Blog Comments

We agree. More investment choices and a couple of more transfers allowed each month would be wonderful, but they (the TSP advisory board) don't care too much about what we want.

Your Post Election Blast Off recap seems spot on yet investors in the TSP do not benefit from the current vehicles offered to place capital. Sure, we get a 5% match, can invest a healthy chunk of money for the retirement years, but do we get the appreciation available with other funds. With approximately 600 billion dollars placed within the TSP I think the TSP advisory board could do a better service to investors by offering a wider choice/selection upon which participants could find returns.

Having Blackrock, which manages in excess of 6 TRILLION dollars on our side makes a difference. Why can't the TSP advisory board enlist Blackrock to come up with other investment possibilities for participants to choose among? Even if Blackrock charged a higher fee for those possibilities, would it not be worth entertaining the notion if higher returns could get achieved? It boils down to risk management I suppose. I am to date disappointed with the caretaker, also ran mentality of the TSP advisory board overall. Never in all the years of investing with the TSP have I ever been offered to fill out an investor satisfaction survey. And, I believe the leadership of the Advisory Board does a disservice to patrons for offering such inadequate investment opportunities.

I am not looking to take on a pile of risk, and don't want participants to lose money ever. Yet, at the same time, if I, and/or any other participants had a wider variety to place the investment then we may in fact achieve better results.

Bottom line: The TSP Advisory Board seems asleep as of this date, 11/11/18, and oblivious to the desires of participants who wish for better choices to place 401k dollars.

...isleepwell...

[B]Full Disclosure[/B] :) I compared them both (TNX and BND) against AGG, rather than the F-fund. While BND is sloppy next to the F-fund, it's nearly a perfect match (correlation-wise) to AGG ... [B]much [/B]more than slightly better then TNX. And since we can only use the AGG for T/A charting purposes, it seemed logical to use that as the benchmark, rather than the F-fund.

Also note, you compared percentages. Percentages aren't really correlations. For example:

Imagine an Underlying and its 3x bull ETF. We'll call them UND and ETF. They are perfectly 'correlated.' When UND moves 1%, ETF moves exactly 3% in the same direction.

Your analysis would show that the percentages don't 'match.' However, they are 100% correlated. The T/A done on one would exactly match the T/A done on the other.

This is what's needed for charting purposes. On the other hand, if you were looking for something to match the [I]actual percentage moves[/I], then that would be a different animal.

This is probably a critical distinction when finding a replacement for AGG with regard to [B]chart T/A[/B].

[B]Fun facts:[/B] I ran a correlation search over nearly all stocks and etf's (not indicies). IEF and UST are listed as 2nd and 3rd best correlated (Under BND). TNX wasn't in the top 20 :( I then ran a line chart comparison (%-wise) to visually see that they not only are correlated, their %-scales are the 'same.'

I'd be curious to see your analysis comparing BND and TNX to AGG :)

[QUOTE=tsptalk;bt9208]Thanks. I had that one on my list but hadn't been checking it.

Looks like neither are very consistant with the F-fund but BND may be slightly better.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by userque

You may want to consider BND for an AGG substitute if needed in the future. They strongly correlate for charting purposes.

Thanks. I had that one on my list but hadn't been checking it.

Looks like neither are very consistant with the F-fund but BND may be slightly better.

You may want to consider BND for an AGG substitute if needed in the future. They [B]strongly[/B] correlate for charting purposes.

[I]"given his propensity to tell it like it is"[/I]

LOL! To do that, you have to have a propensity to tell the truth.

I'm curious (in a rhetorical sense), as to how you feel about your above blog entry today (months later).

:popcorn: :)

You have to fix the title/url. There's a percentage sign in it that's not properly encoded.

The [I]most recent[/I] information regarding the [I]potential [/I]"North Korean Talks" would, imo, cause that line item to be also classified as a "[COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]Check, but impact not fully known yet."[/FONT][/COLOR]

"[COLOR=#3E3E3E][[B]LEFT[/B]][/COLOR][COLOR=#3E3E3E] [B]Investors[/B] are still trying to digest the tariff talk ..."

LOL ... I'm sure they've been digesting lots of :popcorn: instead.[/COLOR]

[I]"...[/I][COLOR=#3E3E3E][I]as investors digests the President's intentions."[/I]

I don't think his [I]intentions [/I]are the issue. Regardless of his intentions; I [I]do [/I]think investors are concerned with, and want to "digest," the effects of any [U]tariffs[/U].

[I]--[/I][/COLOR][I]the road to hell is paved with good intentions[/I]

Thanks for the shout-out!

Updated:
[IMG]https://storage.googleapis.com/openscreenshot/z/U/L/rJonoCLUz.png[/IMG]

The same thing happened last year and I suspect it's a glitch related to dividend payments.

more... http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/the-s-fund...tml#post595017

Am I seeing this right? The S-Fund is up 9%? This seems like a glitch to me, as I have not found any articles about it on the financial websites, and this would be a breaking news headline, I'm assuming.

Yeah, that was an older gap that did take more time. Thanks. I should have marked that too. I was looking at that smaller gap opened on the 22nd.

Hi Tom,

I like your "gap identification within the channels" that you've been doing on your discussions. It certainly has helped me look at this as a quick "out and in" tool.

Regarding the Aug 22 gap, I guess I had a different take on it...that it took us about 5 weeks to fill the July 13th gap on Aug 22???

Hey DCR...

The F-fund doesn't really track the AGG. It's that both the AGG and the F-fund track the aggregate bond fund. The bond market closes at 3:00 PM ET but AGG stops trading at 4:00 PM ET so that last hour can make a difference in the two. The folks who manage the TSP funds have to determine the best price out of that situation.

Tom, if the F Fund tracks the AGG, and the AGG closed at a positive .03 percent, how is it the F Fund closed at a negative .10 percent. I know there must be a logical explanation. Thanks. Gary

"Eight years ago a 100-point gain in the Dow was gain of 1.42%. Today it's just 0.49% so we see a lot more of them,"

Very nice take on perception based on the past versus todays reality.