Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Performance History
Old 05-19-2006, 01:26 PM   #1
Recycles dryer sheets
tomz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 251
Performance History

I am trying to find out the year-by-year performance of Vanguard Wellesley (VWINX) (among others) from when the fund started. On the Vangard website, the annual performance numbers only go back to 1991. The fund was started in 1970. Yahoo finance only goes back to 1996. Does anyone know of any free sites that have performance numbers back to the fund's start? Thanks.
__________________

__________________
tomz is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Re: Performance History
Old 05-19-2006, 01:39 PM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,149
Re: Performance History

tom,

I don't have a source for you, but I do have some information on VWINX going back to 1985 I got off the Vanguard site last year, apparently before they updated it.

2004 7.6
2003 9.7
2002 4.6
2001 7.4
2000 16.2
1999 -4.1
1998 11.8
1997 20.2
1996 9.4
1995 28.9
1994 -4.4
1993 14.7
1992 8.7
1991 21.6
1990 3.8
1989 20.9
1988 13.6
1987 -1.9
1986 18.3
1985 27.4
__________________

__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Performance History
Old 05-19-2006, 01:43 PM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Re: Performance History

PM "ats5g"...i'm pretty sure we emailed some annual performance info for wellesley and wellington back and forth at some point. I dont seem to be able to find it.

I remember seeing a table with annual distributions, share values and total returns on one of the financial web sites, but I cant recall which one. Must have been free. I dont pay for nuthin'
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Performance History
Old 05-19-2006, 03:17 PM   #4
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 961
Re: Performance History

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomz
I am trying to find out the year-by-year performance of Vanguard Wellesley (VWINX) (among others) from when the fund started.* On the Vangard website, the annual performance numbers only go back to 1991.* The fund was started in 1970.* * Yahoo finance only goes back to 1996.* Does anyone know of any free sites that have performance numbers back to the fund's start?* Thanks.
I put together the returns of Wellesley [monthly and annually] in this conversation [see reply #20]. You can always find historical return info on Vanguard's funds in their SEC filings [annual reports]. For example, the 1994 annual report for Wellesley has return info from inception to 1994.

- Alec
__________________
ats5g is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Performance History
Old 05-19-2006, 03:39 PM   #5
Recycles dryer sheets
tomz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 251
Re: Performance History

Thank you. This is exactly what I was looking for. I'm not sure I understand the regression results after a superificial look at them. I'll take a more detailed look when I'm, umm, not at work.... :
__________________
tomz is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Performance History
Old 05-19-2006, 08:37 PM   #6
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Re: Performance History

Thanks Alec!

Yeah, that work stuff screws up your brain.
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Performance History
Old 05-20-2006, 10:24 AM   #7
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 961
Re: Performance History

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomz
Thank you. This is exactly what I was looking for. I'm not sure I understand the regression results after a superificial look at them. I'll take a more detailed look when I'm, umm, not at work.... :
Hi Tom,

In a nutshell [well, kind of ], any regression model is looking to try to explain something, whether that be a drop in crime, college student test scores, or the returns of mutual funds. For a little backround, see Fama & French's two papers on the subject of explaining portfolios of stock and bond returns. Also see Frank Armstrong's explanation, and Bill Bernstein's application of the three factor model. I just included the two bond factors [read: explanatory variables] because I was dealing with mutual funds with both stocks and bonds.

Basically, what you're looking for is a high R-squared, which means that your model explains most of the returns of said mutual fund. For example, if the R-squared is 87%, that tells you that 87% of the fund's monthly returns are explained by the 5 factors.

Then, look at the coefficient for the "Intercept." This is any extra monthly return that is not explained by the 5 factors. This is the value added by the mutual fund manager, or "alpha." Say the alpha is "0.05", then the yearly alpha is then [1+0.05%]^12-1 = 0.60% per year.

If the "t-stat" is greater than 1.96, then that coefficient is generally considered "statistically significant," and we can say that the alpha is different than zero.

Of course, any statistically signficiant alpha may or may not be due to the skill of the managers. It may totally be due to luck, we just can't know. Also, finding a fund with alpha doesn't say anything about the possible persistence of this alpha, as the shareholders of Vanguard's Windsor Fund found out in the 1980's and 1990's with John Neff.

It should be noted that my results for Wellesley and Wellington don't say conclusively that their monthly returns are totally due to their exposure to stocks, value stocks, and longer term corporate bonds. It just says that their monthly returns are highly correlated with the returns of stocks, value stocks, and longer term corporate bonds. Of course, reading through Bogle's Speech on Wellington and the prior investment policies of Wellington in its SEC filings [focusing on value stocks and longer term corporate bonds], does point to the conclusion that the returns of these two funds are mostly due to their focus on large cap value stocks and longer term corporate bonds.

hth,

- Alec
__________________
ats5g is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Performance History
Old 05-20-2006, 11:15 AM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Re: Performance History

Could I add "Good Quality" to the "large cap value stocks" and "longer term corporate bonds"?

They seem to do a good job of picking up the quality offerings and leaving the dogs lying. Something that indexes cant do, but for some reason...a lot of fund managers cant do either.
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Performance History
Old 05-20-2006, 09:20 PM   #9
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 961
Re: Performance History

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cute Fuzzy Bunny
Could I add "Good Quality" to the "large cap value stocks" and "longer term corporate bonds"?

They seem to do a good job of picking up the quality offerings and leaving the dogs lying. Something that indexes cant do, but for some reason...a lot of fund managers cant do either.
CFB,

I'm not trying to be difficult, but I haven't seen much evidence to support the theory that Wellington or Wellesley has done a good job of picking up the qualify offering and leaving the dogs lying. They have certainly done a good job [since Vanguard took over in the late 1970's] of sticking to their investment objectives [large value dividend paying stocks and high quality corporate bonds]. I think this is more of a reason to hold Wellington or Wellesley than holding out hope for any alpha the managers could add.

I've probably said this before, but if an investor wants a value tilted balanced fund, either of these would do nicely, especially if one qualifies for admiral shares.

- Alec
__________________
ats5g is offline   Reply With Quote
Re: Performance History
Old 05-21-2006, 12:56 PM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Re: Performance History

Not difficult at all. I know you've done a lot more work looking at this aspect of the funds than I have, and i've read a bit of it. I have a lot of respect for your opinion and the opinions of people who do a good job of investigating the data before forming opinions. Even more for people who accept and incorporate criticism as easily as praise.

In looking at the holdings of a fund like wellesley, I dont see a lot of poor credit or junk offerings, and the stock holdings, while value tilted, tend to be pretty blue-chip offerings. Hence the "quality" comment.

Your point about the cost factors is well noted...sub .20 rates for the wellesley admiral fund is pretty dang good for a managed fund.

Although looking at target retirement income, there are some nice attributes to that fund as well. If I were a highly risk averse investor or someone looking for high current income and low volatility, I might see sense in splitting my money between the two. They might end up moving in tandem, but their holdings (last time I looked) seemed rather different.
__________________

__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
health history for health insurance vic Health and Early Retirement 22 10-26-2006 10:07 AM
Q on military history: mutiny/insubordination brewer12345 Other topics 34 10-04-2006 01:50 PM
How do you calculate your portfolio performance? Surfdaddy FIRE and Money 13 04-13-2006 08:32 AM
Charting and Performance Question? HnE FIRE and Money 4 06-20-2005 08:18 PM
Fund costs vs. performance LRAO FIRE and Money 19 10-14-2004 09:36 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:27 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.