One of the changes he made was to sell a percentage of Vanguard Total Stock Market Fund weightings (VTSMX) and buy Akre Focus Fund (AKREX).
Last January, I did a briefing on this fund, and made the statement that it looked like Bob Brinker was trying to "beat the market" with these changes. So how is it going so far? According to this chart, Bob added a lot of risk to his portfolios with no added reward, yet anyway.
Akre Focus is a very new mid-cap growth fund -- less than 3 years old. It has less than $450 million in assets and a 25% turnover. AKRE has much less diversity with only 25 stocks, whereas, there are 3344 stocks in the VanguardTotal Stock Market Fund.
Bob has always taught listeners to keep expenses down to a minimum, but surprisingly, AKREX has a very high expense ratio (1.45%) and a 12b1 fee.
Also, Bob has always recommended limiting exposure in any single stock to only 4% of one's total portfolio. Akre Focus Fund's top ten holdings are much more than that -- some as much as 12%.
25 comments:
Akre Focus is not the type of recommendation one expects of Bobby B. Stranger yet is that the Total Stock Market fund has been mentioned as the one fund to own if you could only own one fund. There is more in this story than meets the eye. Money and greed. Maybe desperation, such as the need to hit a home run is a factor.
Keep sniffing the old money trail. The true answer is buried there somewhere, just like an old bone.
Wise ol' dog
I don't know how much Brinker moved from the Total Market to Akre but the ultimate exposure to any one stock is still way less than 4%.
And you are comparing a mid-cap growth fund to the total market which is not valid IMO.
There is a mid-cap index and even a mid-cap growth index and that would be a more appropriate benchmark I would think.
Upperdown,
You have:
1. Entirely missed my point about the 4% rule that Bob Brinker has touted for years. The AKREX portfolio manager does not follow it -- and Brinker has AKREX in all of his Marketimer model portfolio that he recommends for subscribers.
2. I wasn't "comparing" AKREX, the mid-cap, high expense fund, to the Total Stock Market Fund -- or making it a "benchmark."
Bob Brinker replaced a percentage of the Total Stock Market weightings with Akre (mid-cap) Fund. Please explain that move.
In AKREX:
Portfolio I = 15%
Portfolio II = 10%
Portfolio III = 5%
Wise ol' dog,
You are right. It certainly is not the the kind of fund Bob would recommend. It breaks all of his diversify, low-expense rules.
Of course there is more to this story, and I certainly agree it has to do with money, greed and desperation.
All the same reasons why now he basically LIES everytime he brags about his "buy-opportunities" in 2010 and 2011, but never once mentioned the disastrous "buying-opportunity" in 2008-09 -- starting as high as mid-1400s.
Just as the market was TOPPING 2007, Brinker wrote in Marketimer that there had been 18 buying opportunities to get in the market in the mid-1400s!
October 3, 2007 (S&P@ 1526.75) Marketimer, Bob Brinker said: “In August and September editions of Marketimer, we rated the stock market attractive for purchase on any weakness in the area of the S&P 500 Index mid-1400’s range. During August and September there were 18 buying opportunities, consisting of 15 market days on which the S&P 500 Index closed within the 1430 to 1470 range, and three market days on which the index closed slightly below that range.
Although we do not believe further weakness into the mid-1400’s range must occur, we remain comfortable with rating the market attractive for purchase should any such additional weakness occur……….”
So Wise ol' dog....if you know something more about this AKRE buy, please share it with us. You are entirely anonymous here.
Akre Focus
Could DaBrink have arranged something where he gets a percentage of what flows into that fund for say 60% days after he recommends it?
With DaBrink the motivation is always $$$.
tfb
"Bob Brinker replaced a percentage of the Total Stock Market weightings with Akre (mid-cap) Fund. Please explain that move."
Heck, I can't explain why he did that since I don't subscribe. Doesn't Brinker say why he is making portfolio changes in his newsletter?
I see the fund had a one year return of 17.88% and an annual return since inception of 16.4%.
It's on Schwabs list of funds you can buy with no commission.
Here's the report card if the link will work:
https://www.schwab.wallst.com/cgi-bin/upload.dll/file.pdf?z0992110azf91f348a39cd4dc892b5f74255a6396f
Could DaBrink have arranged something where he gets a percentage of what flows into that fund for say 60% days after he recommends it?
With DaBrink the motivation is always $$$. tfb
-----------------------------------
If you allow your blog to be used to accuse Brinker of accepting illegal kickbacks, you are skating on thin ice.
Delete that post and ban that poster.
To the person who anonymously DEMANDED that I delete TFB's post and ban him.
You must be living in a time warp where the two Bob Brinker's run message boards where posts they don't like are deleted and posters are banned.
This is MY blog and I decide what gets posted here and who gets banned.
But I have an important question for you: ARE YOU THREATENING ME for publishing a QUESTION about Bob Brinker's ethics?
Ya know,now that I think about this, it is easily resolved. Since we know DaBrink monitors this forum Da Brink can set aside all questions by making very clear and concise statements that he receives absolutely no form of renumeration from any of the mutual funds he recommends in any form other than as paid advertisers on his show.
By the way has Da Brink ever had any undisclosed relationships with any companies he steered listeners or subscribers to? Does anyone know?
tfb
But I have an important question for you: ARE YOU THREATENING ME for publishing a QUESTION about Bob Brinker's ethics?
Let us be clear. Brinker has advised people on the air to EVADE taxes and to deceive lending institutions.
Brinker exhibits a total lack of ethics and morals.
TFB asked: "By the way has Da Brink ever had any undisclosed relationships with any companies he steered listeners or subscribers to? Does anyone know?"
Yes, this person knows. LOL! Bob Brinker touted UTEK on Silicon Investor for several years back when it was still legal for him to do it WITH AN ALIAS.
He had an inside fee-based relationship with the company. He admitted it to Paul Kangas when he was asked point blank on Nightly Business Report. And he had the gall to deny that there was a "conflict of interest." Of course, what choice did he have? He couldn't admit it on nation-wide TV.
On the message boards where he posted as Don Lane (the alias was later changed to Mistertopes), Brinker acted like a carnival barker praising UTEK and at the same time warning "shorts" of dire consequences.
I have all of his posts saved. Perhaps I will put together a few choice ones and let you read them. When Brinker thought he was anonymous, he showed some true colors that you would never guess.
Anonymous (please sign your posts) said: "Let us be clear. Brinker has advised people on the air to EVADE taxes and to deceive lending institutions."
That is absolutely true. Both Moneytalk conversations are documented on this blog.
The tax evasion advise was to Becky, the babysitter, and the "deceive lending institution" advice was more recent, but just as blatant.
You can read about them here.
Anonymous (please sign your posts) said: "Let us be clear. Brinker has advised people on the air to EVADE taxes and to deceive lending institutions."
Oh sorry HottieBee, it was I the fluffy one...
Love,
tfb
If you allow your blog to be used to accuse Brinker of accepting illegal kickbacks, you are skating on thin ice.
Delete that post and ban that poster.
Let us review,shall we StrokeOff?
Let me see, the little, adorable ball of fur suggests that perhaps Da Brink might be the type to accept some form of compensation for the funds he recommends, and guess what it appears he did. Then the fluffy one goes on to state that Da Brink also recommends tax evasion and deception in financial transactions which HoneyBee substantiates.
Seems to me like you were the one on thin ice grandstnding s your were.
By the way, do you know why I call the huckster known as Bob Brinker "Da Brink", it is because that is the name he referenced himself by when he was posting under one of his aliases.
I often speculated he wanted folks to refer to him as "Da Brink" because he was jealous of my cool name and he wanted to be cool too. I mean face it, Brinker was probably one of those pencil necked geeks who was always getting bitched slapped and swirlies in the locker room. He certainly was not one of the cool kids.
Even with his millions, Da Brink is a loser.
Th post was by tfb, though I think that was evident.
TFB said: "Oh sorry HottieBee"
LOL! Perhaps I can change my "name."
anyone know bob current veiw for this year?
anonymous asked: "anyone know bob current veiw for this year?"
Firstly, please sign or use an ID to identify yourself when you post.
I published your question because it was so outrageous I wanted others to be entertained by it.
If you read this blog and you still don't know Bob Brinker's "current views for this year," as well as well as his views for the past 25 years, I suggest that you SUBSCRIBE to Marketimer. Good luck!
TFB,
Speaking of losers. If Bob Brinker had a son, what would he look like? LOL!
(For the humorless, it's a joke.)
Speaking of losers. If Bob Brinker had a son, what would he look like? LOL!
OOOOOH OOOOOOH OOOOOOOHH
I don't know what he looks like, but I betcha his name is boB or maybe sonny, or maybe junior, or maybe LOOSER.
Am I right? HUH? HUH? HUH?
Anonymous aksed:
anyone know bob current veiw for this year?
Yes, I do.
Warmer than the last 3 months until at least October with a chance of rain and partly cloudy.
The days should be increasing in length, but that might bring shorter nights. Golf courses will be more expensive and quite expensive.
Anything else?
I'm still waiting to find out from "anonymous" if he was threatening me.
And I'd like to know what kind of "thin ice" I am skating on.
Does anyone else have a clue? Here is what he said to me in a post yesterday:
"If you allow your blog to be used to accuse Brinker of accepting illegal kickbacks, you are skating on thin ice......Delete that post and ban that poster."
To the person who just sent the sick note to me: Take your meds. You may blow a gasket.
No, let me say that better:
Take your meds. You WILL blow a gasket -- sooner or later. NOONE can hate someone as much as you have hated me for so long, and not destroy themselves.
Now enjoy my words to you, because they will be my last to you for ANOTHER ten years.
I'm still waiting to find out from "anonymous" if he was threatening me. And I'd like to know what kind of "thin ice" I am skating on.
I would pay no attention to the girlie-boy that made that threat. It's a limp wristed threat, just like HEr. (Not that there is anything wrong with that)
If sHE threatens your bank account or phone records, then BEWARE. (((ROAR)))
You WILL blow a gasket -- s
Oh I bet the He-she has blown lot more than gaskets over the years.
tfb
Post a Comment