Why not 100% PSLDX? [PIMCO StocksPLUS Long Duration Fund]
-
- Posts: 1287
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:23 am
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I finally got a chance to take a step back and read this entire thread from start to finish. Really learned a lot!
Honestly the only question I have remaining is: is anyone who doesn’t otherwise tilt adding something like a small cap value fund or even a small cap blend fund to offset how top-heavy this is? For example, I could see adding something like AVUV or another small-cap fund alongside PSLDX to make sure you’re getting more of a total market picture.
Also, can add that I have been doing multiple buy orders of $99 at Schwab to avoid transaction fees without issue.
Honestly the only question I have remaining is: is anyone who doesn’t otherwise tilt adding something like a small cap value fund or even a small cap blend fund to offset how top-heavy this is? For example, I could see adding something like AVUV or another small-cap fund alongside PSLDX to make sure you’re getting more of a total market picture.
Also, can add that I have been doing multiple buy orders of $99 at Schwab to avoid transaction fees without issue.
-
- Posts: 2678
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:23 am
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I hold PSLDX as my core holding but make sure to diversify it with assets that do ok under rising rates. Utilities, small cap value, etcmanlymatt83 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 03, 2022 11:26 am I finally got a chance to take a step back and read this entire thread from start to finish. Really learned a lot!
Honestly the only question I have remaining is: is anyone who doesn’t otherwise tilt adding something like a small cap value fund or even a small cap blend fund to offset how top-heavy this is? For example, I could see adding something like AVUV or another small-cap fund alongside PSLDX to make sure you’re getting more of a total market picture.
Also, can add that I have been doing multiple buy orders of $99 at Schwab to avoid transaction fees without issue.
-
- Posts: 1287
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:23 am
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Interesting timing. Received a warning from Schwab Mutual Fund operations today about my $99 Mutual Fund orders to avoid the $49 fee. They human review these and consider "multiple in one day" to be abuse. This is different than information I had previously heard (I called and asked permission before doing this) but a heads up to others doing this.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Yeah that's not a surprise at all. Sucks though, sorry to hear it.manlymatt83 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 05, 2022 2:32 pm Interesting timing. Received a warning from Schwab Mutual Fund operations today about my $99 Mutual Fund orders to avoid the $49 fee. They human review these and consider "multiple in one day" to be abuse. This is different than information I had previously heard (I called and asked permission before doing this) but a heads up to others doing this.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
This is a great post. Bonds are hurting right now, but give it some time and the narrative will switch.bgf wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 1:50 pm I'm still holding. People are WAY overconfident that they know what bonds are going to do over the next few months, years, even 10 years. People accept they can't tell the future with equities but they apparently have little problem foretelling future interest rate moves and bond performance. It's the single most interesting thing on this forum over the past quarter or so.
Every boglehead is now somehow a bond expert.
What I think is that they are equally good at forecasting rates and bond performance as stock performance, which is to say, they're hot garbage.
-
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:50 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Might I ask what percentage of your portfolio is in PSLDX? I’m thinking of moving a significant portion of my Roth into this. And with how it’s been struggling recently, this might be an advantageous entry point, too. Do you also hold PISIX for international exposure?bgf wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 1:50 pm I'm still holding. People are WAY overconfident that they know what bonds are going to do over the next few months, years, even 10 years. People accept they can't tell the future with equities but they apparently have little problem foretelling future interest rate moves and bond performance. It's the single most interesting thing on this forum over the past quarter or so.
Every boglehead is now somehow a bond expert.
What I think is that they are equally good at forecasting rates and bond performance as stock performance, which is to say, they're hot garbage.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
PSLDX is ~10% of my entire portfolio. It is my only holding in an old Simple IRA that doesn't get any contributions anymore. It's at Schwab which carries the fund. My other accounts don't allow for it. I do not hold PISIX but get plenty of international exposure from the rest of my portfolio, which is either target date funds are ETFs modeled after the TDF.superjames1992 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 06, 2022 11:10 amMight I ask what percentage of your portfolio is in PSLDX? I’m thinking of moving a significant portion of my Roth into this. And with how it’s been struggling recently, this might be an advantageous entry point, too. Do you also hold PISIX for international exposure?bgf wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 1:50 pm I'm still holding. People are WAY overconfident that they know what bonds are going to do over the next few months, years, even 10 years. People accept they can't tell the future with equities but they apparently have little problem foretelling future interest rate moves and bond performance. It's the single most interesting thing on this forum over the past quarter or so.
Every boglehead is now somehow a bond expert.
What I think is that they are equally good at forecasting rates and bond performance as stock performance, which is to say, they're hot garbage.
“TE OCCIDERE POSSUNT SED TE EDERE NON POSSUNT NEFAS EST"
-
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:50 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Got ya, thanks! My IRA is also in Schwab, so I am able to buy into it for a $50 fee. So not the best to DCA into, but for a lump sum it can work, it would seem. I think I'll take the plunge an allocation a portion of my IRA portfolio into this one.bgf wrote: ↑Wed Apr 06, 2022 12:51 pmPSLDX is ~10% of my entire portfolio. It is my only holding in an old Simple IRA that doesn't get any contributions anymore. It's at Schwab which carries the fund. My other accounts don't allow for it. I do not hold PISIX but get plenty of international exposure from the rest of my portfolio, which is either target date funds are ETFs modeled after the TDF.superjames1992 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 06, 2022 11:10 amMight I ask what percentage of your portfolio is in PSLDX? I’m thinking of moving a significant portion of my Roth into this. And with how it’s been struggling recently, this might be an advantageous entry point, too. Do you also hold PISIX for international exposure?bgf wrote: ↑Mon Mar 28, 2022 1:50 pm I'm still holding. People are WAY overconfident that they know what bonds are going to do over the next few months, years, even 10 years. People accept they can't tell the future with equities but they apparently have little problem foretelling future interest rate moves and bond performance. It's the single most interesting thing on this forum over the past quarter or so.
Every boglehead is now somehow a bond expert.
What I think is that they are equally good at forecasting rates and bond performance as stock performance, which is to say, they're hot garbage.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I put in a order to sell all my PSLDX.
Maybe its the wrong move, but I don't believe in the S&P 500 or bonds anymore.
Maybe its the wrong move, but I don't believe in the S&P 500 or bonds anymore.
-
- Posts: 349
- Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2021 1:26 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Bonds are tough during rising interest rates, especially 100%. With high inflation stocks & IBonds are probably the best.
No individual stocks.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Does anyone know the average maturity or effective duration of the bonds in the fund?
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
14-18 years, check the summary prospectus for current info.
PIMCO actively manages the Fixed Income Instruments held by the Fund with a view toward enhancing the Fund’s total return, subject to an overall portfolio duration which normally varies within two years (plus or minus) of the portfolio duration of the securities comprising the Bloomberg Barclays Long-Term Government/Credit Index, as calculated by PIMCO, which as of May 31, 2021 was 16.00 years. Duration is a measure used to determine the sensitivity of a security’s price to changes in interest rates. The longer a security’s duration, the more sensitive it will be to changes in interest rates.
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 7:21 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Hi
How many trades were you placing at a time, to get an idea if there is some threshold number of trades above which Schwab will warn the client?
How many trades were you placing at a time, to get an idea if there is some threshold number of trades above which Schwab will warn the client?
manlymatt83 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 05, 2022 2:32 pm Interesting timing. Received a warning from Schwab Mutual Fund operations today about my $99 Mutual Fund orders to avoid the $49 fee. They human review these and consider "multiple in one day" to be abuse. This is different than information I had previously heard (I called and asked permission before doing this) but a heads up to others doing this.
- hiddenpower
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:24 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Given inflation, what's the general thoughts on getting into this fund? (x-posting from HFEA thread)
Does it make sense to wait, and if so, what would be indicators to get in? Has anyone looked into an adaptive strategy based on inflation to get in and out of leveraged risk parity?
Does it make sense to wait, and if so, what would be indicators to get in? Has anyone looked into an adaptive strategy based on inflation to get in and out of leveraged risk parity?
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Naturally as someone who is down 22% in this fund since January I would wait until at least rates stabilize. Since the fund has gotten hit mostly on rate hikes, feels like the next shoe to drop is whenever the next equity drawdown happens
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Waiting for things to “stabilize” is usually a recipe for waiting too long.
"Far more money has been lost by investors preparing for corrections than has been lost in corrections themselves." ~~ Peter Lynch
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
-
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 10:08 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I'm also curious about this. I used to do a bunch of $99 orders, as much as I think 20 in a day at one point, and haven't received a warning. Was thinking of moving my Roth to Schwab and using small orders to make regular contributions but would like to know if that would be allowed... currently using an approximation on M1.chintu2005 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:20 pm Hi
How many trades were you placing at a time, to get an idea if there is some threshold number of trades above which Schwab will warn the client?
manlymatt83 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 05, 2022 2:32 pm Interesting timing. Received a warning from Schwab Mutual Fund operations today about my $99 Mutual Fund orders to avoid the $49 fee. They human review these and consider "multiple in one day" to be abuse. This is different than information I had previously heard (I called and asked permission before doing this) but a heads up to others doing this.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I'm debating getting into this soon. Probably will await the fed (likely) 1/2 point increase and see what shakes out from there .... but I'm thinking a mid-year entry in my IRA.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
At this rate I might convert it to a roth IRA!
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
On Jan 1, I decided my 100% allocation to commodities futures in the wife’s Roth IRA was foolish and switched it all to this fund because “efficiency” in investing sounded good. Talk about
I did invest my entire IRA in farmland and think my approach may be good in the long run. (Overall asset allocation is 70% stock index funds, 10% alts, and 10% tanking long duration bonds).
I did invest my entire IRA in farmland and think my approach may be good in the long run. (Overall asset allocation is 70% stock index funds, 10% alts, and 10% tanking long duration bonds).
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Today is going to be a terrible, very bad, no good kind of a day. -7%?
The main question I have is whether the tanking bond fund that is really dragging down this fund will still provide additional return if held to full maturity as a long term hold (16 years or so) due to the excess returns, eventually which make up for the decreased NAV. That's the theory with a standard bond fund. However does that go away when accounting for the extra management fee for this fund and some volatility decay?
The main question I have is whether the tanking bond fund that is really dragging down this fund will still provide additional return if held to full maturity as a long term hold (16 years or so) due to the excess returns, eventually which make up for the decreased NAV. That's the theory with a standard bond fund. However does that go away when accounting for the extra management fee for this fund and some volatility decay?
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Not too bad. Down 5.57%.RosieQ wrote: ↑Thu May 05, 2022 1:11 pm Today is going to be a terrible, very bad, no good kind of a day. -7%?
The main question I have is whether the tanking bond fund that is really dragging down this fund will still provide additional return if held to full maturity as a long term hold (16 years or so) due to the excess returns, eventually which make up for the decreased NAV. That's the theory with a standard bond fund. However does that go away when accounting for the extra management fee for this fund and some volatility decay?
- hiddenpower
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:24 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
How do you all track this fund in real time? If I have access to a self-directed brokerage account in my 401k, is there a better way to reproduce something close to PSLDX? Not knowing how things are going until you get a dividend seems painful.
-
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 10:08 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I think the dividend is largely irrelevant to how the fund is doing, and the best measure is just the price at the end of the day. If you want to estimate how it's doing down to the minute, adding the return of BLV and SPY should be a decent approximation. As for recreating it in an investable way, since it's 100% sp500 and 100% long bonds, using leveraged ETFs might be able to reproduce it somewhat (usual leveraged ETF caveats apply).hiddenpower wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:11 am How do you all track this fund in real time? If I have access to a self-directed brokerage account in my 401k, is there a better way to reproduce something close to PSLDX? Not knowing how things are going until you get a dividend seems painful.
- hiddenpower
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:24 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
The dividend is relevant, otherwise it's in perpetual decline/sideways.RussellWilson wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:29 amI think the dividend is largely irrelevant to how the fund is doing, and the best measure is just the price at the end of the day. If you want to estimate how it's doing down to the minute, adding the return of BLV and SPY should be a decent approximation. As for recreating it in an investable way, since it's 100% sp500 and 100% long bonds, using leveraged ETFs might be able to reproduce it somewhat (usual leveraged ETF caveats apply).hiddenpower wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:11 am How do you all track this fund in real time? If I have access to a self-directed brokerage account in my 401k, is there a better way to reproduce something close to PSLDX? Not knowing how things are going until you get a dividend seems painful.
- firebirdparts
- Posts: 4411
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm
- Location: Southern Appalachia
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
This has been discussed ad nauseum. It's 100% bonds plus 100% stocks. 10 ways to approximate it, all upthread. The dividends don't tell you anything, they are required to set a market value every single day, and they do so.hiddenpower wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:11 am How do you all track this fund in real time? If I have access to a self-directed brokerage account in my 401k, is there a better way to reproduce something close to PSLDX? Not knowing how things are going until you get a dividend seems painful.
If you want to guess the dividend, which most of us wouldn't bother to do, then you should presume they are paying out the bond interest and they are also paying out the total return of the S&P 500 in cash. If the return is negative, then that piece will be small or zero and whatever negative it "should be" gets taken out of the asset value. You could look at the prospectus, guess the dividend over time, and maybe you'll get good at it. But that would be a lot of work that doesn't interest any of the rest of us.
But if your question is really how to approximate it, here are some options:
* 35% UPRO
* 20% TMF
* 45% BLV (Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF)
or
UPRO 35
TMF 30
IEF 35
or
UPRO 35
TMF 20
VCLT 45
or
UPRO 33
TMF 33
VOO 17
VGLT 17 (this one is pure treasury, no corporate)
Last edited by firebirdparts on Fri May 06, 2022 10:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
This time is the same
- hiddenpower
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:24 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
We need a FAQ, because reading through countless pages (over and over) is not the way. This is not reddit, where you can find the better comments by upvotes and proper sorting.firebirdparts wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:33 amThis has been discussed ad nauseum. It's 100% bonds plus 100% stocks. 10 ways to approximate it, all upthread. The dividends don't tell you anything, they are required to set a market value every single day, and they do so.hiddenpower wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:11 am How do you all track this fund in real time? If I have access to a self-directed brokerage account in my 401k, is there a better way to reproduce something close to PSLDX? Not knowing how things are going until you get a dividend seems painful.
What do you use as your approximation then? Because even though you can lever treasuries using CASHX, it's not going to have the quarterly reset characteristics of a futures contract.
- willthrill81
- Posts: 32250
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:17 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Yikes. PSLDX was down -31% YTD as of yesterday, and stocks aren't even in a bear market.
The Sensible Steward
- firebirdparts
- Posts: 4411
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm
- Location: Southern Appalachia
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Okay, I did it for you and edited my post.reading through countless pages (over and over) is not the way
I've definitely unmade some money.Yikes. PSLDX was down -31% YTD as of yesterday, and stocks aren't even in a bear market.
This time is the same
- hiddenpower
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:24 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Love you.firebirdparts wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:42 amOkay, I did it for you and edited my post.reading through countless pages (over and over) is not the way
portfoliovisualizer approximations
What do you all do to track this on a more realtime basis?
-
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 10:08 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
They could stop distributions entirely and it would have no impact on returns. Gains or losses are reflected in daily NAV. If this weren't true, people could buy right before distribution and get free money.hiddenpower wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:32 amThe dividend is relevant, otherwise it's in perpetual decline/sideways.RussellWilson wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:29 amI think the dividend is largely irrelevant to how the fund is doing, and the best measure is just the price at the end of the day. If you want to estimate how it's doing down to the minute, adding the return of BLV and SPY should be a decent approximation. As for recreating it in an investable way, since it's 100% sp500 and 100% long bonds, using leveraged ETFs might be able to reproduce it somewhat (usual leveraged ETF caveats apply).hiddenpower wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:11 am How do you all track this fund in real time? If I have access to a self-directed brokerage account in my 401k, is there a better way to reproduce something close to PSLDX? Not knowing how things are going until you get a dividend seems painful.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Long term bonds are. This is a 2x levered fund so if bonds are in a bear market and equities are down double digits what else could you possibly expect?willthrill81 wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:38 am Yikes. PSLDX was down -31% YTD as of yesterday, and stocks aren't even in a bear market.
Is this somehow not in line with your expectations given the YTD returns of the SP500 and long term bonds?
“TE OCCIDERE POSSUNT SED TE EDERE NON POSSUNT NEFAS EST"
- xraygoggles
- Posts: 308
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 3:30 pm
- Location: Paradise
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Given the title of this thread - is anyone actually 100% PSLDX (at least in tax-advantaged accounts)?
Simplicity is the key to brilliance - Vti & chill.
- willthrill81
- Posts: 32250
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:17 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
It's not out of what I expected, but I suspect that some who were interested in this fund didn't expect it. We're seeing that any sort of bet on bonds going up when stocks go down can go really far south.bgf wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 11:15 amLong term bonds are. This is a 2x levered fund so if bonds are in a bear market and equities are down double digits what else could you possibly expect?willthrill81 wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 10:38 am Yikes. PSLDX was down -31% YTD as of yesterday, and stocks aren't even in a bear market.
Is this somehow not in line with your expectations given the YTD returns of the SP500 and long term bonds?
The Sensible Steward
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
An off-topic post has been removed. As a reminder, see: General Etiquette
At all times we must conduct ourselves in a respectful manner to other posters. Attacks on individuals, insults, name calling, trolling, baiting or other attempts to sow dissension are not acceptable.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I was all in. Luckily only about 5 years of 401k contributions and Roth as I'm early career and another 20-30 to go. My tax advantaged accounts have been hit hard this year as a result. It's a good reminder, diversification in all things. I'm planning to keep it until 5 years out from retirement or so and see what happens over the next 20+ years but I'm a bit shy about adding more. Luckily my last 12 months or so of contributions have been SWTSX (schwab total stock market). I feel like the long bonds drop may be a bit of an overreaction and hope we are at a bottom but I'll sure feel bad if bonds drop down by 50% still and rates are up at 6-7% in the next few years.xraygoggles wrote: ↑Fri May 06, 2022 11:45 am Given the title of this thread - is anyone actually 100% PSLDX (at least in tax-advantaged accounts)?
-
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 10:08 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
One thing I'm wondering about, is what leverage does to an eventual recovery. Like how much is it still true that losses will be regained after a time equal to the duration, vs permanent value destruction from selling low to settle SP500 losses? Should I assume that if both stocks and bonds recover to where they were at some arbitrary past date, that PSLDX will be lower than it was at that date?
-
- Posts: 3565
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:42 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
The question, "Why not 100% PSLDX?" seems quite ironic right now. When it was first posted, it was dead serious. Unfortunately leverage works in both directions, up and down. Given sufficient time, loading up too heavily on past winners usually pays a price for excessive optimism. 100% of the portfolio in one asset implies a higher level of certainty about the market's future than any of us reliably have. Sometimes a 100% allocation to one asset can prosper over a given time frame, but when that happens, the driving force is timing luck, not insight.
Garland Whizzer
Garland Whizzer
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Are we considering PSLDX to be a singular asset though? This seems to be one of the most diversified single funds available that has substantial buy-in... Large-cap derivatives + a wide variety of long-term bond/bond-like securities. A seemingly solid 1-fund portfolio holding. NTSX is probably the closest suitable equivalent for a taxable holding.garlandwhizzer wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 1:35 pm The question, "Why not 100% PSLDX?" seems quite ironic right now. When it was first posted, it was dead serious. Unfortunately leverage works in both directions, up and down. Given sufficient time, loading up too heavily on past winners usually pays a price for excessive optimism. 100% of the portfolio in one asset implies a higher level of certainty about the market's future than any of us reliably have. Sometimes a 100% allocation to one asset can prosper over a given time frame, but when that happens, the driving force is timing luck, not insight.
Garland Whizzer
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I agree with kevinf.kevinf wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 3:00 pmAre we considering PSLDX to be a singular asset though? This seems to be one of the most diversified single funds available that has substantial buy-in... Large-cap derivatives + a wide variety of long-term bond/bond-like securities. A seemingly solid 1-fund portfolio holding. NTSX is probably the closest suitable equivalent for a taxable holding.garlandwhizzer wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 1:35 pm The question, "Why not 100% PSLDX?" seems quite ironic right now. When it was first posted, it was dead serious. Unfortunately leverage works in both directions, up and down. Given sufficient time, loading up too heavily on past winners usually pays a price for excessive optimism. 100% of the portfolio in one asset implies a higher level of certainty about the market's future than any of us reliably have. Sometimes a 100% allocation to one asset can prosper over a given time frame, but when that happens, the driving force is timing luck, not insight.
Garland Whizzer
Also, has it be determined now that PSLDX is dead? Are they closing the fund? Is it impossible to outperform the SP500 from now til the end of time? Did something special happen today and it’s “game over”?
“TE OCCIDERE POSSUNT SED TE EDERE NON POSSUNT NEFAS EST"
- OuterBanks
- Posts: 167
- Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:19 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I still think it’s an outstanding fund choice for a Roth IRA at Vanguard. 100% stock and 100% bonds in one fund. I only wish I could buy more this year instead of waiting until next year. The bad times can hit hard but so can the good times.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I also certainly don't see the fund as dead, just massively under performing this year. However the same tides that have been hurting hard seem to be loading it up for incredible outperformance in the future. Will it's 2x leveraged fall continue in the near future? Maybe. However with the double fall in stock and long bond performance new purchases will have lower equity valuations locked in with a better chance at good stock returns AND higher bond prices to cushion a drop again. I personally doubt I'll have the courage to continue massive investments but I suspect I'll nibble here and there.
-
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:50 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
I put a lot of my Roth into PSLDX and the international PISIX a little over a month ago. It’s been rough, but it’s something I’m going to try to not touch for a long time, so I’m still hopeful for the future. I got in when it was already down something like 20% YTD, though it’s only gotten worse. Hoping it might’ve been a good entry point, though. At least PISIX hasn’t fallen nearly as badly.
-
- Posts: 1287
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:23 am
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
Is PISIX supposed to operate similarly?superjames1992 wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 10:41 am I put a lot of my Roth into PSLDX and the international PISIX a little over a month ago. It’s been rough, but it’s something I’m going to try to not touch for a long time, so I’m still hopeful for the future. I got in when it was already down something like 20% YTD, though it’s only gotten worse. Hoping it might’ve been a good entry point, though. At least PISIX hasn’t fallen nearly as badly.
-
- Posts: 2748
- Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:31 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
The “return stacking” portfolios available through Pimco (stocksplus) and WisdomTree (efficient core) have exposed the benefits of a portfolio that allocates to these investments and 1/3 to alternatives that may do well when stocks and bonds fall together: commodities, managed futures, farmland, private commercial real estate, etc.
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
international001 wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 8:07 pm Just to put things in perspective:
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... on4_2=-100
Some more perspective.....long-term treasury yields hit over 10% in 1987, when this backtest started. We can't expect the same "juiced" returns going forward.
- hiddenpower
- Posts: 564
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2020 11:24 pm
Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?
How are folks tracking the total return performance of this in real time?
If you have option to use LETFs, would you prefer those? Or if one wanted to DCA into PSLDX over a long time period, would it make sense to use lefts until fully exposed, and then switch it all to PSLDX? Thanks!
If you have option to use LETFs, would you prefer those? Or if one wanted to DCA into PSLDX over a long time period, would it make sense to use lefts until fully exposed, and then switch it all to PSLDX? Thanks!