Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (7) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: stillwater9999 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 14518  
Subject: Corporate Bonds Date: 1/3/2013 4:16 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
taking a pretty good whack of late:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=PIGIX+Basic+Chart&t=1y

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=VFICX

Appears that the big switch out of bonds into equities may be
underway.

sw
Print the post Back To Top
Author: TMFHockeypop Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 13078 of 14518
Subject: Re: Corporate Bonds Date: 1/3/2013 6:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
1. Could be.

2. It was only a month ago that bonds looked much better than the S&P. Not sure if this link adds the S&P.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=1y&s=PIGIX&l=on&...

3. Do you think we've hit our last European or US fiscal crisis?

4. It IS a good time to shorten the corporate duration IMO.

5. I've been wrong SO LONG about inflation I'm scared I'll never be right. Illogical I know, but five years is a LONG time to be wrong about inflation.

6. Bill Gross of Pimco sounds the same warning. Unfortunately the conclusion should result in both a bond and stock decline.

http://www.pimco.com/EN/Insights/Pages/Money-for-Nothin-Writ...
Investment conclusions
Investors should be alert to the longterm inflationary thrust of such check writing. While they are not likely to breathe fire in 2013, the inflationary dragons lurk in the “out” years towards which long-term bond yields are measured. You should avoid them and confine your maturities and bond durations to short/intermediate targets supported by Fed policies. In addition, be aware of PIMCO’s continued concerns about the increasing ineffectiveness of quantitative easing with regards to the real economy. Zero-bound interest rates, QE maneuvering, and “essentially costless” check writing destroy financial business models and stunt investment decisions which offer increasingly lower ROIs and ROEs. Purchases of “paper” shares as opposed to investments in tangible productive investment assets become the likely preferred corporate choice. Those purchases may be initially supportive of stock prices but ultimately constraining of true wealth creation and real economic growth. At some future point, risk assets – stocks, corporate and high yield bonds – must recognize the difference.


VH is probably NOT the place for this discussion (said AFTER I entered in ;-)

Bob
RYR Home Fool

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: KenAtPcs Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 13079 of 14518
Subject: Re: Corporate Bonds Date: 1/4/2013 12:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
taking a pretty good whack of late:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=PIGIX+Basic+Chart&t=1y
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=VFICX
Appears that the big switch out of bonds into equities may be
underway.


Yahoo charts don't account for the year-end distributions, which makes the rather small actual drop appear much larger than reality:
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.html?VFICX,PIGIX

Ken

Print the post Back To Top
Author: stillwater9999 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 13080 of 14518
Subject: Re: Corporate Bonds Date: 1/5/2013 12:57 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Good point, but from what I see the decline is more pronounced this year (same time frame) than in past years.

sw

Print the post Back To Top
Author: stillwater9999 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 13081 of 14518
Subject: Re: Corporate Bonds Date: 1/5/2013 1:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
and there is this from Goldman:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-goldman-thinks-dump-bonds-...

sw

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CM001 Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 13082 of 14518
Subject: Re: Corporate Bonds Date: 1/5/2013 3:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
and there is this from Goldman:

I don't think Fed is leaving the market, at least no yet. My expectation is Fed will not leave until the inflation is on your face or their stated goal of 6.5% unemployment rate is met.

Ben B's second term runs upto 2014, so we are looking at, at least one more year of ZIRP and then also the interest rates will claimb gradually.

While Goldman may be correct, but I would not rush into equities or sell any fixed income based on this.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TMFHockeypop Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 13083 of 14518
Subject: Re: Corporate Bonds Date: 1/5/2013 7:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"A reversion of risk premiums to historical averages of 6% nominal rates (3% real rates and 3% inflation) would suggest estimated losses in portfolios with bond durations of 5 years of 25% or more," equity strategist Robert D. Boroujerdi said in a note.

Taking the other side, it depends on your time frame to make his statement be true. Lets take a retirement account where you don't expect to need that money right away. Stocks stayed flat for 10+ years on whole. They are still deemed over-valued by Shilling and others to the tune of 15% to 45%.

IF you have a bond fund, or individual bonds of five year duration, you will be back to level at the higher rate he hypothesizes in five years.

As I said, I personally prefer ST corporate funds with an average 3 year duration, but there still are arguments for keeping an allocation of bonds.

Bob
RYR Home Fool

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (7) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement