Thank you for your response; it helped a lot.  After reading, and then going back to the funds, it appears (to me) that LSBRX is focussed more on corporate exposure.  That suggests (again to me) that it should do better when the economy is on an upswing and MAY tend to overlook rising interest rates, assuming there is still reasonable liquidity in the marketplace?

MWTRX and HABDX seem to inhabit the same space, but seem to be making slightly different bets.  HABDX seems to be out of Treasuries, holding lots of cash, and heavy in the mortgage market.  This seems (to me) to suggest that it is positioning itself for purchases of corporate or maybe municipal bonds, which might help it ride out a rise in interest rates?  MWTRX, otoh, seems to be making the same mortgage bets, but has little liquidity, and is still holding Treasuries.  A more pessimistic view and more open to being negatively impacted by a rise in interest rates maybe?

I'm not sure what to make of WMRIX.  It has done REALLY well, but I'm not sure why!?  It has long-term bond exposure as well as financials exposure.  I guess if it was holding high-interest bonds that would have helped as interest rates were lowered?  And it got lucky with the financials for some reason?  Confusing.  The fund seems to have a mandate to short issues as well as to invest long-term - How can you be long and short CASH?  I'd like to invest in it, but I really don't understand how it functions.  Anyone able to help?  I'll ask in MUTUAL FUNDS as well; I know people have positions in it...

Anyway, does what I'm saying above make any sense, or am I still badly confused?

I don't know much about these individual bond funds, but these are the thoughts I have after a quick review.

LSBRX - an expense ratio of 0.95 is too high for a bond fund.

HABDX - Bill Gross is considered one of the best bond fund managers out there.  I agree that mortgage-backed assets are undervalued now and treasuries are overvalued.  Smart move on his part to get out of treasuries when they were high and into mortgage-backed securities when they are low.  This fund should do well in the next few years.

WMRIX - minimum investment is $500k

KCallie:

LSBRX - an expense ratio of 0.95 is too high for a bond fund.

It IS high, but that half-point difference between LSBRX and HABDX (for example) has more than been compensated for in the 10-year, 5-year, and 3-year returns (not, however, during the last year, but that is the ONLY year since 2001).

KCallie:

HABDX - Bill Gross is considered one of the best bond fund managers out there.  I agree that mortgage-backed assets are undervalued now and treasuries are overvalued.  Smart move on his part to get out of treasuries when they were high and into mortgage-backed securities when they are low.  This fund should do well in the next few years.

 Good to know I got that one right <g>!

 

KCallie:

WMRIX - minimum investment is $500k

As mentioned in another thread, this limit can be worked around by purchasing through Fidelity.

In short, then, would it be safe to say that LSBRX has decent prospects if the market continues to come back, and HABDX seems to be well-positioned for the future?

I would still worry about funds with subprime exposure.... I don't think we are out of the woods yet.  You might want to check out begbx ....That's where Cheney has put a lot of his money ... guess he has little faith in American bonds.  I wish I had kept my position in BEGBX but I sold  because I was advised that it had some subprime exposure and now the fund is up about 9% since last Sept. or so. You might want to check out funds with tips.

Mrs. S 

Racqueteer:

In short, then, would it be safe to say that LSBRX has decent prospects if the market continues to come back, and HABDX seems to be well-positioned for the future?

LSBRX - try starting a new thread devoted soley to this fund and see what others who know about it think.  If it has significant foreign exposure, the expense ratio may not be out of line.

I think HABDX is well positioned for the future, but it may take a year or more to start to realize those gains.

With the Loomis Sayles and the Harbor (pimco run) you're talking about two different approaches to bond investing and two of the best managers in the business..  I basically, split my money between them.

Gross is more conservative and Dan Fuss is more willing to take advantage of things like emerging markets and high yield when appropriate since he's running a fund with a broader mandate than Grosses.  This also shows up in total returns.  I have added PTTDX to the attached link since it the Gross fund that approximates HABDX but has been in existance longer and so you can compare total returns over a longer period of time in the chart view.  Look carefully at the risk characteristics and other things in the table view.

fund comparison 

Roberta 

Roberta, Lately I think Bill Gross has been more of a risk taker while Dan Fuss has been more conservative. For example, Gross recently had 31.45% of HABDX invested in mortgage-related bonds and only 10% in U.S. corporate bonds, while Fuss had 60% of LSBRX invested in U.S. corporates and 0 (zero) in mortgage-related bonds. HABDX is yielding only 5.05% but enjoyed good price appreciation, while LSBRX is yielding 6.75% and has had nearly flat price appreciation. Incidentally, in the recent Barron's Big Money Poll, 33.3% of the respondents were bullish on U.S. corporate bonds' prospects in the next 6-12 months while 45% were neutral. Gross, Fuss, and nearly everybody else thinks U.S. Treasuries are overvalued (62.2% of the money managers were bearish on them). I think HABDX or Pimco Total Return and LSBRX do make a well-balanced bond "sandwich." It will be interesting to see how Gross or Fuss may respond to S&P's upgrade of Brazil's bonds to investment grade last week. I note that Leuthold Asset Allocation (LAALX) has already staked out a position in Brazilian debt.

Thanks, Roberta and Closer.  It also seems to me that HABDX and LSBRX would be a good combination for pure bond exposure, and an even mix also seems a reasonable position to take.  I'm thinking 10% total in these two with another 60% in balanced funds.  The other 30% in stuff that might give the portfolio a little more pop, but isn't overly volatile (like FAIRX, for example), as well as some additional foreign exposure (JAOSX, HIINX).  What I need now is a nice little (5+%) pullback <g>!

Closer,

My "safe" money is in my sandwhich but I use CEF's to play things like emerging market, junk and mortgage bonds.  I see where you're coming from when comparing Gross and Fuss's recent actions, but I still think Gross is the more conservative.  Although mortgages and particularly colleratized  mortgage debt has gotten all the publicity I believe there has been recent bargains in that area as good stuff tanked along with the caca.  Although emerging market bonds have been on a tear, there's such a lack of real transparency in those countries and exceedingly different attitudes.

Roberta