Why not 100% PSLDX?

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
BullHouse_BearMarket
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:19 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by BullHouse_BearMarket »

At about $1 a year, give or take, the reinvestment works great to keep building the share count and thus more distribution value each year. No complaints with low share value when it pays over 10% each year.
mroe800
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 1:37 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by mroe800 »

BullHouse_BearMarket wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 11:26 am Capital gains day, hopefully, right?
Yes. PIMCO documentation shows combined ST/LT cap gains of $0.46405 today.

https://www.pimco.com/handlers/displayd ... SxM6tszowg
Raraculus
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2019 10:43 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Raraculus »

I was checking the closing PSLDX price today and you can imagine my surprise! 6% loss! :shock: Came here to find relief... just a cap gain/dividend distribution. If I held this in a taxable account, I would have been very bummed today.
international001
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:31 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by international001 »

I see if I buy it on Vanguard account, it has a 25k minimum? Is this a Vanguard thing? I don't see any minimum at Fidelity
jarjarM
Posts: 645
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

international001 wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 3:01 pm I see if I buy it on Vanguard account, it has a 25k minimum? Is this a Vanguard thing? I don't see any minimum at Fidelity
Schwab was at $100k minimum when I purchased so that's already a good deal.
User avatar
Ramjet
Posts: 702
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:45 am
Location: Cleveland

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Ramjet »

international001 wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 3:01 pm I see if I buy it on Vanguard account, it has a 25k minimum? Is this a Vanguard thing? I don't see any minimum at Fidelity
No minimum at TDA, only $50 per trade. It's not expensive to buy at Ally or Etrade either
averagedude
Posts: 1440
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by averagedude »

I wouldn't put all of my eggs in the PSLDX basket. Their are so many smart individual and institutional investors out their and if this is such a great idea, than tell my this fund has assets under management in the millions instead of billions. If you desire to own this fund and you completely understand the risks, just make it a part of your portfolio, not all of it.
drzzzzz
Posts: 623
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:56 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by drzzzzz »

international001 wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 3:01 pm I see if I buy it on Vanguard account, it has a 25k minimum? Is this a Vanguard thing? I don't see any minimum at Fidelity
Fidelity has a minimum of $1,000,000 probably since listed as an institutional class. I confirmed that today with a rep.
Semantics
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:42 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Semantics »

averagedude wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:39 pm I wouldn't put all of my eggs in the PSLDX basket. Their are so many smart individual and institutional investors out their and if this is such a great idea, than tell my this fund has assets under management in the millions instead of billions.
At 940M AUM it's in fact very close to a billion-dollars, it seems disingenuous to portray a large distinction when you would not have done so if it were 7% larger. I think there are several pretty simple reasons that it doesn't have more AUM, but they're probably more boring than what you're hoping for.

1) It's very tax-inefficient, probably the biggest factor in the "low" AUM is nobody wants to buy it in a taxable account.
2) It's technically actively managed (the bond part) and won't show up in lists of index funds or 401k plans -- not very easy to market.
3) It's a mutual fund not an ETF.
4) It's not available at all brokers, and most that do offer it have minimum investment thresholds and charge high transaction fees.
5) It's leveraged, which steers most investors away by default, even if they have no problem levering up to buy a home.

I didn't know about this fund until March when I started spending a lot more time here. I'm pretty sure most retail investors just don't know about it.

There's no doubt it likely won't massively outperform SPX like it has over the past decade, and may have higher volatility, but the prospectus makes it pretty clear what this fund is and isn't.
000
Posts: 4603
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2020 12:04 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by 000 »

Semantics wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:00 pm
averagedude wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:39 pm I wouldn't put all of my eggs in the PSLDX basket. Their are so many smart individual and institutional investors out their and if this is such a great idea, than tell my this fund has assets under management in the millions instead of billions.
At 940M AUM it's in fact very close to a billion-dollars, it seems disingenuous to portray a large distinction when you would not have done so if it were 7% larger. I think there are several pretty simple reasons that it doesn't have more AUM, but they're probably more boring than what you're hoping for.

1) It's very tax-inefficient, probably the biggest factor in the "low" AUM is nobody wants to buy it in a taxable account.
2) It's technically actively managed (the bond part) and won't show up in lists of index funds or 401k plans -- not very easy to market.
3) It's a mutual fund not an ETF.
4) It's not available at all brokers, and most that do offer it have minimum investment thresholds and charge high transaction fees.
5) It's leveraged, which steers most investors away by default, even if they have no problem levering up to buy a home.

I didn't know about this fund until March when I started spending a lot more time here. I'm pretty sure most retail investors just don't know about it.

There's no doubt it likely won't massively outperform SPX like it has over the past decade, and may have higher volatility, but the prospectus makes it pretty clear what this fund is and isn't.
6) Institutional investors can implement it themselves.
jarjarM
Posts: 645
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

000 wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:08 pm
Semantics wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:00 pm
averagedude wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:39 pm I wouldn't put all of my eggs in the PSLDX basket. Their are so many smart individual and institutional investors out their and if this is such a great idea, than tell my this fund has assets under management in the millions instead of billions.
At 940M AUM it's in fact very close to a billion-dollars, it seems disingenuous to portray a large distinction when you would not have done so if it were 7% larger. I think there are several pretty simple reasons that it doesn't have more AUM, but they're probably more boring than what you're hoping for.

1) It's very tax-inefficient, probably the biggest factor in the "low" AUM is nobody wants to buy it in a taxable account.
2) It's technically actively managed (the bond part) and won't show up in lists of index funds or 401k plans -- not very easy to market.
3) It's a mutual fund not an ETF.
4) It's not available at all brokers, and most that do offer it have minimum investment thresholds and charge high transaction fees.
5) It's leveraged, which steers most investors away by default, even if they have no problem levering up to buy a home.

I didn't know about this fund until March when I started spending a lot more time here. I'm pretty sure most retail investors just don't know about it.

There's no doubt it likely won't massively outperform SPX like it has over the past decade, and may have higher volatility, but the prospectus makes it pretty clear what this fund is and isn't.
6) Institutional investors can implement it themselves.
+1 for both of you, the strategy isn't super sophisticated. If the institution has reasonable handle on the fixed income side, it can be executed fairly easy w/o paying Pimco for it.

Also, in most brokerage, the minimum entry is quite high, $100k for schawab, and up to $1m for others.
AZAttorney11
Posts: 811
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:12 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by AZAttorney11 »

The minimum for PSLDX at Schwab isn't $100,000 or $1,000,000. I initially purchased $10,000 of it back in June in my Roth IRA.
User avatar
codoriti
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:00 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by codoriti »

Yes, those are outdated limits for PSLDX on Schwab, they changed at some point. There is more discussion on limits and brokers earlier in the thread. Schwab's current limits on PSLDX in an IRA is $1000.
jarjarM
Posts: 645
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

That change must be pretty recent, I purchased in Schwab only early this year (during the depth of March) and it was $100k at the time. :oops:
User avatar
Ramjet
Posts: 702
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:45 am
Location: Cleveland

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Ramjet »

averagedude wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 4:39 pm I wouldn't put all of my eggs in the PSLDX basket. Their are so many smart individual and institutional investors out their and if this is such a great idea, than tell my this fund has assets under management in the millions instead of billions. If you desire to own this fund and you completely understand the risks, just make it a part of your portfolio, not all of it.
It is not good to be held in taxable

Main reason IMO
User avatar
Ramjet
Posts: 702
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2020 11:45 am
Location: Cleveland

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Ramjet »

Semantics wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:00 pm I didn't know about this fund until March when I started spending a lot more time here
How much of your portfolio did you allocate to it
Semantics
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:42 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Semantics »

Ramjet wrote: Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:19 am
Semantics wrote: Thu Dec 10, 2020 5:00 pm I didn't know about this fund until March when I started spending a lot more time here
How much of your portfolio did you allocate to it
6%, all in my Roth IRA (majority of my portfolio is in taxable and this would be bad there). I initially figured I'd migrate it all to a HEDGEFUNDIE style allocation (was initially in Vanguard which doesn't have leveraged ETFs), but with bond yields so low I might wait a bit as I'm curious if their active management can do better than TMF.
OuterBanks
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:19 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by OuterBanks »

I noticed yesterday PSLDX was unchanged for the day. Doesn’t that seem unusual that the fund can hit exactly 0% change for the day?
HSA 100% FZROX, 401K 100% FSKAX, Roth IRA 100% VTSAX, Taxable 100% VTSAX.
User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 2253
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by firebirdparts »

It’s not unheard of. I am in the habit of checking every day. They are always very late pricing it.
A fool and your money are soon partners
international001
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:31 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by international001 »

Just tried to by $4000 on my Vanguard Roth IRA. Denied because it didn't reach the minimum required.
moptop
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon May 07, 2018 8:11 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by moptop »

25K minimum at vanguard
hnd
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:43 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by hnd »

no limit on TDA. I tiptoed in last year.
kevinf
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:35 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by kevinf »

international001 wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 12:05 pm Just tried to by $4000 on my Vanguard Roth IRA. Denied because it didn't reach the minimum required.
I just buy NTSX or VTSAX until I have enough to justify the purchase fee (and in your case, meet the minimum purchase amount).
OuterBanks
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:19 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by OuterBanks »

After buying in at $25,000 I aim for having exactly $6,000 for each purchase of PSLDX to limit the $20 fee. I let some money invest in taxable until I can completely max out the yearly contribution and buy more in one shot.
HSA 100% FZROX, 401K 100% FSKAX, Roth IRA 100% VTSAX, Taxable 100% VTSAX.
User avatar
ccf
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 9:13 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by ccf »

I'm poking at PSLDX in Portfolio Visualizer and ... any ideas why this happened in 2013?

red = 100% PSLDX
blue = 100% SPY

Image
moptop
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon May 07, 2018 8:11 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by moptop »

ccf wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:26 pm I'm poking at PSLDX in Portfolio Visualizer and ... any ideas why this happened in 2013?

red = 100% PSLDX
blue = 100% SPY

Image
I'm guessing it was a bad year for longterm bonds.
User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 2253
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by firebirdparts »

Yes, I would have certainly expected to find that before I looked. Long term bonds rates shot up on May 1 2013. I don't remember why.
A fool and your money are soon partners
international001
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:31 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by international001 »

Fidelity (Brokerage Link) tells me that I have to call to a representative to buy the fund.

Sounds normal?
Tingting1013
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2020 5:44 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Tingting1013 »

international001 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:17 pm Fidelity (Brokerage Link) tells me that I have to call to a representative to buy the fund.

Sounds normal?
Call them on Monday and report back
User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 2253
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by firebirdparts »

international001 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:17 pm Fidelity (Brokerage Link) tells me that I have to call to a representative to buy the fund.

Sounds normal?
Maybe so. I don't know what they call it, but it's certainly in some kind of special category. When I look at it in brokeragelink, I don't see any data feed coming from the outside world into Fidelity. No graphs, no performance data. It doesn't have a fund web page and it doesn't show in the fund finder tool. Since I already own it, I can still buy more by going to the trade button. At least I could the last time i checked.

Just to be clear, I bought it during a brief window when they just treated it like any normal fund. Just lucky.
A fool and your money are soon partners
kardan
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 9:56 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by kardan »

I spoke with a Fidelity rep yesterday and they told me that individuals can't buy PSLDX through Fidelity even if they want to invest the $1M minimum. They claimed it had something to do with their relationship (or lack of one) with PIMCO. This was after about a 10 minute hold while they checked with "another department".
Elysium
Posts: 3296
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:22 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Elysium »

moptop wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:29 pm
ccf wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:26 pm I'm poking at PSLDX in Portfolio Visualizer and ... any ideas why this happened in 2013?

red = 100% PSLDX
blue = 100% SPY

Image
I'm guessing it was a bad year for longterm bonds.
It was. 2018 was another bad year for long bonds and this type of strategy.
corp_sharecropper
Posts: 419
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 2:36 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by corp_sharecropper »

Elysium wrote: Sat Dec 19, 2020 9:12 am
moptop wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:29 pm
ccf wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:26 pm I'm poking at PSLDX in Portfolio Visualizer and ... any ideas why this happened in 2013?

red = 100% PSLDX
blue = 100% SPY

Image
I'm guessing it was a bad year for longterm bonds.
It was. 2018 was another bad year for long bonds and this type of strategy.
In 2013 bond yields rose when Bernanke announced that they would be scaling back, or tapering, Fed treasury purchases (slowing down on QE). Basically treasuries were getting dumped by investors as yields increased (will cause other non-treasury bond yields to rise also). Often referred to as the "taper tantrum", gotta love Wall Streets' creativity.
User avatar
imak
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2019 5:18 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by imak »

Wondering if equity portion of PSLDX can be diversified away from S&P 500 to resemble more of diversified equity portfolio, such as Paul Merriman's ultimate buy and hold allocations.

To mimick PSLDX (100% equity & 100% long-term bond), I attempted a lazy approximation with 110% Equity and 90% Long-term treasuries with equity allocation similar to Paul Merriman style slice-and-dice large-cap/small-cap and US/Intl split of approximately 70%-30%.

SSO (2x S&P500) : 20%
UWM (2x Russell2000) : 20%
VXUS (ex-US Large cap) : 15%
VSS (ex-US Small cap) : 15%
TMF (3x Long-term treasuries): 30%

As per portfolio visualizer, returns are about 17% CAGR from 2012-2020 with similar volatility as PSLDX:

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... tion5_1=30

Yield : 0.90% (significantly lower than PSLDX, favorable for taxable account)
Expense ratio: 0.72% (about 12 basis points higher than PSLDX)

SSO, UWM and TMF leveraged ETFs were selected as their assets under management are larger than 250M (my arbitrary threshold).

For this portfolio, even though returns are about 4% lower than PSLDX so far (mainly due to International underperformance), we get the advantage of more diversified equity exposure and much favorable yield for taxable account implementation.

Curious if anyone is implementing these kind of cloned versions of PSLDX?
Register44
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:30 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Register44 »

:arrow:
Last edited by Register44 on Mon Jan 11, 2021 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ccf
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 9:13 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by ccf »

corp_sharecropper wrote: Sat Dec 19, 2020 10:40 am [
In 2013 bond yields rose when Bernanke announced that they would be scaling back, or tapering, Fed treasury purchases (slowing down on QE). Basically treasuries were getting dumped by investors as yields increased (will cause other non-treasury bond yields to rise also). Often referred to as the "taper tantrum", gotta love Wall Streets' creativity.
ah thank you! I vaguely remember now.
international001
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:31 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by international001 »

kardan wrote: Sat Dec 19, 2020 8:36 am I spoke with a Fidelity rep yesterday and they told me that individuals can't buy PSLDX through Fidelity even if they want to invest the $1M minimum. They claimed it had something to do with their relationship (or lack of one) with PIMCO. This was after about a 10 minute hold while they checked with "another department".
They just told me I can buy it if I have $1M

I guess when I get there I'll figure it out ;-)
kevinf
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:35 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by kevinf »

Buy it elsewhere and do a transfer-in-kind to Fidelity?
international001
Posts: 1826
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:31 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by international001 »

kevinf wrote: Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:10 pm Buy it elsewhere and do a transfer-in-kind to Fidelity?
It's a Fidelity 401k. Can you do this?
kevinf
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:35 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by kevinf »

No idea! Just suggesting possible backdoor methods.
manlymatt83
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:23 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by manlymatt83 »

If my goal is to remain 50/50 US / International, and I own PSLDX, is it safe to buy just as much VXUS as PSLDX to maintain a balance?
IPS: 90% VTWAX, 10% SCV until Vanguard’s test says otherwise. IRA I don’t contribute to anymore set aside separately as “play” fund, which is 3% of net worth.
manlymatt83
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:23 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by manlymatt83 »

For a nomad who doesn't ever want to buy a home, could you instead put the value of a home into PSLDX and have similar risk in leverage to a mortgage?
IPS: 90% VTWAX, 10% SCV until Vanguard’s test says otherwise. IRA I don’t contribute to anymore set aside separately as “play” fund, which is 3% of net worth.
User avatar
cos
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:34 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by cos »

manlymatt83 wrote: Tue Dec 22, 2020 10:30 am If my goal is to remain 50/50 US / International, and I own PSLDX, is it safe to buy just as much VXUS as PSLDX to maintain a balance?
Considering the equity portion of PSLDX is around 100% US stocks, yes, this makes perfect sense.
BullHouse_BearMarket
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:19 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by BullHouse_BearMarket »

I think it is dividend day but not entirely sure. Seems like it is usually the last Thursday of December.
OuterBanks
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:19 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by OuterBanks »

Dividend was on December 9, 2020.

Dividend History for Stockplus Long Duration Fd Instl Cl/PIMCO Funds (NASDAQ:PSLDX)
https://www.dividendinvestor.com/divide ... ail/psldx/
HSA 100% FZROX, 401K 100% FSKAX, Roth IRA 100% VTSAX, Taxable 100% VTSAX.
BullHouse_BearMarket
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:19 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by BullHouse_BearMarket »

OuterBanks wrote: Thu Dec 24, 2020 8:15 am Dividend was on December 9, 2020.
I think that was short and long term capital gains distribution. Typically the quarterly dividend follows on the last Thursday in December. I suppose it is possible there won't be one.
pshonore
Posts: 7075
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 2:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by pshonore »

BullHouse_BearMarket wrote: Thu Dec 24, 2020 10:28 am
OuterBanks wrote: Thu Dec 24, 2020 8:15 am Dividend was on December 9, 2020.
I think that was short and long term capital gains distribution. Typically the quarterly dividend follows on the last Thursday in December. I suppose it is possible there won't be one.
Sept dividend was paid on 9/10; believe the 12/10 payment was dividend and cap gains.
OuterBanks
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:19 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by OuterBanks »

BullHouse_BearMarket wrote: Thu Dec 24, 2020 10:28 am
OuterBanks wrote: Thu Dec 24, 2020 8:15 am Dividend was on December 9, 2020.
I think that was short and long term capital gains distribution. Typically the quarterly dividend follows on the last Thursday in December. I suppose it is possible there won't be one.
Interesting, you are right, it was just the short and long capital gains in December so far, still need an income distribution. Going back several year it seems there has always been one in December.
HSA 100% FZROX, 401K 100% FSKAX, Roth IRA 100% VTSAX, Taxable 100% VTSAX.
mroe800
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 1:37 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by mroe800 »

kevinf wrote: Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:10 pm Buy it elsewhere and do a transfer-in-kind to Fidelity?
I have been considering trying this. I hold a good bit of my portfolio at Vanguard in PSLDX.
OuterBanks wrote: Thu Dec 24, 2020 3:20 pm
BullHouse_BearMarket wrote: Thu Dec 24, 2020 10:28 am
OuterBanks wrote: Thu Dec 24, 2020 8:15 am Dividend was on December 9, 2020.
I think that was short and long term capital gains distribution. Typically the quarterly dividend follows on the last Thursday in December. I suppose it is possible there won't be one.
Interesting, you are right, it was just the short and long capital gains in December so far, still need an income distribution. Going back several year it seems there has always been one in December.
The PIMCO website Tax Center contains all this information. Dividend of $0.16/share will be paid on 12/28/2020.
mwxlkn
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 10:59 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by mwxlkn »

I'm potentially interested in PSLDX as well. Do you know what happened to the fund on Dec 8th? :confused

Image

(4ish% drop vs VOO < 1% drop)
Post Reply