February 4, 2012....Bob Brinker is well known for recommending Vanguard Ginnie Mae Fund. Brinker often gets calls on his radio show about this fund and he always sounds very positive about it. He loudly proclaims that this fund is part of his fixed income portfolio (which he now calls "income portfolio") and model portfolio III.
What Brinker does not tell callers is that he has lowered his Ginnie Mae holdings from 40% to 15% in his income portfolio (and sold all TIPS). Taking the place of the Ginnie Mae Fund and VIPSX, Brinker has increased the weightings of Vanguard High-Yield Fund (VWEHX) to 20%, and he has added Vanguard Wellesley Income Fund (VWINX).
The latest addition to Brinker's income portfolio was Doubleline Total Return Fund (DLTNX) in May 2011. Here is what Brinker said on Moneytalk which I originally posted here.
Brinker said: "Now as to why I selected that fund. I selected that fund because I really like that manager. I think that manager has really outstanding talent. Actually, I stipulate that on page 3 of the newsletter, that I like the manager. And that was the reason that I selected that fund. Now although what you said is true that it's a relatively new fund. It started in the spring of 2010, its done very well its first year out there. Now here's the thing, that manager had a long-term track record at his prior fund. A record of over ten years of excellence in income management at his prior fund. I looked at that record, looked at what he's done the first year in his new fund since he's gone out on his own, and was very pleased at the data I was looking at. And that was the reason that I selected it.....Remember though, if you see a recommendation that doesn't work with you investment, don't buy it...... But I have to go with what I believe in the investment letter because of performance tracking.....and that was the analysis that I based that recommendation on. Good call, Bill. I appreciate it. This is Moneytalk."
Jeffrey Gundlach is the Doubleline Total Return Fund manager that Brinker admires. This fund has a duration of 3.86 and the expense ratio is about three times that of Vanguard Ginnie Mae Fund -- It's a whoppin' 0.74.
What has Brinker's fund exchange done for investors so far? Take a look (click to enlarge):
8 comments:
I wonder if Bob will be jumping on the band wagon talking about how great the employment numbers were this week. If he does, I would like to tell him that 8.3% unemployment is NOT a good number. If you look at the last six four year presidential terms it was never that high. You have to go back to December of 1983 to find unemployment at that level.
I hope Bob talks about Mark Zuckerberg's tax bill. Why does he have to pay over a billion dollars while Mitt gets away with 15%?
"Mark Zuckerberg Will Have To Pay $1.5 Billion In Taxes After The Facebook IPO
Facebook CEO and cofounder Mark Zuckerberg is going to have to pay $1.5 billion in income taxes after the company's shares begin public trading in May, the Financial Times reports.
The reason: In 2005, Zuckerberg was granted new stock options as part of his compensation.
Facebook says that those options will be excercised after the IPO.
That means Zuckerberg will buy them for how much they cost back then.
The difference between that price and how much Facebook shares will trade for after the IPO will be considered taxable income.
The tax bill reduce Zuckerberg's wealth to a mere $24 billion.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuck....#ix zz1lML6UO3E
pricewhouse
pricewhouse,
Perhaps you need to consult with a CPA or enrolled agent who specializes in tax planning. You obviously do not understand how capital gains tax works.
Or you could ask Warren Buffett. He knows how it works but always whines because he doesn't pay enough taxes.
pricenuthouse says:
...while Mitt gets away with 15%?
Man, is that disgusting.
What the hell is wrong with him? John F'n Kerry doesn't pay anywhere near that. I think he's down to 12%, and docks his massive yacht 2 states distant to save on taxes.
Romney needs a new accountant, doncha think?
Obviously somebody here doesn't understand how capital gains works either.
I think this is the answer:
"As so-called “non-qualifying” stock options similar to those handed to other corporate executives, the gains on the Zuckerberg options will be taxed at the top US marginal income tax rate of 35 per cent, said John Barcal, associate professor of accounting at the USC Leventhal School of Accounting."
So Zuckerberg is paying the full top tax of 35 percent while Romney is paying less than 15% because of tax breaks only available to venture capitalists and hedge fund managers.
pricewhouse
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/6dbffbce-4e8b-11e1-ada2-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1lWuADZPX
Mr. Pig
You will find this hard to believe, but I am actually dumber than you when it comes to figuring my taxes. I even had to pay $42,700 in back taxes before getting my current job.
pricewhouse:
To your post I say, So What?
That is the tax code as enacted by Congress. Anyone in the 10 or 15% brackets pays zero percent on qualified capital gains. Should THEY pay more too?
Or will you create a dividing line between rich and poor with respect to dividends and capital gains. Where is the line drawn? Who gets to draw it?
Here is my proposal: zero tax on dividends and capital gains. In most cases, it is the second time the money is being taxed. Add a tax associated with the trading of shares not held long term. Make it a fraction of a cent per share. It may not discourage program driven trading but it will bring in some revenue. And dedicate that revenue to paying off the public debt.
Now, what is your proposal?
-- Frankj
Frank, capital gains have not been taxed before and certainly not "carried interest" which is ONLY available to a few fat cats like Romney. Not to anybody else.
Mitt Romney’s carried interest tax problem
Look into the future and imagine a President Mitt Romney trying to explain how he personally saved millions of dollars thanks to federal income tax rules that don’t make any sense and exist to BENEFIT JUST A TINY PERCENTAGE of Americans like him.
Does that strike you as a hard sell?
Private equity executives and people who run other investment partnerships have managed for years to defend the favored tax treatment of a large part of their income, called carried interest. That money - a share of profits those managers earn for investors - amounts to a performance bonus and is taxed at a federal rate of just 15 percent, rather than the 35 percent rate wealthy people would pay on ordinary income.
pricewhouse
http://articles.boston.com/2012-01-27/business/30667202_1_ordinary-income-money-managers-tax-treatment
Post a Comment