Why not 100% PSLDX?

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 2677
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by firebirdparts »

NMBob wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 7:46 am
daily rebalancing of upro/edv...smh..have a nice day
I figure when somebody uses the phrase "exactly the same volatility decay" and his name is "semantics" I don't have anything to say about that. let the reader act accordingly.
A fool and your money are soon partners
Jags4186
Posts: 5935
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Jags4186 »

dafioram wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:35 pm Thats 5% drop on psldx in my account looks a little scary.
I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but I don't understand why you would buy a complex product like this without understanding how mutual funds in general work. I hope you own it in a tax advantaged account
Raraculus
Posts: 118
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2019 10:43 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Raraculus »

rchmx1 wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:43 pmYa, historically Q1 and 2 have had quite low distributions, so I wasn't expecting them to both the so large this year. I guess the team needed to be particularly active what with everything going on in the bond market this year?
I call blackmagictruckery on this one! :shock: This is the third consecutive quarter where PSLDX paid out a large dividend. Job well done, but I wonder what's their secret sauce?
grp2c
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 5:51 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by grp2c »

MA405 wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:04 pm
mutedbytes wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:43 pm
grp2c wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:54 am FYI just found out you can buy PSLDX at JP Morgan commission free.

I took advantage of a chase private client brokerage bonus last year for a taxable account. I think I'll move my roth ira's there to buy PSLDX.
Interesting. Any minimums? How is JP Morgan in general service-wise, interface etc?
Wouldn’t let me complete simulated order in my taxable, “This mutual fund is not available for purchase in your account”.
Don’t have IRA accounts at Chase.
I cannot purchase new shares either. JP Morgan advisor said it says available to purchase on his end so he's not sure why. He suggested bring over the shares in kind and then I should be able to buy more. He doesn't think there's any minimums if I already own shares.

Chase/JP Morgan interface has been fine for my minimal trading. I believe I have the JP Morgan self directed account now. Their naming of the accounts has been through some iterations. There's no fees. With the private client upgrade I did get a dedicated advisor. I'm actually impressed how responsive he has been. He did pitch an SMA account at one point but I said I wasn't really interested and he didn't push further.
Semantics
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:42 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Semantics »

NMBob wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 7:46 am
Semantics wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:53 pm
NMBob wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:39 pm
Semantics wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:56 am
NMBob wrote: Wed Jun 02, 2021 11:44 pm

if you believe in A) volatility decay being a possible risk that does exist that may or may not come to bite you or B) possibility of a 3x stock etf going to zero value....then taking those risks in upro just to get 100 percent stock seems like low reward, higher risk. At least in 55/45 hfea one has the high reward of 160 in stock return.
If you're 33% UPRO then you have exactly the same volatility decay and risk of equity going to zero as if you were holding 100% SPY, assuming regular rebalancing.

Only advantages of PSLDX that I see are that it's set it and forget it, and maybe there's some value to the more diversified bond portion (not just LTT).
Technically it can probably never go to zero, but etfs have closed or reduced leverage multipliers.

Look at 3 consecutive days of 20 percent drop triggering sp500 shutdown. That means you have 51.2 percent of spy left of your beginning 3 day total, or only 6.4 percent of your upro. So your initial proposal of 33 percent upro is now 2.
If you rebalance daily this cannot happen, your exposure to stocks will be 100% of the portfolio value every day, just like with the 100% SPY version.
daily rebalancing of upro/edv...smh..have a nice day
3 consecutive days of 20% drop...smh...have a nice day

BTW if you want to consider ridiculous scenarios, shouldn't you consider both extremes? 3 consecutive days of 20% gain = 73% increase for PSLDX, and with no rebalancing 103% increase for upro/edv. :beer Consider that in the long run market generally goes up.
Last edited by Semantics on Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:34 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Semantics
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:42 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Semantics »

firebirdparts wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:48 am
NMBob wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 7:46 am
daily rebalancing of upro/edv...smh..have a nice day
I figure when somebody uses the phrase "exactly the same volatility decay" and his name is "semantics" I don't have anything to say about that. let the reader act accordingly.
I'm not sure what your point is or what my screen name has to do with this. My point, since you don't seem to follow, is that volatility decay is simply a mathematical property of converting mean to geometric mean (look up the AM-GM inequality and Ito's Lemma). 1/3 of a 3x fund (rest cash) has exactly the same volatility of the 1x fund -- therefore the identical volatility decay. You would only suffer from greater volatility decay if you don't rebalance, and let your allocation to the 3x fund slip to below 1/3 of the portfolio value. I really don't understand what you're trying to argue here. I strongly recommend understanding the math before you even consider using leverage in a portfolio.
Semantics
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:42 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Semantics »

NMBob wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:39 pm
Semantics wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:56 am
NMBob wrote: Wed Jun 02, 2021 11:44 pm
RussellWilson wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 10:59 pm Thinking of attempting a DYI with 33% UPRO and 67% EDV. I'm wondering, is increasing duration taking the same kind of risk as leverage? The duration for PSLDX is ~16, so if EDV was ~24, is that the same kind of interest rate risk and expected performance as levering a 16 duration treasury bond by 1.5x? I know PSLDX isn't all treasuries so the risk profile is different in that regard...

I know that UPRO behaves differently than 3x margin SP 500. But say I'm aiming for 100% SP 500 and 100% LTT, is the above a decent approximation? Considering the combined ER of EDV/UPRO is .36, vs 1.02 for PSLDX, it seems like a DYI version is optimal, unless maybe UPRO's issues stemming from daily leverage are worth paying a significant amount to avoid?
if you believe in A) volatility decay being a possible risk that does exist that may or may not come to bite you or B) possibility of a 3x stock etf going to zero value....then taking those risks in upro just to get 100 percent stock seems like low reward, higher risk. At least in 55/45 hfea one has the high reward of 160 in stock return.
If you're 33% UPRO then you have exactly the same volatility decay and risk of equity going to zero as if you were holding 100% SPY, assuming regular rebalancing.

Only advantages of PSLDX that I see are that it's set it and forget it, and maybe there's some value to the more diversified bond portion (not just LTT).
Technically it can probably never go to zero, but etfs have closed or reduced leverage multipliers.

Look at 3 consecutive days of 20 percent drop triggering sp500 shutdown. That means you have 51.2 percent of spy left of your beginning 3 day total, or only 6.4 percent of your upro. So your initial proposal of 33 percent upro is now 2. Now you hope the bonds save you enough you can recover.
I failed to even notice in my earlier replies that this example is incomplete resulting in a seemingly backwards conclusion, in addition to being unrealistic. Let's look at the complete portfolio behavior assuming bond values don't change.

33% UPRO / 67% EDV: becomes 2% UPRO / 67% EDV = remaining portfolio value is 69%

100% SPY (or for PSLDX case: 100% SPY / 100% bonds / -100% cash) = remaining portfolio value is 51.2%

Explain to me again how UPRO/EDV is a worse option? I still don't get it. The daily rebalancing of UPRO helps to limit your losses in a major crash.
Hydromod
Posts: 597
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2019 10:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Hydromod »

Semantics wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:32 pm Technically it can probably never go to zero, but etfs have closed or reduced leverage multipliers.

Look at 3 consecutive days of 20 percent drop triggering sp500 shutdown. That means you have 51.2 percent of spy left of your beginning 3 day total, or only 6.4 percent of your upro. So your initial proposal of 33 percent upro is now 2. Now you hope the bonds save you enough you can recover.
I failed to even notice in my earlier replies that this example is incomplete resulting in a seemingly backwards conclusion, in addition to being unrealistic. Let's look at the complete portfolio behavior assuming bond values don't change.

33% UPRO / 67% EDV: becomes 2% UPRO / 67% EDV = remaining portfolio value is 69%

100% SPY (or for PSLDX case: 100% SPY / 100% bonds / -100% cash) = remaining portfolio value is 51.2%

Explain to me again how UPRO/EDV is a worse option? I still don't get it. The daily rebalancing of UPRO helps to limit your losses in a major crash.
[/quote]

You aren't rebalancing consistently.

UPRO/EDV case (lose 60 percent of UPRO every day, rebalance back to 33 / 67 every day)

Day 1 market: 0.33*0.4 + 0.67 => portfolio = 0.802
Day 1 rebalance: 0.802 * [1/3 2/3] => 0.267/0.535

Day 2 market: 0.267*0.4 + 0.535 => portfolio = 0.642
Day 2 rebalance: 0.642 * [1/3 2/3] => 0.214/0.428

Day 3 market: 0.214*0.4 + 0.428 => portfolio = 0.513

UPRO/EDV case (lose 60 percent of UPRO every day, don't rebalance)

UPRO after three days: 0.33 * 0.4^3 = 0.021
Portfolio: 0.021 + 0.67 = 0.691

SPY case (lose 20 percent every day)

SPY after three days: 0.8^3 = 0.512

PSLDX case (lose 20 percent of SPY part every day, rebalance back to 50/50 every day)

Day 1 market: 0.5*0.8 + 0.5 => portfolio = 0.9
Day 1 rebalance: 0.9 * [1/2 1/2] => 0.45/0.45

Day 2 market: 0.45*0.8 + 0.45 => portfolio = 0.81
Day 2 rebalance: 0.81 * [1/2 1/2] => 0.405/0.405

Day 3 market: 0.405*0.8 + 0.405 => portfolio = 0.729

I think this is right.
langlands
Posts: 1081
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2019 10:05 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by langlands »

Semantics wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:16 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:48 am
NMBob wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 7:46 am
daily rebalancing of upro/edv...smh..have a nice day
I figure when somebody uses the phrase "exactly the same volatility decay" and his name is "semantics" I don't have anything to say about that. let the reader act accordingly.
I'm not sure what your point is or what my screen name has to do with this. My point, since you don't seem to follow, is that volatility decay is simply a mathematical property of converting mean to geometric mean (look up the AM-GM inequality and Ito's Lemma). 1/3 of a 3x fund (rest cash) has exactly the same volatility of the 1x fund -- therefore the identical volatility decay. You would only suffer from greater volatility decay if you don't rebalance, and let your allocation to the 3x fund slip to below 1/3 of the portfolio value. I really don't understand what you're trying to argue here. I strongly recommend understanding the math before you even consider using leverage in a portfolio.
Heh, I'm afraid your post will largely fall on deaf ears. I've largely stepped back from posting about leveraged portfolios because I realized that either you have the right mathematical framework for thinking about it or you don't. After reading a lot of posts here, I've concluded that very few understand what volatility decay actually is or its relevance to geometric vs. arithmetic return. The math isn't really that hard, but first one has to realize that leverage really is a purely mathematical concept and there's no way around that fact. About 50 pages of discussion in the HFEA thread could be summarized cleanly in one page of mathematics.

Anyway, it's not really realistic to expect even a minority of posters on a general finance forum to be familiar with either the AM-GM or Ito's lemma. Unfortunately, the logical conclusion is that it's not really reasonable to expect very many posters to understand all the nuances of leverage. This is a problem because you can't use leverage as just a black box. The difference between 2x and 3x leverage can be massive and the margin between an aggressive and a catastrophic amount of leverage is thin. A bit of complex mathematics is required to really understand factors as well, but the actionability there is pretty simple. Just add more value if you like value or add more momentum if you like momentum. To understand when and why you should rebalance a leveraged portfolio and how much leverage to take really requires understanding the nuts and bolts. There is a reason why leveraged ETFs come with warning signs at most brokers while even risky factor funds do not.
NMBob
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 8:13 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by NMBob »

"The difference between 2x and 3x leverage can be massive and the margin between an aggressive and a catastrophic amount of leverage is thin. "

1 - So if that is true, why would people suggest anyone use 3x leveraged etfs if they could use something else? Which basically was my point in my first post.

"Explain to me again how UPRO/EDV is a worse option? I still don't get it. The daily rebalancing of UPRO helps to limit your losses in a major crash."

2 - So what is the reality that someone wants to have to rebalance their portfolio on a daily basis? Is their anyone who has posted they had a leveraged etf portfolio that they rebalanced it every day? And rebalanced it everyday in March and April of 2020?

3 - In HFEA , and 33 upro/67edv seems to be a hfea variant, although more it is often Mototrojans 43/57 ratios,. People have concluded quarterly rebalancing seems to have a higher return than monthly rebalancing. So, why would someone be daily rebalancing stock/ bond leveraged portfolio daily and not quarterly to begin with in hfea variant? Has anyone stated they have actually gone with daily rebalancing and shown that would bring them better returns than monthly or quarterly? I don't think that claim has been made or endorsed in the mega thousands of hfea posts.

Or have discussions left practical application behind?
Semantics
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:42 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Semantics »

Hydromod wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:06 pm
Semantics wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:32 pm I failed to even notice in my earlier replies that this example is incomplete resulting in a seemingly backwards conclusion, in addition to being unrealistic. Let's look at the complete portfolio behavior assuming bond values don't change.

33% UPRO / 67% EDV: becomes 2% UPRO / 67% EDV = remaining portfolio value is 69%

100% SPY (or for PSLDX case: 100% SPY / 100% bonds / -100% cash) = remaining portfolio value is 51.2%

Explain to me again how UPRO/EDV is a worse option? I still don't get it. The daily rebalancing of UPRO helps to limit your losses in a major crash.
You aren't rebalancing consistently.

UPRO/EDV case (lose 60 percent of UPRO every day, rebalance back to 33 / 67 every day)

Day 1 market: 0.33*0.4 + 0.67 => portfolio = 0.802
Day 1 rebalance: 0.802 * [1/3 2/3] => 0.267/0.535

Day 2 market: 0.267*0.4 + 0.535 => portfolio = 0.642
Day 2 rebalance: 0.642 * [1/3 2/3] => 0.214/0.428

Day 3 market: 0.214*0.4 + 0.428 => portfolio = 0.513

UPRO/EDV case (lose 60 percent of UPRO every day, don't rebalance)

UPRO after three days: 0.33 * 0.4^3 = 0.021
Portfolio: 0.021 + 0.67 = 0.691

SPY case (lose 20 percent every day)

SPY after three days: 0.8^3 = 0.512

PSLDX case (lose 20 percent of SPY part every day, rebalance back to 50/50 every day)

Day 1 market: 0.5*0.8 + 0.5 => portfolio = 0.9
Day 1 rebalance: 0.9 * [1/2 1/2] => 0.45/0.45

Day 2 market: 0.45*0.8 + 0.45 => portfolio = 0.81
Day 2 rebalance: 0.81 * [1/2 1/2] => 0.405/0.405

Day 3 market: 0.405*0.8 + 0.405 => portfolio = 0.729

I think this is right.
PSLDX should be 100/100, no? So the daily rebalancing would just lower the bond exposure and pay back borrowed money. The equity portion would stay the same as the overall portfolio value and be 0.512 to match the SPY case.

So, to restate my original point, if you rebalance daily they are equivalent. And also, if you rebalance monthly or quarterly, then UPRO/EDV could do mildly better or worse, depending on the scenario and which of daily vs monthly volatility is higher. I suspect it's not worth worrying about, but I think whether UPRO/EDV would do better depends on whether bond returns have a mean-reversion tendency like equities have the past couple decades (making monthly volatility lower than daily volatility, and therefore monthly rebalancing slightly less volatility drag than daily rebalancing).
Semantics
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:42 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Semantics »

langlands wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:11 pm
Semantics wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:16 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:48 am
NMBob wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 7:46 am
daily rebalancing of upro/edv...smh..have a nice day
I figure when somebody uses the phrase "exactly the same volatility decay" and his name is "semantics" I don't have anything to say about that. let the reader act accordingly.
I'm not sure what your point is or what my screen name has to do with this. My point, since you don't seem to follow, is that volatility decay is simply a mathematical property of converting mean to geometric mean (look up the AM-GM inequality and Ito's Lemma). 1/3 of a 3x fund (rest cash) has exactly the same volatility of the 1x fund -- therefore the identical volatility decay. You would only suffer from greater volatility decay if you don't rebalance, and let your allocation to the 3x fund slip to below 1/3 of the portfolio value. I really don't understand what you're trying to argue here. I strongly recommend understanding the math before you even consider using leverage in a portfolio.
Heh, I'm afraid your post will largely fall on deaf ears. I've largely stepped back from posting about leveraged portfolios because I realized that either you have the right mathematical framework for thinking about it or you don't. After reading a lot of posts here, I've concluded that very few understand what volatility decay actually is or its relevance to geometric vs. arithmetic return. The math isn't really that hard, but first one has to realize that leverage really is a purely mathematical concept and there's no way around that fact. About 50 pages of discussion in the HFEA thread could be summarized cleanly in one page of mathematics.

Anyway, it's not really realistic to expect even a minority of posters on a general finance forum to be familiar with either the AM-GM or Ito's lemma. Unfortunately, the logical conclusion is that it's not really reasonable to expect very many posters to understand all the nuances of leverage. This is a problem because you can't use leverage as just a black box. The difference between 2x and 3x leverage can be massive and the margin between an aggressive and a catastrophic amount of leverage is thin. A bit of complex mathematics is required to really understand factors as well, but the actionability there is pretty simple. Just add more value if you like value or add more momentum if you like momentum. To understand when and why you should rebalance a leveraged portfolio and how much leverage to take really requires understanding the nuts and bolts. There is a reason why leveraged ETFs come with warning signs at most brokers while even risky factor funds do not.
Yeah you are right, it's probably best to just point to the math so those interested can dig deeper. I don't have a background in finance and picked up most of what I know from yourself and others on the forum, and Prof Google. I do think there are some simple but overlooked takeaways (like so-called volatility decay having a mathematical formula, not some nebulous effect that shows up in backtests), so of these days if no one's done it already maybe I'll write up a backtest-free summary.
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

@Semantics @landlands The more time people like yourselves want to spend figuring out ways transpose these more complex mathematical topics into more approachable English, the better. Maybe some books or podcasts you know of, that focus on these topics?
Semantics
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:42 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by Semantics »

NMBob wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:28 pm 2 - So what is the reality that someone wants to have to rebalance their portfolio on a daily basis? Is their anyone who has posted they had a leveraged etf portfolio that they rebalanced it every day? And rebalanced it everyday in March and April of 2020?
Yeah it doesn't make practical sense to rebalance every day and nobody does that. My point was intended to show that the portfolios are essentially equivalent, which is easiest to see if you imagine daily rebalancing. In theory rebalancing frequency doesn't matter if the market is a random walk. In practice, in recent decades there's been a slight mean-reversion trend, meaning monthly volatility is lower than daily, such that rebalancing monthly has done a bit better (and quarterly even more so, as you say). But that may not remain true forever.
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

Raraculus wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:28 am
rchmx1 wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:43 pmYa, historically Q1 and 2 have had quite low distributions, so I wasn't expecting them to both the so large this year. I guess the team needed to be particularly active what with everything going on in the bond market this year?
I call blackmagictruckery on this one! :shock: This is the third consecutive quarter where PSLDX paid out a large dividend. Job well done, but I wonder what's their secret sauce?
Helping it catch up at least. From July when I first purchased this fund, SPY is up 31.89% while PSLDX is now up 31.58%. Is it reasonable to feel impressed that, with all this weird interest rate stuff that has been going on recently, PSLDX has been nearly able to keep up with the S&P500?
User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 2677
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by firebirdparts »

Gonna be a big day today.
A fool and your money are soon partners
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

firebirdparts wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 2:11 pm Gonna be a big day today.
Unfortunately the S&P500 didn't come along for the ride today, so while PSLDX will be green, I think it'll be a modest gain.
jarjarM
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

rchmx1 wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:34 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 2:11 pm Gonna be a big day today.
Unfortunately the S&P500 didn't come along for the ride today, so while PSLDX will be green, I think it'll be a modest gain.
1.06% gain for the day, not bad comparing to S&P500, it would be nicer if stock side did a bit better. :twisted:
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

jarjarM wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:33 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:34 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 2:11 pm Gonna be a big day today.
Unfortunately the S&P500 didn't come along for the ride today, so while PSLDX will be green, I think it'll be a modest gain.
1.06% gain for the day, not bad comparing to S&P500, it would be nicer if stock side did a bit better. :twisted:
Was just gonna post that. Very nice considering S&P500 was flat!
jarjarM
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

rchmx1 wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:44 pm
jarjarM wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:33 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:34 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 2:11 pm Gonna be a big day today.
Unfortunately the S&P500 didn't come along for the ride today, so while PSLDX will be green, I think it'll be a modest gain.
1.06% gain for the day, not bad comparing to S&P500, it would be nicer if stock side did a bit better. :twisted:
Was just gonna post that. Very nice considering S&P500 was flat!
yup, good day for bond heavy holdings.
iskey
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:24 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by iskey »

jarjarM wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:47 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:44 pm
jarjarM wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:33 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:34 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Thu Jun 17, 2021 2:11 pm Gonna be a big day today.
Unfortunately the S&P500 didn't come along for the ride today, so while PSLDX will be green, I think it'll be a modest gain.
1.06% gain for the day, not bad comparing to S&P500, it would be nicer if stock side did a bit better. :twisted:
Was just gonna post that. Very nice considering S&P500 was flat!
yup, good day for bond heavy holdings.
PSLDX unchanged today. I'll take it.
User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 2677
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by firebirdparts »

Yep. I like it. I wonder sometimes when they do that exactly zero if they just knock off early.
A fool and your money are soon partners
jarjarM
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

firebirdparts wrote: Sat Jun 19, 2021 7:21 am Yep. I like it. I wonder sometimes when they do that exactly zero if they just knock off early.
Me too, seems hard to arrive precisely at 0%.
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

jarjarM wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 12:52 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Sat Jun 19, 2021 7:21 am Yep. I like it. I wonder sometimes when they do that exactly zero if they just knock off early.
Me too, seems hard to arrive precisely at 0%.
I would guess it's a product of the fact that PSLDX always stays at a pretty small NAV which only uses whole cents? So any change +/- ~.1% will work out to less than a one cent increase/decrease, if I've done the math right. I would assume, on days where the increase/decrease is < .1% and so would be less than a one cent difference, they tack that change onto the next day's movement.
jarjarM
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

rchmx1 wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:08 pm
jarjarM wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 12:52 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Sat Jun 19, 2021 7:21 am Yep. I like it. I wonder sometimes when they do that exactly zero if they just knock off early.
Me too, seems hard to arrive precisely at 0%.
I would guess it's a product of the fact that PSLDX always stays at a pretty small NAV which only uses whole cents? So any change +/- ~.1% will work out to less than a one cent increase/decrease, if I've done the math right. I would assume, on days where the increase/decrease is < .1% and so would be less than a one cent difference, they tack that change onto the next day's movement.
Ah, that make sense. Thanks :beer
grp2c
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 5:51 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by grp2c »

mutedbytes wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:43 pm
grp2c wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:54 am FYI just found out you can buy PSLDX at JP Morgan commission free.

I took advantage of a chase private client brokerage bonus last year for a taxable account. I think I'll move my roth ira's there to buy PSLDX.
Interesting. Any minimums? How is JP Morgan in general service-wise, interface etc?
I brought PSLDX in kind from Schwab to JP Morgan. I bought more shares commission free. Doesn't appear to be any minimum. One purchase order was for $45. You must already own the fund in order to purchase.
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

On days like this I get genuinely excited to see what PSLDX's NAV will be. lol
iskey
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:24 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by iskey »

rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:17 pm On days like this I get genuinely excited to see what PSLDX's NAV will be. lol
Make some popcorn and spam the refresh button!
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

iskey wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:44 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:17 pm On days like this I get genuinely excited to see what PSLDX's NAV will be. lol
Make some popcorn and spam the refresh button!
It's quite possible that around 5:30 CST you'll find me doing just that many a day. :D
jarjarM
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 4:00 pm
iskey wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:44 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:17 pm On days like this I get genuinely excited to see what PSLDX's NAV will be. lol
Make some popcorn and spam the refresh button!
It's quite possible that around 5:30 CST you'll find me doing just that many a day. :D
I'm definitely doing that today. I'm betting 1+% :beer
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

jarjarM wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 5:03 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 4:00 pm
iskey wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:44 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:17 pm On days like this I get genuinely excited to see what PSLDX's NAV will be. lol
Make some popcorn and spam the refresh button!
It's quite possible that around 5:30 CST you'll find me doing just that many a day. :D
I'm definitely doing that today. I'm betting 1+% :beer
PIMCO knows we're on tender hooks so of course they're (at least at Schwab) taking their sweet time. :annoyed haha
jarjarM
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 5:40 pm
jarjarM wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 5:03 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 4:00 pm
iskey wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:44 pm
rchmx1 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 3:17 pm On days like this I get genuinely excited to see what PSLDX's NAV will be. lol
Make some popcorn and spam the refresh button!
It's quite possible that around 5:30 CST you'll find me doing just that many a day. :D
I'm definitely doing that today. I'm betting 1+% :beer
PIMCO knows we're on tender hooks so of course they're (at least at Schwab) taking their sweet time. :annoyed haha
i know, Schwab is way late.
jarjarM
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by jarjarM »

1.13%, not bad for a day where SPY return 0.75%
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

Very nice extra helping of greens on the plate, thanks to the bond portion. After a rough stretch to begin the year, we're having more and more days where the strategy is working to increase returns. Glad to be in this fund.
User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 2677
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by firebirdparts »

I do look at it every day. But it was more fun today.
A fool and your money are soon partners
User avatar
noraz123
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 1:23 am
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by noraz123 »

firebirdparts wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 10:33 pm I do look at it every day. But it was more fun today.
Was it more fun just because it was up more than 1%,or was there something special about today?

I own a little psldx (little being the operative word) mostly to better understand it. But I don't follow the daily prices. So I am wondering if am missing something.
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

noraz123 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 11:46 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 10:33 pm I do look at it every day. But it was more fun today.
Was it more fun just because it was up more than 1%,or was there something special about today?

I own a little psldx (little being the operative word) mostly to better understand it. But I don't follow the daily prices. So I am wondering if am missing something.
PSLDX is fun to have when:

Both stocks and bonds are up (meaningful outperformance), or
when stocks are down but bonds are up. (modest outperformance)

PSLDX is not so fun to have when:

Stocks are up but bonds are down (modest underperformance), or
(especially) when both stocks and bonds are down. (meaningful underperformance)

So, today was fun because both stocks and bonds were up, so we knew we'd be getting extra green when the NAV updated. It is these kind of days which are responsible for this fund's historical outperformance of its benchmark, so when they come around, we, it's adherents, enjoy raising a glass. :beer
User avatar
noraz123
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 1:23 am
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by noraz123 »

rchmx1 wrote: Sat Jul 03, 2021 3:25 am
noraz123 wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 11:46 pm
firebirdparts wrote: Fri Jul 02, 2021 10:33 pm I do look at it every day. But it was more fun today.
Was it more fun just because it was up more than 1%,or was there something special about today?

I own a little psldx (little being the operative word) mostly to better understand it. But I don't follow the daily prices. So I am wondering if am missing something.
PSLDX is fun to have when:

Both stocks and bonds are up (meaningful outperformance), or
when stocks are down but bonds are up. (modest outperformance)

PSLDX is not so fun to have when:

Stocks are up but bonds are down (modest underperformance), or
(especially) when both stocks and bonds are down. (meaningful underperformance)

So, today was fun because both stocks and bonds were up, so we knew we'd be getting extra green when the NAV updated. It is these kind of days which are responsible for this fund's historical outperformance of its benchmark, so when they come around, we, it's adherents, enjoy raising a glass. :beer
Thank you for the explanation! Very helpful.
rchmx1
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by rchmx1 »

Man, the bond portion of this fund has been killing it the last two days. Up like .67% with the S&P500 was down around .2% yesterday, and up 1% when the S&P500 is up .34% today. It's nice to start breaking out of that stretch where the bond side was dragging down this fund's performance. :beer
buster1971
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 6:48 am

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by buster1971 »

To set our status: Retired 51 year old, 47 year old wife, 15 year old kids in private school, no debt (no mortgage), kids education fully funding sitting in 529, $8.5M net worth roughly.

PSLDX is a big part of our income stream. When I retired I moved $1M from VWUAX to PSLDX in a taxable as no 401K/Roth IRA space. This is generating about $10k a month in income which funds our life with excess going into emergency fund.

This has allowed me to continue to hold a significant amount in VT as I did during accumulation phase but not need to touch it. As long as PSLDX keeps generating my income stream no need to withdraw from it.

As for tax - If I was still working I would be paying tax on the income, so paying tax on the PSLDX churn is no different; except I am not working for the privilege of paying taxes ;)
BullHouse_BearMarket
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 4:19 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by BullHouse_BearMarket »

buster1971 wrote: Wed Jul 21, 2021 8:11 am PSLDX is a big part of our income stream. When I retired I moved $1M from VWUAX to PSLDX in a taxable as no 401K/Roth IRA space. This is generating about $10k a month in income which funds our life with excess going into emergency fund.

This has allowed me to continue to hold a significant amount in VT as I did during accumulation phase but not need to touch it. As long as PSLDX keeps generating my income stream no need to withdraw from it.
This sounds a lot like what I hope to do. Are you reinvesting the distributions then selling off shares to meet expense needs?
chintu2005
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 7:21 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by chintu2005 »

@buster1971
What brokerage do you hold PSLDX in your taxable account? I tried IBKR but seems like it is restricted to buy PSLDX in taxable.
ra7
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2021 4:13 pm

Re: Why not 100% PSLDX?

Post by ra7 »

chintu2005 wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 12:40 pm @buster1971
What brokerage do you hold PSLDX in your taxable account? I tried IBKR but seems like it is restricted to buy PSLDX in taxable.
You can try Ally or Etrade. Ally charges $9.99 and Etrade $19.99 per trade
Post Reply