Ameristock/Ryan 5 Year US Treasury ETF (GKC)

All Comments on GKC

  • commenter
    whidbey
    Jul 15 11:38 AM
    Bond Expert: Tuesday Outlook [view article]
    Good review. The markets are about adjust again, this time to lower yields, but soon that changes and we will lose money in bonds and stocks. That should be a bottom for a while until the fall plunge. Reply
  • commenter
    Josh Stern
    Jul 14 11:08 PM
    Bond Expert: Monday Wrap [view article]
    Beyond the sanctuary aspect, the dollar is doing better than expected vs. the Euro because Trichet is humming a happy tune while he drives Europe over the cliff.
     Reply
  • commenter
    bearfund
    Jul 14 10:39 PM
    Bond Expert: Monday Wrap [view article]
    Dear ex-fellow Treasury shorts: I was on the other side of your covering trades today! Thanks so much for giving me a price I never thought I'd see again at which to extend my position even further. See you at 10%! Love and kisses, bearfund. Reply
  • commenter
    sbenard
    Jul 14 06:54 PM
    My Website
    Bond Expert: Monday Wrap [view article]
    John, I confess that I have little understanding of what makes the bond markets tick. It would have seemed to me that with all the inflation, interest rates should have been rising like smoke in a forest fire.
    I appreciate your insights here, and on your website. Good stuff!     Reply
  • commenter
    richjoy
    Jul 14 08:56 AM
    Bond Expert: Monday Outlook [view article]
    On the contrary, I think trading volume will be very heavier. I agree there will be volitility, and a tension between the bottom-seekers and those wanting to get out of their positions on price improvements.

    However, in the bigger picture, what has happened?...FNM and FRE have been bailed out, all our other problems remain.

    So at 4pm, I expect the market to have come back to only a modest gain.     Reply
  • commenter
    Smart ETF
    Jun 17 02:25 PM
    Defining ETF Risk: Does It Pass the "Smell" Test? [view article]
    Matt Hougan wrote about this very thing on June 8th and lists the exact same information plus 'tax risk' and 'counterparty risk' (in the case of commodity and leverage funds). I think you are missing the two most important risks: 'Expected Shortfall risk' and 'volatility risk'.
    Expected Shortfall is the extra (fat-tail) loss that is ignored using a normal distribution. By converting to a 'Stable' (logarithmic) distribution you can actually see the true risk of a frequency distribution. In other words, it is a Value-at-Risk (VaR) model that better describes the tails of a distribution. With VaR, with may think you stand to lose 3% of the portfolio value on a given day, one percent of the time (at a 99% VaR). With conditional expected shortfall (or conditional VaR) the actual loss 1% of the time may actually be 6%; like what happened this past February.
    Volatility Risk is the extra risk you assume by investing in less diversified asset classes. This is a big deal with ETFs. The cause of this problem stems from the sudden interest in ETFs and the need for ETF manufacturers to gobble up their stake in the ETF real-estate game. As the land-grab for ETF shelf space continues so does the increase in volatility. The first ETFs were broad-based market indices, like the S&P 500. The next wave of ETFs was the industry sectors (health care, financials, basic materials, etc.). Because they are less diversified the risk on one industry, in terms of volatility (measured in standard deviation) is 1.3 to 8.6 times the volatility of the S&P 500. Having seized the industry sector space the ETF manufacturers went to the sub-sector frontier to build their niche (such as bio-tech); and henceforth more risk. Not to be out done, competing manufactures launched inverse funds and leveraged funds; again, more risk. Only since June of last year has the risk in new ETF’s subsided with the introduction of fixed income, real estate and some commodity ETF’s. The largest risk in managing a portfolio of ETF’s is in choosing the proper fund universe; then comes the ardent task of fundamental research and asset allocation.

    Expected Shortfall is the extra (fat-tail) loss that is ignored using a normal distribution. By converting to a 'Stable' (logrithmic) distribution you can actually see the ture risk of a frequency distribution. In other words, it is a Value-at-Risk (VaR) model that better describes the tails of a distribution. With VaR, with may think you stand to lose 3% of the portfolio value on a given day, one percent of the time (at a 99% VaR). With conditional expected shortfall (or conditional VaR) the actual loss 1% of the time may actually be 6%; like what happened this past February.

    Volatility Risk is the extra risk you assume by investing in less diversified asset classes. This is a big deal with ETFs. The cause of this problem stems from the sudden interest in ETFs and the need for ETF manufacturers to gobble up their stake in the ETF real-estate game.
    Reply
  • commenter
    Lisa
    May 29 05:13 PM
    Ameristock to Close Five Failing Bond ETFs [view article]
    The ETF shake-out begins. Too many index ETFs are insufficiently differentiated. And some (GLD and IAU; SPY and IVV) are identical. Reply
  • commenter
    yahoo user
    g1s
    Apr 28 05:20 PM
    Treasuries: Profiting From the Bear's Next Victim [view article]
    TO atauber:
    that means ALL rates will go up, not just inter bank.
    mortgages are keyed off the 10year treasury.
     Reply
  • commenter
    adan
    Apr 28 11:20 AM
    My Website
    Treasuries: Profiting From the Bear's Next Victim [view article]
    that's a lot of if's, if $ goes into stocks, if inflation wins over deflation, if the regular guy in 401's stillis prohibited (by lack of choice) of directly buying his or her own treasuries, if the current rally's not a bear market counter rally

    not saying all, or most, or some, of those if's might just go ahead and happen, but for anyone in their late 40's, 50's, 60's, and up, is that a risk worth banking on?

    is that what investment banks and the fed are hoping? that we'll "give up" and pile back into stocks and hope and a whim?

    why not just back-stop us the way the market's been backstopped?

    that'd be interesting

    anyway, 'preciate your views; always good to hear different from what one thinks, so's to think it through again :-)
    Reply
  • commenter
    buyitcheap
    Apr 28 10:25 AM
    Treasuries: Profiting From the Bear's Next Victim [view article]
    Direxion funds also has a 2.5X Inverse Bear & Bull for the 10 year note. Just wish there were such an ETF. Reply
  • commenter
    atauber
    Apr 28 08:52 AM
    Treasuries: Profiting From the Bear's Next Victim [view article]
    no that has to do with rates have to pay to the bank Reply
  • commenter
    dieuwer
    Apr 28 08:34 AM
    Treasuries: Profiting From the Bear's Next Victim [view article]
    IF the treasury market plunges it automatically implies that rates will go up. What will that mean for the housing market? Total collapse? Reply
  • commenter
    Ames
    Tiedeman
    Apr 27 05:20 PM
    My Website
    ETF Fund Revenues: A View from the Bottom [view article]
    Nice data! Thanks! Reply
  • commenter
    SeekingAlpha
    Editors
    Apr 06 05:22 AM
    My Website
    General Discussion on GKC
    Is this a buy or a sell? Reply
  • commenter
    Long-Short
    Guy
    Jan 26 05:12 PM
    Which Treasury Bond Should I Buy? [view article]
    Any thoughts on (a) TIPS and (b) the new foreign treasury bond ETF (BWX)? Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: