Official Shiny Things thread Episode V, The Empire Strikes Back

BBCWatcher

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
22,980
Reaction score
4,518
Any recommendations for HY bond fund (SGD hedged) >4%+
I don’t mind those that give higher payout like 6-7% which comprise of capital, as long overall nett yield >4%
I found a weird one: a SGD hedged, SGD quoted/traded, investment grade, accumulating, global corporate bond index fund. It's ticker symbol AGSGDX on the Cboe Europe exchange. That's a BlackRock exchange-traded fund with an expense ratio of 0.10%. New to me! Some people might be intrigued. Let's see if AGSGDX has a high yield (junk bond) counterpart....

....Sort of! There's ticker symbol IEMBX on the same exchange. It looks like IEMBX is a distributing fund that invests in emerging market sovereign and quasi-sovereign bonds. Fun I guess if you think investment grade corporate bonds are too "boring." Still SGD hedged and SGD quoted/traded. The expense ratio is a chunkier 0.50%, but that's at least better than the Endowus/PIMCO 0.85%. (But as an ETF there's a broker commission to get in and another to get out.) It looks like it's split roughly 50-50 between investment grade and junk. IEMBX's 12 month trailing dividend yield is 5.75%. But has IEMBX been delisted (due to lack of sufficient investor interest, presumably)? I can't tell exactly.
 

Shiny Things

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
9,548
Reaction score
759
It's hard to tell because you have to dig through the prospectus, and even then they don't give ratings or ISINs for each of their bond holdings. I notice the fund holds a lot of mortgage-based securities (mostly in the U.S.) which look like they help pull up the overall credit profile of the fund.
That's Pimco being Pimco. They love mortgage bonds, and while that's not completely nonsensical with mortgage spreads where they are, I still don't think it's an amazing bet.

US mortgage bonds are basically a bet that interest rates will stay exactly where they are for a very long time. Most mortgages over here are 30-year fixed-rate mortgages that can be repaid or refinanced at any time with no penalty, so here's what happens when rates move one way or another:
  • Rates go down: the underlying mortgages all refinance at a lower rate, the bond gets repaid, and you have to reinvest your money but rates are a lot lower;
  • Rates go up: the underlying mortgages don't refinance, or they refinance a lot slower, and you're stuck investing in bonds that yield worse than current market rates.
(I'm in bucket 2 right now: I refinanced my mortgage back in 2021 at 2.75% for 30 years, and the same mortgage right now would cost something with a 6 in front of it. My bank hates me, because they've lent me money for 30 years at a comically cheap rate, and I'm absolutely not going to repay it any sooner than I have to.)

The tradeoff for "you lose no matter what interest rates do!" is that mortgage bonds tend to yield a bit (like 0.5-2.0 percentage points) higher than US Treasuries. But unless you have a very well-formed view on interest rate volatility and prepayment speeds, you don't want to go plowing into mortgages or into funds that invest in mortgages.
0.85% is fairly expensive.
Yeah, 0.85% all-in is way too much.

DevilPlate, what's your thinking behind focusing on high-yield (junk) bonds and searching for things that yield 4+? Are you trying to hit a specific cashflow target, or what's your thinking there?
 

BBCWatcher

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
22,980
Reaction score
4,518
That's Pimco being Pimco. They love mortgage bonds, and while that's not completely nonsensical with mortgage spreads where they are, I still don't think it's an amazing bet.…
I suppose some of those mortgages could default at higher than usual rates (in a serious recession, for example), and underlying mortgage defaults would to some extent affect the value of PIMCO’s MBS holdings. Although they appear to lean into government-backed mortgage securities which should be a little tamer. Unless the government yanks its backing, a live issue right now.😐

The fund‘s description says it can hold a lot of junk bonds, and I think it does. The international ones should default in greater numbers in times when the U.S. dollar strengthens, for the U.S. dollarized bonds (which a lot of them seem to be). All of them are subject to higher default risk as market interest rates rise (their issuers can’t roll over debt at lower interest rates), plus the ones that are still performing fall in value. Sectoral risks could affect default rates, notably in real estate where they seem more heavily exposed.

How well is SGD hedging going to work in the medium or long term for a heavily non-SGD bond fund like this one?

I don’t know about you, but I prefer my “junk” in the form of equity (stocks). At least that way I’ll get some upside. On the bond side I prefer investment grade, even as an imperfect concept. And perhaps, for special situations, real return sovereign bonds. (Some of the U.S. target date funds like a TIPS allocation in retirement, and I think I agree with the logic.) Then just adjust the mix to dial up or down the risk.

Any opinions on AGSGDX? It looks like the Singapore dollar equivalent of CRPA, so it might be interesting to some. Before yesterday I had no idea it existed. Does Interactive Brokers reach that exchange (Cboe Europe)?
 

DevilPlate

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Messages
11,951
Reaction score
5,058
That's Pimco being Pimco. They love mortgage bonds, and while that's not completely nonsensical with mortgage spreads where they are, I still don't think it's an amazing bet.

US mortgage bonds are basically a bet that interest rates will stay exactly where they are for a very long time. Most mortgages over here are 30-year fixed-rate mortgages that can be repaid or refinanced at any time with no penalty, so here's what happens when rates move one way or another:
  • Rates go down: the underlying mortgages all refinance at a lower rate, the bond gets repaid, and you have to reinvest your money but rates are a lot lower;
  • Rates go up: the underlying mortgages don't refinance, or they refinance a lot slower, and you're stuck investing in bonds that yield worse than current market rates.
(I'm in bucket 2 right now: I refinanced my mortgage back in 2021 at 2.75% for 30 years, and the same mortgage right now would cost something with a 6 in front of it. My bank hates me, because they've lent me money for 30 years at a comically cheap rate, and I'm absolutely not going to repay it any sooner than I have to.)

The tradeoff for "you lose no matter what interest rates do!" is that mortgage bonds tend to yield a bit (like 0.5-2.0 percentage points) higher than US Treasuries. But unless you have a very well-formed view on interest rate volatility and prepayment speeds, you don't want to go plowing into mortgages or into funds that invest in mortgages.

Yeah, 0.85% all-in is way too much.

DevilPlate, what's your thinking behind focusing on high-yield (junk) bonds and searching for things that yield 4+? Are you trying to hit a specific cashflow target, or what's your thinking there?
U are making alot of sense on lose-lose situation for MBS.
Gona drop off Pimco fund lol

4% is my benchmark right now for me to get interested (at least match SA/RA)
 

Shiny Things

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
9,548
Reaction score
759
I suppose some of those mortgages could default at higher than usual rates (in a serious recession, for example), and underlying mortgage defaults would to some extent affect the value of PIMCO’s MBS holdings. Although they appear to lean into government-backed mortgage securities which should be a little tamer.
Yeah, when I looked at the top-10 holdings, over a third of the fund is in government-backed MBS. Even if the mortgages default, the only risk those carry is prepayment/extension risk.
Unless the government yanks its backing, a live issue right now.😐
Ehh - I get where you're coming from but it would be genuinely shocking if the US government decided to pull its backing of GSE MBS. The entire US mortgage market would implode in a heartbeat, it's not gonna happen.

The fund‘s description says it can hold a lot of junk bonds, and I think it does.
I'm actually curious about this - I couldn't find a full holdings statement, but where're you seeing the junk bonds?

How well is SGD hedging going to work in the medium or long term for a heavily non-SGD bond fund like this one?
This is the thing I'm least worried about. Hedging these things back to SGD is a piece of cake - you just call up your local EM rates desk and say "one USDSGD Basis Swap, please".

I don’t know about you, but I prefer my “junk” in the form of equity (stocks). At least that way I’ll get some upside.
Yeah, this. And no matter what folks' general view on junk bonds is, they're an atrocious investment right now: the extra return (the "spread") you get in return for taking "junk" risk is the lowest it's been since May 2007. There's been a huge wall of cash flooding into junk bonds in search of yield, and you're not getting adequately compensated for risk any more. Don't buy junk bonds now.

Any opinions on AGSGDX? It looks like the Singapore dollar equivalent of CRPA, so it might be interesting to some. Before yesterday I had no idea it existed. Does Interactive Brokers reach that exchange (Cboe Europe)?
That one's only quoted in SGD, not hedged back to SGD unfortunately, so it's still got the usual lump of FX risk associated with owning USD bonds. Not worth it.
 

DevilPlate

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Messages
11,951
Reaction score
5,058
Yeah, when I looked at the top-10 holdings, over a third of the fund is in government-backed MBS. Even if the mortgages default, the only risk those carry is prepayment/extension risk.

Ehh - I get where you're coming from but it would be genuinely shocking if the US government decided to pull its backing of GSE MBS. The entire US mortgage market would implode in a heartbeat, it's not gonna happen.


I'm actually curious about this - I couldn't find a full holdings statement, but where're you seeing the junk bonds?


This is the thing I'm least worried about. Hedging these things back to SGD is a piece of cake - you just call up your local EM rates desk and say "one USDSGD Basis Swap, please".


Yeah, this. And no matter what folks' general view on junk bonds is, they're an atrocious investment right now: the extra return (the "spread") you get in return for taking "junk" risk is the lowest it's been since May 2007. There's been a huge wall of cash flooding into junk bonds in search of yield, and you're not getting adequately compensated for risk any more. Don't buy junk bonds now.


That one's only quoted in SGD, not hedged back to SGD unfortunately, so it's still got the usual lump of FX risk associated with owning USD bonds. Not worth it.
Yes junk bonds additional spread not worth it rn thats why pimco fund got me interested as i tot it is above junk status while offering nett 4%+ yield.
 

BBCWatcher

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
22,980
Reaction score
4,518
Ehh - I get where you're coming from but it would be genuinely shocking if the US government decided to pull its backing of GSE MBS. The entire US mortgage market would implode in a heartbeat, it's not gonna happen.
Well, Trump has started firing FRB members (a first), and he seems interested in privatizing Freddie and Fannie. "Style points" matter of course, but there are lots of low probability events that've happened. We live in interesting times.🤷
I'm actually curious about this - I couldn't find a full holdings statement, but where're you seeing the junk bonds?
The prospectus (or maybe annual report?) listed the fund's holdings, but it's one of those huge documents that includes several PIMCO funds. And they don't actually provide bond ratings or even ISINs, so it's some guesswork.
This is the thing I'm least worried about. Hedging these things back to SGD is a piece of cake - you just call up your local EM rates desk and say "one USDSGD Basis Swap, please".
OK.
Yeah, this. And no matter what folks' general view on junk bonds is, they're an atrocious investment right now: the extra return (the "spread") you get in return for taking "junk" risk is the lowest it's been since May 2007. There's been a huge wall of cash flooding into junk bonds in search of yield, and you're not getting adequately compensated for risk any more. Don't buy junk bonds now.
Darn! I was looking for the next Hyflux!😐
That one's only quoted in SGD, not hedged back to SGD unfortunately, so it's still got the usual lump of FX risk associated with owning USD bonds. Not worth it.
AGSGDX's fact sheet says it's SGD hedged, so it probably is. Does that change your view? It's a "total global bond market" (Investment grade) index fund with a 0.10% expense ratio.🤔
 

Shiny Things

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
9,548
Reaction score
759
AGSGDX's fact sheet says it's SGD hedged, so it probably is. Does that change your view? It's a "total global bond market" (Investment grade) index fund with a 0.10% expense ratio.🤔
It does change my view, yeah! The product page on iShares' website didn't mention it being hedged, I got that one wrong.

So it's not a SGD-hedged equivalent of CRPA, it's more a SGD-hedged equivalent of AGG - it's got exposure to every type of bond, including US treasuries, US mortgages, G7 govvies, Chinese govvies... I'm a little finicky about my bond exposure and I'd prefer to target it to specific classes of bond (like, I'm not thrilled about mortgages, I think Chinese govvies have already run a long way, etc etc), but this looks like a solid option if you really don't want to think about your bond exposure.
 

revhappy

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
12,194
Reaction score
2,635
Hey guys how are you doing? I went to FSM fund selector and filtered for ALL fixed income products and sorted by performance over the last 10 years and convertible bonds come on top even better than high yield. Any thoughts if this can be part of the portfolio and the risks involved buying them at this time? @Shiny Things @BBCWatcher

convertible.png
 

Shiny Things

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
9,548
Reaction score
759
Hey guys how are you doing? I went to FSM fund selector and filtered for ALL fixed income products and sorted by performance over the last 10 years and convertible bonds come on top even better than high yield. Any thoughts if this can be part of the portfolio and the risks involved buying them at this time?
Sooooo this is a fun one! The answer is "because when you're buying convertibles, you're not really buying fixed-income - they're like bonds with an equity kicker - and also you're basically YOLOing meme stocks".

First, for anyone who doesn't know what a convertible bond is: a convertible bond starts its life like a regular bond, but if the underlying stock rises above a certain level at maturity, the bond gets repaid in stock of the underlying company instead of in cash. That means bondholders participate in gains in the underlying equity; the tradeoff for that sweet deal is that convertibles usually have much lower coupons than straight bonds, and they're usually issued by really junky companies who can't afford the cashflow drain of the coupons on a regular bond.

(For anyone else with options brain-damage: it's like you're long a call option on the company's stock, and paying for it by lending to the company at a cheap yield.)

These have become very popular lately amongst meme-stock issuers, of all things. The biggest name in ICVT is Microstrategy, which has issued an absolute truckload of convertibles to buy bitcoin. Other names you'll recognize in the top-ten are Coinbase, Uber, SMCI, Gamestop, Rocket Lab... basically every memey stock in the world has started issuing convertibles.

These things go wrong in two ways:
1) If the stock goes up, they're worse than just owning the stock. For example, you'd rather own Gamestop outright than buy their convertibles and hope they convert.
2) If the stock goes down, these are generally pretty junky companies, and you're stuck receiving a below-market yield. A lot of convertibles are issued with a zero coupon, or a sub-1-percent coupon, and if you're not getting the equity coupon that's a pretty trash return.

And, three, if the company goes really sideways, they may struggle to repay the converts. (I'm specifically thinking of Strategy here, which, when its NAV premium inevitably disappears in a year or two, is going to have to sell some of its stash of bitcoin to make the payments on these bonds.)

So, don't be led astray by the spicy returns on converts - remember, they're not really fixed income, they're more like an incredibly expensive way to get exposure to meme stocks.
 

revhappy

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
12,194
Reaction score
2,635
Sooooo this is a fun one! The answer is "because when you're buying convertibles, you're not really buying fixed-income - they're like bonds with an equity kicker - and also you're basically YOLOing meme stocks".

First, for anyone who doesn't know what a convertible bond is: a convertible bond starts its life like a regular bond, but if the underlying stock rises above a certain level at maturity, the bond gets repaid in stock of the underlying company instead of in cash. That means bondholders participate in gains in the underlying equity; the tradeoff for that sweet deal is that convertibles usually have much lower coupons than straight bonds, and they're usually issued by really junky companies who can't afford the cashflow drain of the coupons on a regular bond.

(For anyone else with options brain-damage: it's like you're long a call option on the company's stock, and paying for it by lending to the company at a cheap yield.)

These have become very popular lately amongst meme-stock issuers, of all things. The biggest name in ICVT is Microstrategy, which has issued an absolute truckload of convertibles to buy bitcoin. Other names you'll recognize in the top-ten are Coinbase, Uber, SMCI, Gamestop, Rocket Lab... basically every memey stock in the world has started issuing convertibles.

These things go wrong in two ways:
1) If the stock goes up, they're worse than just owning the stock. For example, you'd rather own Gamestop outright than buy their convertibles and hope they convert.
2) If the stock goes down, these are generally pretty junky companies, and you're stuck receiving a below-market yield. A lot of convertibles are issued with a zero coupon, or a sub-1-percent coupon, and if you're not getting the equity coupon that's a pretty trash return.

And, three, if the company goes really sideways, they may struggle to repay the converts. (I'm specifically thinking of Strategy here, which, when its NAV premium inevitably disappears in a year or two, is going to have to sell some of its stash of bitcoin to make the payments on these bonds.)

So, don't be led astray by the spicy returns on converts - remember, they're not really fixed income, they're more like an incredibly expensive way to get exposure to meme stocks.
Wow! Thanks for the detailed reply Shiny, I will stay away from them.
 

BBCWatcher

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
22,980
Reaction score
4,518
I suppose among other things the convertible bonds would dilute the equity, reducing the probability the bond will convert to stock at maturity — and reducing the value of shares if converted. Said another way, shareholders pay for these bonds, too.🤷‍♂️

Convertible bonds are the converse of (certain types of) preferred shares of stock, right?
 

ericcsn

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2024
Messages
682
Reaction score
313
kind of recall Warren Buffett negotiated for convertible bonds off Goldman Sachs in the heat of 2008 and benefitted.
 

Shiny Things

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
9,548
Reaction score
759
Convertible bonds are the converse of (certain types of) preferred shares of stock, right?
Sort of, yeah - they're kinda the inverse of death-spiral prefs?

kind of recall Warren Buffett negotiated for convertible bonds off Goldman Sachs in the heat of 2008 and benefitted.
Yeah, but it wasn't anything to do with the structure of the deal: Buffett made a ton off the banks in 2008 because he injected a truckload of cash right when the banks were most desperate for cash because the world was exploding. He'd have made money if he bought straight equity, converts, prefs, bonds, whatever.

The message here isn't "convertible bonds are special", it's "buy low sell high".
 

DevilPlate

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2020
Messages
11,951
Reaction score
5,058
Sooooo this is a fun one! The answer is "because when you're buying convertibles, you're not really buying fixed-income - they're like bonds with an equity kicker - and also you're basically YOLOing meme stocks".

First, for anyone who doesn't know what a convertible bond is: a convertible bond starts its life like a regular bond, but if the underlying stock rises above a certain level at maturity, the bond gets repaid in stock of the underlying company instead of in cash. That means bondholders participate in gains in the underlying equity; the tradeoff for that sweet deal is that convertibles usually have much lower coupons than straight bonds, and they're usually issued by really junky companies who can't afford the cashflow drain of the coupons on a regular bond.

(For anyone else with options brain-damage: it's like you're long a call option on the company's stock, and paying for it by lending to the company at a cheap yield.)

These have become very popular lately amongst meme-stock issuers, of all things. The biggest name in ICVT is Microstrategy, which has issued an absolute truckload of convertibles to buy bitcoin. Other names you'll recognize in the top-ten are Coinbase, Uber, SMCI, Gamestop, Rocket Lab... basically every memey stock in the world has started issuing convertibles.

These things go wrong in two ways:
1) If the stock goes up, they're worse than just owning the stock. For example, you'd rather own Gamestop outright than buy their convertibles and hope they convert.
2) If the stock goes down, these are generally pretty junky companies, and you're stuck receiving a below-market yield. A lot of convertibles are issued with a zero coupon, or a sub-1-percent coupon, and if you're not getting the equity coupon that's a pretty trash return.

And, three, if the company goes really sideways, they may struggle to repay the converts. (I'm specifically thinking of Strategy here, which, when its NAV premium inevitably disappears in a year or two, is going to have to sell some of its stash of bitcoin to make the payments on these bonds.)

So, don't be led astray by the spicy returns on converts - remember, they're not really fixed income, they're more like an incredibly expensive way to get exposure to meme stocks.
If these products so sucky, then why there is still demand for them?
 

BBCWatcher

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
22,980
Reaction score
4,518
If these products so sucky, then why there is still demand for them?
The same reason ILPs are reasonably popular?🤷

In all seriousness, there are occasional peculiar tax-related reasons why convertible bonds could make some sense. These peculiar reasons don't apply here.
 

Shiny Things

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
9,548
Reaction score
759
If these products so sucky, then why there is still demand for them?
This is also a fun one: it's because the target market for convertible bonds isn't individual investors, it's vol-arb hedge funds. They treat the convertible as a bond (which they basically just hedge and ignore) plus a call option on the equity, and they trade that embedded option just like any other equity option.

The company wins because they get a lower coupon on their funding; the hedge fund wins because they get cheap options to trade.

As a side note: the reason why so many meme-stock names are doing convertible issuances lately is, if you can believe this, because of the abundance of levered ETFs on these meme-stock names. Those levered ETFs make their underlying stock more volatile because they have to mechanically buy high and sell low; and that increased volatility means the embedded options in convertible bonds are more valuable; and that makes it more appealing for these meme-stock companies to issue convertibles.
 

uponly

Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2024
Messages
495
Reaction score
753
Hi folks, is LionGlobal Short Duration Bond Fund (Active ETF SGD Class) a decent bond fund?

I'm looking for decent returns (>3% annualized), and plan to hold >3 years to longer, depending on performance.
Can i also ask when it comes to selling bond funds, we can only sell on secondary market (SGX) right? We are unable to redeem directly, and have to take the spreads and brokerage fees right?

Many thanks!
 

alanchia67

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
May 28, 2005
Messages
14,248
Reaction score
277
Hi folks, is LionGlobal Short Duration Bond Fund (Active ETF SGD Class) a decent bond fund?

I'm looking for decent returns (>3% annualized), and plan to hold >3 years to longer, depending on performance.
Can i also ask when it comes to selling bond funds, we can only sell on secondary market (SGX) right? We are unable to redeem directly, and have to take the spreads and brokerage fees right?

Many thanks!
 
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards, Terms of Service and Member T&Cs for more information.
Top