Muchas gracias Ruindog. ¡Siempre al quite!
1 me gusta
Aparte del tratamiento y contratacion como acciones, la estructura es la de un fondo de inversion?
Es decir, invierte en una seleccion de acciones?
Tienen bastante puntos en común con los mutual funds y los ETFs. Aquí explican las pequeñas diferencias:
6 Me gusta
En el Chit-Chat se está discutiendo qué comprar para sustituir el dividendo de T. Ya que hay pocas alternativas de empresas, hay conversaciones acerca de CEF.
Pego comentarios:
@Maybenot: “Added more to THW today.
Nice little Health fund, CEF type.
They have RHHBY … JNJ … ABBV … AZN … UNH … UNH … MDT … MRK … NVS … BMY … TMO – as their Top 10.
The distribution yield is currently about 9% - rather plump.
And the Ex-Dividend date is this May 19th - nice.
Just keeping that dividend (or distributions) cash working.”
@Chowder: “I have both THW and THQ in the Older Folk Portfolio. I purchased them both on the same day. If one is focused on yield THW at 8.87% is a good choice. THQ has a yield of 5.91%.
If one wants a combination of yield plus price appreciation THQ is the better option. Year to date THQ is up 13.25% and THW is down slightly at <0.57%>. For price appreciation THQ beats in all time frames, YTD, 1 year, 3 year, 5 year, etc. So the goal is important to know when deciding.
I plan on continuing to add to both.
A couple of other choices for T replacements are ETY with a 7.48% yield and ETV with an 8.23% yield. I already own both, in fact added more ETY today to bring it up in size to ETV.
Other choices if one is willing to go the CEF route (and I own them all):
PTY … yield 8.17%
DNP … yield 7.56%
CSQ … yield 7.24%”
4 Me gusta
¿Chowder ha vuelto a Seeking Alpha o nunca llegó a irse?
Trasladó sus blogs a Silicon Investor y allí sigue.
Pero sigue comentando en blogs de otras personas, como el DGR Chit-Chat.
¿Y el Redux en la coletilla? ¿Cerraron el blog anterior?
Lo mantenía Rnsmth. Al igual que Chowder se enfadó mucho cuando en S.A quitaron capacidad de borrar comentarios en los blogs y alguna otra cosa. También se fue a Silicon Investor.
PERO, casi nadie le siguió allí.
Al tiempo volvieron a dar permiso de borrar comentarios y el CHit-Chat siguió, pero hace unos días, hubo problemas de nuevo y tiró la toalla.
El relevo de mantener el blog ahora es SeeksQuality y ha añadido “Redux” al nombre: DGR Chit-Chat Redux.
Conclusión: Ahora se lee
- DGR Chit-Chat Redux.
- Crowdsoursing Investment Wisdom (cada mes abren uno incluyendo nombre y año del mes, para no borrar comentarios).
2 Me gusta
Viendo las 10 primeras posiciones, la que mas yield da es ABBV, un 4,5%, el resto bastante por debajo de esa cifra y algunas por debajo del 3%
Si las posiciones que mas pesan dan ese yield, no me quiero imaginar como consiguen llegar a es 9%, no quiero saberlo.
Que peligro
5 Me gusta
Con lo que me gustan a mí el peligro y la volatilidad… jeje.
Llevo un par de días dándole fuerte a los distintos hilos y lecturas que habéis colgado por aquí sobre los CEFs. Pensaba que lo conocía todo y mira tú por dónde este vehículo lo desconocía por completo.
Dado que XOM y T ya no están en cartera quedé con bastante liquidez (eran mis mayores posiciones) y también con mi flujo de dividendos reducido a la mitad. El importe de la venta lo reinvertiré en 4 CEFs y los retornos de capital que vaya teniendo los dedicaré a DGI.
Si el mercado cae sé que sufriré el doble, pero afortunadamente he ganado resiliencia y madera para aguantar la cartera con esta estructura.
Los CEFs que de momento me interesan son DNP (con descuento sobre Nav ahora mismo), UGT, PTY y GOF. Tienen un buen historial y cubren sectores que me interesan.
5 Me gusta
llevo PTY e IFN (quería exposición a India) y de momento bastante contento.
1 me gusta
No he estudiado los CEF, pero el yield es más alto que la media de lo que pagan las empresas. En el enlace inicial del hilo explican:
“Closed-end funds can make distributions to their shareholders from three sources – income from interest and dividends, realized capital gains, and return of capital (i.e. the money used to pay the distribution comes from the fund’s assets rather than from income generated from the fund’s investment portfolio)”
2 Me gusta
Yo tampoco los habia estudiado, solo al ver las posiciones principales, su RPD, mas bien bajita, y lo que da el CEF, me chocaba.
Hay que leerse bien la informacion de fondos y demas productos, lo digo sobretodo por mi, estuve durante un tiempo invertido en un fondo de inversion con objetivo de repartir una RPD de un 7%. Sonaba fantastico.
El problema venia en que para conseguir esa RPD, que no podia venir toda de la cartera de acciones, se usaban derivados, y esto es un riesgo añadido a una cartera de renta variable.
1 me gusta
https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/996169-seeksquality/5602656-cefs-for-dgi
Creo que este hilo va a merecer la pena, y mucho.
Desgraciadamente no hay tiempo para todo, pero quien quiera subir el yield de su cartera, aquí seguramente encontrará información que vale oro.
A tener en cuenta que el hilo lo ha abierto @Seeksquality, por lo que estará bien moderado.
1 me gusta
@Chowder
“I was asked a question on the other blog about PTY and ETO as to which would be the better purchase given PTY’s 40% premium to NAV. I sent a very detailed comment via PM to that person but have deleted it and don’t have access to it. So, let me simply sum up what I was saying.
I don’t make purchases based on discounts or premiums to NAV. I decide what sector of the market I want access to and what tools the fund uses to achieve what it is I’m looking for.
PTY is a High Grade Bond Fund.
ETO is a Global Allocation Fund.
PTY … The fund invests at least 80% of its total assets in a combination of corporate debt obligations of varying maturities, other corporate income-producing securities, and income-producing securities of non-corporate issuers.
ETO … The Fund will invest at least 80% of its total assets in dividend-paying common and preferred stocks.
So basically I determine whether I want a high grade bond fund or an equity fund with exposure to equities, preferred and convertible’s. Once I determine the goal, if I decide I want a high grade bond fund, I will compare PTY to other high grade bond funds.
When I screen for high grade bond funds there are 42 choices and only one comes close to comparing with PTY for yield considering the exposure. The only one that comes close is PCN and it too sells at a high discount to fair value. Given the yield PTY pays and considering they haven’t cut the distribution in many, many years and that includes the Great Recession, it’s easy for me to understand why they sell at such a premium. Just don’t expect high capital gain growth, most of your total return is going to come from the distributions.
All of the Pimco funds sell at a premium. PDO is a new one I have been adding to and it too is selling at a premium and the best value, but if it performs like the other Pimco funds, I expect PDO’s premium to rise as well.
In conclusion, your goals and risk tolerance levels should dictate your decision.”
2 Me gusta
@Chowder
"BST … With its upcoming 1-for-3 Rights Offering, which will obviously drop the fund precipitously on its Ex-Rights date, which will be the day before the Record date of June 18 and I am going to sell BST in one of the portfolios I manage.
I have a portfolio where BST had triple digit total returns, I had already trimmed part of that position and started a position in AIO. The remaining BST shares are up up 91.50% and I don’t want the market taking any of those gains away, so I am going to sell the whole position in BST on Monday and put all of the proceeds into AIO.
In the process of replacing BST … AIO has a higher yield. … AIO yields 5.49% and BST yields 4.56%.
The move will allow me to earn 20.4% more income with AIO than I was receiving with BST. This is in a tax advantaged account, so there are no taxes to worry about.
- AIO … Under normal market conditions, the Trust will invest at least 80% of its total assets in equity securities issued by U.S. and non-U.S. science and technology companies in any market capitalization range, selected for their rapid and sustainable growth potential from the development, advancement and use of science and/or technology , and/or potential to generate current income from advantageous dividend yields .
- BST … Under normal market conditions, the Trust will invest at least 80% of its total assets in equity securities issued by U.S. and non-U.S. science and technology companies in any market capitalization range, selected for their rapid and sustainable growth potential from the development, advancement and use of science and/or technology , and/or potential to generate current income from advantageous dividend yields.
Pretty much the same investment thesis just using different ways of managing them.
BST is selling at an 11.47% premium.
AIO is selling at a 5.20% discount."
[…]
“All I can share is that in the CEF world, it is easier to start similar CEFs as IPOs and merge them later. Of course, PKO is the oldest, then came PDI, and then PCI. When the later cousins started, their differences were highlighted, but Ivascyn was common to them, and at some point (initial or later), Murata also joined the 3. After Ivascyn became the CIO of Pimco (post-Gross), it was just a matter of time that his many funds would be consolidated.
The PCI and PDI convergence theme emerged in 1/1/16 after its poor start. Ivascyn was brought in Jan 2014 to fix PCI. From Jan-2016 to mid-2017, and Jan-2109 to mid-2020, PCI outperformed PDI and then later had been acting in a flat trend line. This was the natural end of the convergence theme.”
1 me gusta
@Chowder
“In the other blog I was asked about Return of Capital (ROC) and why I was invested in a CEF with a declining NAV. Before I could respond, Ted asked us to reduce the amount of CEF talk so I never did share my thoughts and will do so now.
Keep in mind I am not recommending others to follow my choices as my choices are based on specific goals and risk tolerance levels and that’s different for everyone. So, anything I say, look into it first and then decide if it works for you or not. If it doesn’t, simply move on, no need for a long discussion on something that isn’t of any interest to you.
When people are discussing the merits of high growth vs dividend income paying companies, the discussion always comes down to … I can always buy income later by taking profits and then buy dividend growth companies.
When the dividend folks come back with you might have to trim at a time when the markets are in a recession and that’s not an ideal time to trim and buy income. … The growth folks always come back with, that’s why I have 3, 4, or 5 years of income in savings. I can always dip into savings and give the market time to recover. I think that’s legit argument. I don’t want to hold 5 years worth of income in savings, but I get that it works for some people.
Anyway, that’s how I look at ROC. CEF’s are designed to pay you a steady flow of income regardless of market conditions. In order to do that, they have to have a way to continue making those payments when the market doesn’t favor the assets they hold. The fund doesn’t have the capital gains, the dividend income, or other method to support that monthly or quarterly income payment they promised to pay you so they return some of your capital to you (ROC) in order to make up the difference.
To me it’s like me having to dip into my savings to supplement what my assets can’t cover in order to meet my monthly needs. I don’t mind doing this as long as the market recovers. That’s how I look at ROC.
Some of us will give our equities time to recover and while we wait, we like getting paid while waiting. After a certain period time, we may lose patience with the equity and simply replace it with something else. Some refer to it as a You Pizz Me Off (YPMO) stock. I do the same thing with CEF’s.
The same principles I apply to my equities, I apply to my CEF’s.
As to leverage, the companies we invest in use leverage, it’s called debt. Every company we invest in has debt (leverage) we simply decide how much of it we are willing to accept. I don’t wish to get into a long discussion about the differences between company debt and CEF leverage, it’s not the semantics I focus on but the principles applied, how I manage both situations.”
1 me gusta
Gracias por subir esos aportes, @luisg . Son reflexiones muy interesantes. El mundo de los CEFs me parece muy interesante. Cosas de la vida, habría tardado mucho mucho dar con todo esto de no ser por el recorte de T.
1 me gusta