homeownership, thanks to the magic of no-documentation, Adjustable-Rate Mortgage loans. As a sense of entitlement grew, some borrowers began buying multiple homes and condos to “flip” at higher prices for quick profits. Classes were held in local hotels around the country teaching real estate “investors” how to make millions from real estate by buying and flipping homes using sub-prime loans.

      The sub-prime loans being generated were then packaged into CDOs (Collateral Debt Obligations), and given AAA ratings, thanks to the governmental link of Fannie Mae. Even though they were NOT backed by the full faith and credit of the US government, a wink and a nod allowed their AAA status. This rating caused the investment banks to skip any due diligence concerning the actual quality of the paper, and these new securities were rapidly being packaged and sold around the world.

      Ben Bernanke succeeded Alan Greenspan on February 1, 2006 and continued raising interest rates, a trend his predecessor began in mid-2004 after the Fed Funds rate had bottomed at 1.00%. Two years later, Fed Fund rates had climbed to 5.25%. As the 3-year Adjustable Rate Mortgages began resetting at much higher interest rates, many sub-prime borrower couldn’t afford the “doubling” of their monthly mortgage bill. As the supply of homes for sale quickly expanded, the real estate market softened and foreclosures began growing at an alarming rate. Soon, the AAA-rated CDO securities began defaulting, and both prices and buyers disappeared. The credit markets (bonds) began losing liquidity.

      To compound this problem, back in 2004, five of the largest, most well respected investment-banking firms went to the SEC and received approval to increase their use of leverage from $14 for every $1 of assets to $40 for $1 of assets. Not ironically, these five firms were Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs. They wanted the additional leverage to issue a new form of derivative security under the acronym of CDS (Credit Default Swaps). This security was designed to transfer the credit exposure of fixed-income products (bonds such as CDOs) among counter parties.

      In February of 2007, just as these bonds started defaulting, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) instituted “fair value accounting.” Because the values of these securities ranged so widely, both the commercial banks and investment banks in this game began taking massive write-offs. This led to a need for new capital, which was initially being provided, in part, by sovereign-wealth funds. But once again, due to political pressure, the sovereign wealth funds withdrew their support and the liquidity crisis was on with a vengence.

      Ah yes, politics. Clinton and the Democrats started the socialist ball rolling and now, 10 years later, we are watching capitalism's demise on Wall Street, Washington and Main Street. Who's going to bail us out?
      View article »
    • Sat Sep 27th 13:56 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      S&P 500 Trading Action
      "Whether you agree with the $700 billion TARP plan or not, this has been a case study on the worst of partisan politics."

      I agree. As Dennis Kneale stated on CNBC yesterday: "We should all vote against every single incumbant running for re-election."
      View article »
    • Thu Sep 25th 16:21 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      A Peek Under the Wisdom Tree
      Thank you Ray.
      View article »
    • Thu Sep 25th 14:26 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      A Peek Under the Wisdom Tree
      Excellent article. Another question that I was hoping to see answered: "What are the tax ramifications?" If I understand this aspect correctly, the IRS does not recognize currencies, or ETFs holding currencies, as an investment. Therefore, capital gain rates do not apply and all gains are taxed at the tax payer's higher ordinary income rate. Can you, or anyone, verify or correct this understanding?
      View article »
    • Wed Sep 17th 16:53 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      How to Profit from This Sell-off (100% Guaranteed): Tax Loss Harvesting
      You are betting that the stock WILL GO UP BY 114% in the next 5 years. What if it doesn't? What if it doesn't even get back to $10,000 in the next five years? What if it continues to fall farther over the next five years? What if Obama changes the capital gains rate? What if Obama discontinues the ability to write off any losses?

      Take the write-off now while you can.
      View article »
    • Wed Aug 27th 10:41 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      One Often Overlooked Benefit of ETFs: Transparency
      For a list of the complete holdings of an ETF, go to the issuers web site.
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»