Last close, VBR up 93.8%?

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
Post Reply
Topic Author
bluto
Posts: 510
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:54 pm

Last close, VBR up 93.8%?

Post by bluto » Sun Jan 10, 2010 4:15 pm

So I opened my account at Fido and was surprised to see my account value up quite a bit today.

The 'Last close' column is showing a 93.8% change for VBR. I knew my small value tilt would payoff!

Predictably, BIV is up only 35.53% since last close on Friday. All other funds/etf's in my account look fine.

I hold VBR in my Roth IRA and Taxable account and it is up 93.8% in both. I've never seen this before and wondered if someone had a clue what was going on??

Edit to fix italics
Last edited by bluto on Sun Jan 10, 2010 4:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
SpringMan
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Michigan

Post by SpringMan » Sun Jan 10, 2010 4:44 pm

Yahoo finance shows VBR up .36% on 1/8/2010. I own VBR at Vanguard but have a Fidelity account also. Here is a real time Fidelity quote:
Real-Time Quote

* As of 01/10/2010 10:26am ET

VBR

VANGUARD SM-CAP VAL

* Refresh

Last [Tick] $108.99[+] Chg up$52.9500
Volume 758,352 % Chg up94.49
Day High $108.99 Open $55.90
Day Low $55.79 Bid $55.1800
Prev Close
01/07/2010 $56.0400 Ask $57.1000
I want to sell at that price :lol:
Best Wishes, SpringMan

pshonore
Posts: 6842
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 2:21 pm

Post by pshonore » Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:01 pm

Fido has BIV with a Friday close price of $107 and change (versus roughly $80 at Fridays close). They've obviously picked up the wrong price somehow but my account sure looks great. Thats really strange as they had the correct price yesterday.

User avatar
SpringMan
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Michigan

Post by SpringMan » Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:15 pm

Pity the poor sole that placed a market order to buy and it executed at that price. Fidelity would almost certainly reverse the transaction but it could make for some nervous moments.
Best Wishes, SpringMan

natureexplorer
Posts: 4197
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:52 am
Location: Houston

Post by natureexplorer » Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:17 pm

SpringMan wrote:Pity the poor sole that placed a market order to buy and it executed at that price. Fidelity would almost certainly reverse the transaction but it could make for some nervous moments.
Are there any laws or policies for that or would they do this just out of good will?

User avatar
SpringMan
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Michigan

Post by SpringMan » Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:29 pm

natureexplorer wrote:
SpringMan wrote:Pity the poor sole that placed a market order to buy and it executed at that price. Fidelity would almost certainly reverse the transaction but it could make for some nervous moments.
Are there any laws or policies for that or would they do this just out of good will?
I don't know for sure regarding the law. It seems like a wild point aberration that happened after the close on Friday. This should be something to keep in mind regarding the use of limit orders rather than market orders. I admit I have occasionally used market orders during the middle of the trading day but would never use one at the very open or close of trading. I know nothing about how after market trading works and have never done it.
Best Wishes, SpringMan

pshonore
Posts: 6842
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 2:21 pm

Post by pshonore » Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:34 pm

They also show VXX with a close of $109 versus Fridays real close of $29+.

Topic Author
bluto
Posts: 510
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 4:54 pm

Post by bluto » Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:36 pm

Ok, lets all say nothing and sell first thing Monday morning :D

User avatar
baw703916
Posts: 6681
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Seattle

Post by baw703916 » Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:53 pm

On the down side, that's liable to make it look like there's a huge spread between the market price and the NAV! :shock:

I looked up the price on CNN's site, and didn't see anything bizarre there. Nor on Vanguard's site (one would hope that they would know what their own funds were trading for!) Maybe Fidelity just ended up putting in the wrong price?

Brad
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.

pshonore
Posts: 6842
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 2:21 pm

Post by pshonore » Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:07 pm

As of 8:05 EST prices appear to be back to normal

User avatar
woof755
Posts: 3169
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 2:03 pm
Location: Honolulu

Post by woof755 » Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:02 pm

A few years back I was shocked to see the small bank stock that's been gifted through my family for decades jump from the teens to $50.00 exactly one day. It typically either doesn't trade or trades a few hundred shares on a daily basis.

Someone had put in a market order to buy and apparently a wise guy had a limit order to sell at $50. Lesson learned.
"By singing in harmony from the same page of the same investing hymnal, the Diehards drown out market noise." | | --Jason Zweig, quoted in The Bogleheads' Guide to Investing

Tramper Al
Posts: 3629
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:42 am

Post by Tramper Al » Mon Jan 11, 2010 9:16 am

woof755 wrote:A few years back I was shocked to see the small bank stock that's been gifted through my family for decades jump from the teens to $50.00 exactly one day. It typically either doesn't trade or trades a few hundred shares on a daily basis.

Someone had put in a market order to buy and apparently a wise guy had a limit order to sell at $50. Lesson learned.
In this case, I think it was simply that Fidelity posted some erroneous prices - I saw it for many ETFs.

And how is the guy with the $50 limit sell order a wise guy? The fellow who places a market buy order (get it for me at whatever price it takes) should thank that guy. If not for him, the gotta-have-it buyer may have paid >$100 to the market maker or the next wise guy in line. Or do you mean wise like a fox?

User avatar
woof755
Posts: 3169
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 2:03 pm
Location: Honolulu

Post by woof755 » Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:03 pm

Well, the fact that the next wise guy was even more of a jerk (limit sell order at $100, as in your example) doesn't make the joker that set a sell order of $50 (on a stock that had a snowball's chance in hell of making it to $50--this is a small bank stock that I've been following for 20 years--it creeps slowly, slowly) any more of an angel!
"By singing in harmony from the same page of the same investing hymnal, the Diehards drown out market noise." | | --Jason Zweig, quoted in The Bogleheads' Guide to Investing

Tramper Al
Posts: 3629
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:42 am

Post by Tramper Al » Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:49 pm

woof755 wrote:Well, the fact that the next wise guy was even more of a jerk (limit sell order at $100, as in your example) doesn't make the joker that set a sell order of $50 (on a stock that had a snowball's chance in hell of making it to $50--this is a small bank stock that I've been following for 20 years--it creeps slowly, slowly) any more of an angel!
I don't mean to belabor this, but don't you think the central problem in this scenario is actually the market buy order? The guy who sells to the market buy order does so because no one else on the planet is prepared to sell at a lower price at that moment. He actually has the best price in town. And the market buy order says I gotta have it now. Which of them is responsible for the distastefully above-prudent-market-value execution.

User avatar
woof755
Posts: 3169
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 2:03 pm
Location: Honolulu

Post by woof755 » Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:24 pm

I was assuming the guy who sold set a limit of $50, such that he wouldn't sell unless, basically, someone made an error and placed a market order in a case when there were no other offers to sell. with this stock, that's pretty likely b/c it doesn't trade that often. so he sold at $50 when he knew it was worth $30 or so. Opportunistic is about all i can say about him.
"By singing in harmony from the same page of the same investing hymnal, the Diehards drown out market noise." | | --Jason Zweig, quoted in The Bogleheads' Guide to Investing

m_j_paquette
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:05 pm

Post by m_j_paquette » Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:41 pm

Back in the Bad Old Days when I played with individual stocks, I followed Apple Inc (AAPL) closely. This is a large cap, high volume stock.

Now, it turns out that there is a defunct oil company called Appell Pete, with a ticker APPL. Some wise guy with shares of this company kept a limit sell order open near Apple Inc's share price for a number of years. Every once in a great while, he'd get a bite, and someone would find themselves the proud owner of a chunk of worthless Appell Pete.

Of course, having big publishers like Forbes occasionally misprint Apple's ticker as APPL didn't exactly help...

sommerfeld
Posts: 1158
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 8:02 pm

Post by sommerfeld » Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:45 pm

Tramper Al wrote:I don't mean to belabor this, but don't you think the central problem in this scenario is actually the market buy order?
yup, that's exactly it.

a hypothetical user-friendly market would refuse to accept market orders in the absence of sufficient depth in the order books, but in the real world you need to be careful about this sort of thing.

User avatar
stratton
Posts: 11083
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 5:05 pm
Location: Puget Sound

Post by stratton » Tue Jan 12, 2010 12:33 am

Web sites like Yahoo make mistakes too. They have been known to get signs on the daily returns backwards. Vanguard shows VEU up today and Yahoo shows it down.

Paul

Post Reply