|
|
Bob Brinker Free Discussion Site 59,820+
This archived discussion is "read only". « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next » » SteveT - Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... In response to Brink's current bond recommendation...... posted by SPYDR22000:
-- posted by SteveT » clocker - Re: Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... In response to Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... posted by SteveT:Does he have any aternative tax-exempt bond recommendations? If so, would you please detail? Thanks. -- posted by clocker » JackSwanson - Is anybody going?? Is anybody going to see Stinker in San Jose or San Fran-freak-show?-- posted by JackSwanson » JackSwanson - Re: Re: Is anybody going?? Cap'n....maybe I should honor him on his visit to San Fran-freak-show with Jack's special "lifetime achievement award"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-- posted by JackSwanson » JIMMY62 - Re: Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... In response to Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... posted by SteveT:15% High yield corporate That is a surprise as Bob has advised against junk bonds many times as I listened to THE PROGRAM. -- posted by JIMMY62 » honeyoneohone - Re: Re: Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... In response to Re: Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... posted by JIMMY62:. He changed his tune when Vanguard began sponsoring his program. He started recommending Vanguard High Yield Fund. But there are other High Yield Funds that do much better: -- posted by honeyoneohone » arommel88 - Re: Re: Re: Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... In response to Re: Re: Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... posted by honeyoneohone:That is a little apples and oranges. VWEHX is rather conservative for a high yield bond fund that averages BB and essentially has no below B rated. Look at the holdings and maturities. STHYX has done worse while NHFIX has turned out better but then it had longer maturities and took more risk than VWEHX. STHYX has short maturities so it did not take advantage of the interest rate driven bull market and thus shows lower numbers. left column is the fund , right column is industry average.
US GOVERNMENT 0.00 0.67 STHYX US GOVERNMENT 4.20 0.67 AAA 0.00 1.19 AA 0.00 0.08 A 0.00 0.67 BBB 0.00 3.19 BB 21.90 24.76 B 54.70 52.47 BELOW B 19.20 13.40 OTHER 0.00 3.56 BOND HOLDINGS Averages STHYX Category Avg Maturity 4.40 6.75 Duration 3.90 4.15 Credit Quality B B WILINK Presents: View List of Free Prospectuses VWEHX -- posted by arommel88 » honeyoneohone - Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... posted by arommel88:. When it's all said and done, it's the bottom line that counts--for me, anyway. But it is good to be aware of risk. That is the point of owning funds rather than individual bonds--spreading risk. Over the years that I have owned High Yield Bond Funds, I've noticed that even when the big corrections happen, Vanguard holds up very little better than Northern. -- posted by honeyoneohone » honeyoneohone - BTW: Aromme188 In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Brink's current bond recommendation...... posted by arommel88:. I meant to ask you to give us some examples of what you would compare VWEHX with since you are so quick to shoot down my comparison to other High Yield Funds. -- posted by honeyoneohone » arommel88 - Re: BTW: Aromme188 In response to BTW: Aromme188 posted by honeyoneohone:I would have to do a little research on that. I do not think I was quick to shoot you down. I did offer an explaination. BB rated bonds are a higher grade than B bonds and you have to account for maturity. As a matter of fact there is another point to it. STHYX has out performed in the short term because it is not taking as much of a rate hit. Risk ranking an investment is part of the picture.
That is why VWEHX has a better 5 year and on a risk adjusted bases beat NHFIX. It probably won't on a long bull market. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=VWEHX&t=...
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=VWEHX&t=...
"In fact, the average cumulative default rate on BB bonds over any two year period from 1994–2003 was roughly 5%, versus 17% for B bonds, which are just a notch lower in investment quality."
-- posted by arommel88 « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 Next » Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|