Skip to main content

The Price of Safety

I have written several posts on stable value funds over the last year or two. With the financial crisis easing, the topic needs revisiting.

It is worth reviewing some of the issues around stable value funds a year ago and contrasting the situation with where we are today.

Back from the brink --

Back when Lehman Bros. was failing and the stock market was collapsing, many people moved portions of their 401Ks into stable value funds. These funds guaranteed principal and paid a modest interest rate. It came out that this was a popular strategy for employees even at the Federal Reserve.

I, myself, took this same action and wrote about it on this blog. The reaction among readers ranged from agreement on the strategy to "what, are you crazy?" The reason for the latter opinion is that many stable value funds held bonds that had always been solid and conservative in the past but, in the midst of a real estate melt-down, were now at risk. I am talking about mortgage-backed securities issued by the likes of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

What if?

Many observers began to suspect that some stable value funds could find themselves in trouble. If some fund holdings deteriorated, the funds could offset that problem by reducing the interest rate delivered to investors. If fund holdings really went south and large numbers of investors tried to redeem shares at the same time, there was a fear that shareholders would not receive full value of their principal. There was even speculation that a fund might fail.

A sigh of relief --

Well, we have come quite a ways from the dark days of late 2008 / early 2009 and there haven't been any outright failures of stable value funds and very few instances of shareholders failing to receive full value of their principal upon cashing out.

Not so fast --

On the other hand, stable value funds have not skated through this mess without feeling some impacts. Though investors did lot lose funds, they also failed to make much money.

The primary impact to stable value funds has been a decrease in the rate of return. Funds used to promise that investors would receive a certain interest rate on the cash invested. As stable value funds worked their way through the crisis, however, interest rates seemed to drift lower and lower.

I have not done a wide ranging survey but using my own fund as an example I see that rates have dwindled to practically nothing, probably due to the fact that U.S. Treasury bonds now make up a larger proportion of fund holdings.

What next --

The question at this point is what to do with those stable value fund holdings. The market has moved up strongly since March of 2009 yet stable value funds have returned very little.

It's decision time. If you still have substantial sums stashed in your stable value fund, it's time to think about redeploying some portion of it. Otherwise, it is virtually dead money. Are you willing to pay that price for safety?

To read more posts from TradeRadar on 401Ks and stable value funds click this link.


Popular posts from this blog

Brazil - in a bubble or on a roll?

A couple of years ago, no one recognized the real estate bubble even though it was under everyone's nose. Now, analysts and bloggers are seeing bubbles everywhere they look. One of them, they say is in Brazil whose Bovespa stock market index has doubled in the last 12 months. Does the bubble accusation hold water? I don't think so and here are 7 reasons why Brazil is by no means a bubble economy: Exports have held up over the past year thanks to demand from China for Brazil's soya exports and iron ore. This was helped by the the Brazilian government's drive to improve trade links with Asia and Africa. Export diversification, spurred by a more active trade policy and increased focus on "south-south" trade under current president Lula, helped mitigate the decline in demand from OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries A "sensible" economic framework has been in place since the 1990's. This has included inflation

Thursday Bounce: Trend Busters, Swing Signals and Trend Leaders for July 9, 2009

This is a quick post to announce that we have published Thursday's Trend Leaders, Swing Signals and Trend Busters at Alert HQ . All are based on daily data. Today we have the following: 72 Swing Signals -- A couple of days ago we had 35 signals, today we have twice as many. Happily, we now have 65 BUY signals, a mere 4 SELL Signals plus 3 Strong BUYs. Whoo-hoo! 56 Trend Leaders , all in strong up-trends according to Aroon, MACD and DMI. There are 18 new stocks that made today's list and 60 that fell off Tuesday's list. 48 Trend Busters of which 5 are BUY signals and 43 are SELL signals The view from Alert HQ -- Talk about mixed signals. If you look at our Swing Signals list you would think the market was in the middle of a big bounce. BUY signals are swamping the SELL signals and we even have a few Strong BUYs. Yes, there's a good sprinkling of tech stocks and tech ETFs but the distribution is pretty broad-based with a good number of different sectors represented, eve

Trade Radar gets another update

Some of our data sources changed again and it impacted our ability to load fundamental/financial data. In response, we are rolling out a new version of the software: 7.1.24 The data sourcing issues are fixed and some dead links in the Chart menu were removed. So whether you are a registered user or someone engaged in the free trial, head over to our update page and download the latest version. The update page is here: Contact us if you have questions or identify any new issues.