More

Bill Gross's PIMCO Total Return Fund Seeing Investors Leave In 'Steady Stream'

Bill Gross

First Posted: 12/17/11 11:37 AM ET Updated: 12/17/11 11:37 AM ET

NEW YORK (Jennifer Ablan and Matthew Goldstein) - Bill Gross's PIMCO Total Return Fund, the world's largest bond fund, keeps shrinking as investors look to put their money with some of his competitors.

In November, the mutual fund led by Gross saw about $500 million in outflows, bringing its cash outflow over the past 12 months to $10.3 billion, said Morningstar editorial director Kevin McDevitt.

By contrast, November was a banner month for most other taxable bond funds, which took in nearly $10.2 billion in money as a group, according to Morningstar. Over a 12-month period, taxable bonds fund accumulated $105.8 billion in new money.

An outflow of $10.3 billion might not seem too bad for a fund that still oversees $241 billion in assets, but it's an indication that investors are losing some faith in Gross, whose fund has underperformed all year and in November once again missed out on a big move away from stocks and other risky assets and into bonds and Treasury notes.

"The PIMCO Total Return fund has been seeing a steady stream of outflows," McDevitt added. "Gross's fund has underperformed this year and a lot of it goes back to his misplaced bet on Treasuries."

Pacific Investment Management Co., or PIMCO, did not immediately return calls or emails seeking comment.

Based in Newport Beach, California, PIMCO oversees more than $1.35 trillion in assets. It came under heavy criticism earlier this year when Gross bet heavily against U.S. Treasuries, which have turned out to be one of the biggest outperformers of 2011.

Gross, who is known as "the Bond King", apologized to his investors in October for his poor performance, saying "I'm just having a bad year."

In a letter to investors, Gross wrote that he underestimated the contagion effect from the European debt crisis and U.S. deficit concerns. "As Europe's crisis and the U.S. debt ceiling debacle turned developed economies towards a potential recession, the Total Return Fund had too little risk off and too much risk on," said Gross, who also shares the title of co-chief investment officer at PIMCO with Mohamed El-Erian.

The Total Return portfolio is up 3.48 percent so far this year, lagging his peer category which is up an average of 5.87 percent. Put another way, his fund ranks in the 90th percentile, or 163rd out of 181 funds in his category, said Jeff Tjornehoj, head of Lipper Americas Research.

At the same time, the so-called risk-off trade has benefited other taxable-bond funds, which saw nearly $10.2 billion in inflows, of which $8.5 billion was collected in the conservative intermediate-term bond category.

The DoubleLine Total Return Bond, which is run by one of Gross's arch rivals Jeffrey Gundlach, was one of the primary beneficiaries of the risk-off trade in November with nearly $1 billion in inflows.

DoubleLine now manages $21 billion, up from roughly $7 billion at the end of December 2010. Meanwhile, index-driven funds Vanguard Total Bond Market II Index and Vanguard Total Bond Market Index fared even better with nearly $2 billion in combined inflows.

BETTING BIG ON HOUSING DEBT

Gross's latest move is another bold one.

In September, he ramped up buying of mortgage-backed securities, albeit by using leverage, on the likelihood the Federal Reserve's reinvestment program in those securities will boost prices significantly. Analysts says Gross is moving to recalibrate his fund in the expectation the U.S. Federal Reserve will seek to prop up the American housing market by buying mortgage securities.

Last week, PIMCO said mortgage-backed securities now account for about 43 percent of the holdings of the PIMCO Total Return Fund, as of the end of November.

By loading up on mortgage bonds, Gross is making a bet on higher-yielding securities. But in doing so, he is effectively extending the average duration of his fund's investments, making them potentially more exposed to a rise in interest rates.

For now, the performance of housing debt is still trailing Treasuries. Since June 30, the total return of mortgage-backed securities is roughly 3.15 percent -- more than 200 basis points less than U.S. government bonds.

(Reporting by Jennifer Ablan and Matthew Goldstein; Editing by Claudia Parsons and Martin Howell)

(This Thursday story was corrected in paragraph 2 to change the amount of outflows from the PIMCO Total Return Fund over last 12 months to $10.3 billion from $17 billion, according to a revised calculation by Morningstar, which had erroneously calculated the figure and provided it to Reuters in an interview.)

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
Filed by Maxwell Strachan  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 23
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Game Changer 88
Too True to Testify
01:59 PM on 12/18/2011
Somewhere out there, there is a Team of "Ghost Hunters" looking for the "Ghost Profit" the F.E.D. and the Investors (Middle-manning Leeches) are proclaiming to their Investors/"Crooked" CEO's ("Borrowing" Government-owned/Contracted Corporations and Businesses) who are all involved in "Illegally Taxing Borrowed Money" that they are all conspicuously operating off-of as they attempt to find a rock big enough to hide under, or maybe they're all waiting for those "Underground Cities" to be finished so they can "Disappear in the Dark of Night" and leave the Media proclaiming "It was all a Dream"!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
nofriendofrepublicans
Mother friendly.
08:54 PM on 12/17/2011
I smell a golden parachute.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheTightwireGuy
Attempting to balance reason and passion
07:18 PM on 12/17/2011
"Put another way, his fund ranks in the 90th percentile, or 163rd out of 181 funds in his category"

The statement misuses the concept of 'percentile'. As discussed in this Wikipedia article below, lower rank translates into a LOWER percentile:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentile

It follows that being "163rd out of 181" translates into a rank in the 10th percentile,  not the "90th" as quoted in the article.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wonderYrednow
¿Y read backwards?
08:19 PM on 12/17/2011
It's only math....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheTightwireGuy
Attempting to balance reason and passion
08:43 PM on 12/17/2011
Yah, but here is the guy who supposed said this:

"Jeff Tjornehoj, head of Lipper Americas Research."

Oops!
10:35 PM on 12/17/2011
Exactly right. 90th percentile means your in the top 10%. He's in the 10th percentile, the bottom 10%.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
koos458
We Live In A Kleptocracy
06:35 PM on 12/17/2011
Another house of cards.
06:14 PM on 12/17/2011
One, no manager, no matter how good, is primed for every different environment under the sun. Gross seemed to do well in the bond bull market environment, but its been much tougher in the bond bear market we are in now. Two, his bond fund is so big, it takes really huge positions to move it a widget. Nobody can always pick the winning next move, and statistically, a bunch of little moves, add up to no movement at all. So people took out 5% looking for better bets. This is a time that smaller niche shops should excell, but even they aren't. I believe in the great depression when everybody dove back into stocks, it was bonds that rose. This market we are in now is the most perplexing one in most managers experience. It punishes all attempts at doing anything. The global crises won't be over for another 3-4 years minimum. So if you can't reliably make money, at least try and conserve money. Some of the big money fellows are near totally in cash now, which earns basically no interest and loses to even low inflation rates. There are no answers, only risks in this kind of market.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wonderYrednow
¿Y read backwards?
08:20 PM on 12/17/2011
Well said and thought out comment.

FnF'd for knowing some things.
03:06 AM on 12/18/2011
A bear market in Bonds? Not hardly, or likely anytime soon. My charts show the 30 year ready to break out to new highs.
03:23 AM on 12/18/2011
Ack!
11:18 AM on 12/18/2011
You're absolutely right, Fried. Bill Gross missed the biggest treasury bond rally of this generation. He missed the bull market in bonds.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Brian Helm
At what time does the toothheaded whale porkbelly?
04:43 PM on 12/17/2011
If i had any money there i would pull it out and place it with Sock&Mattress savings and loan.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wonderYrednow
¿Y read backwards?
08:21 PM on 12/17/2011
and your address is ?
04:31 PM on 12/17/2011
why take credit or long duration risk for 3-4%?

he must have bought the MBS portfolio for very cheap number
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jcaunter
Profile: schizoid, INTJ, IQ145
03:16 PM on 12/17/2011
If the total size of the corrupt markets are shrinking as investors run from them, why is Bill so sure that customers of his shrinking fund are heading to other funds?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wonderYrednow
¿Y read backwards?
08:22 PM on 12/17/2011
$240 billion is not all that worried....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:58 AM on 12/18/2011
"At the same time, the so-called risk-off trade has benefited other taxable-bond funds, which saw nearly $10.2 billion in inflows..."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:47 PM on 12/17/2011
Well he's been telling anyone who will listen that he's under performing the index and will be under performing for at least the near future. Why would you keep your money parked in a losing account when an indexed bond fund will at least earn 2, 3, or 4%.
06:24 PM on 12/17/2011
There no longer is any reliability they will appreciate, because if it earns 3% and bond values drop 3% you net nothing but a tax punishment for taking the clear risk. I like either high yield, best of breed corporates or high yeild muni's right now. But even then who is to say federal and state governments won't go after the tax free status of muni's as the economy flounders a few more years. So I split the risk, between two totally different risks. All of this to make a few percent over 2% inflation, which is an artifically low number really. Inflation with food and health care costs and services is probably 4% right now. So an 8% hi yield corporate bond after taxes yeilds about 5.5% or about the same as a high yield Muni recurring revenue bond, both of which make 3.5% profit over base inflation, the lower number, or lose 0.5% from real inflation. And with that you take on a huge amount of risk. Separate is that the value of the bonds could drop 20% in a yaer or two of a continuing environment like this. So you still can't make money but possibly improve income..
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:33 PM on 12/17/2011
Listen, I don't disagree with you but most people really only choose between managed funds and indexed funds. Some people remember dad paid a broker to ladder bonds so they might do that as well. For instance, the DodgeandCox bond fund has returned about 8% average over the last 4 years including 2011 to date. That's a pretty straight forward investment vehicle that beats the index without the extreme risk of some funds. It's a nice conservative approach that beats inflation by a country mile. But my real point is why leave your money in a losing fund when it's still easy to get 3 or 4%, even in a tough market like this one?