350Z's I fund thread DEC 07

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by newest Sort by date
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica]
8fplykn.jpg
[/FONT]
 
350zCommTech said:
That's good for 10 cents.
So, we're down 9 for tomorrow.
I just hope I can get out tomorrow without losing my shirt.:D
Click to expand...

350,
You're just jerkin' our chain, right? Sarcasm, dry humor -seeing if the newbie's will panic, right?? :rolleyes::toung:
 
Last edited:
350zCommTech said:
The markets didn't change enough to cause a +FV. Barclays must have noticed a surge of transfers into the I fund. I'm totally serious about this. The I fund play was way too obvious.
Click to expand...

If one were going to try to add to the FV data that Greg reports on a regular basis, the mid-day and closing results for the funds that impact (as far as you know) the FV for the I fund, would tracking the s&P 500 and the Dow intraday changes be all that would be useful? or would tracking the Dow change from 11:30 to closing also be useful? Any others?

I'm thinking I also need to save the percentage of those being tracked who moved to the I fund on the particular day there was a + FV? (I know this data sample is pretty small but still who knows, might be interesting. Would like to see what it looks like after a year or so.)

I think starting a database of this data would be a very nice monitoring tool though it's usefulness might take a year or so before any conclusions.

Of course if/when our IFT's are limited, effectiveness of this kind of tracking will be minimized because size of data sample will be VERY small, probably too small but can't hurt taking a look. Don't you think?
 
ayla said:
If one were going to try to add to the FV data that Greg reports on a regular basis, the mid-day and closing results for the funds that impact (as far as you know) the FV for the I fund, would tracking the s&P 500 and the Dow intraday changes be all that would be useful? or would tracking the Dow change from 11:30 to closing also be useful? Any others?

I'm thinking I also need to save the percentage of those being tracked who moved to the I fund on the particular day there was a + FV? (I know this data sample is pretty small but still who knows, might be interesting. Would like to see what it looks like after a year or so.)

I think starting a database of this data would be a very nice monitoring tool though it's usefulness might take a year or so before any conclusions.

Of course if/when our IFT's are limited, effectiveness of this kind of tracking will be minimized because size of data sample will be VERY small, probably too small but can't hurt taking a look. Don't you think?
Click to expand...

Ayla,

Collecting data is useless IMO. The FV process appears to be changing all the time.

Before I go on, I would like to clear something up. The FV process is not a guess about what the OSM is going to do. It's a way for Barclay to level the playing field, taking away the advantage of the stale markets by inflating or deflating the I fund price. All that they are trying to do is reduce the impact of people trying to "game the system".

Take Monday for example, with Japan being the only market open the next day, were they really making a guess? Of course not. The 2% day in Japan did not even come close to covering the FV.

On Monday, the obvious move was to go to the I fund. I'm sure a lot folks were thinking the same thing. If I was doing the FV, that would certainly be one factor I would look at. But we have no hard data to prove that and our sample here is too small.

There is another possible explanation for Monday. Here's what I wrote on Monday afternoon.

I don't show anything coming close to a +FV. But, if I was Barclay I might have moved the cut off time to early this morning since the OSM closed much earlier than usual. If they did that, we would be screwed.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
350zCommTech said:
Ayla,

Collecting data is useless IMO. The FV process appears to be changing all the time.

Before I go on, I would like to clear something up. The FV process is not a guess about what the OSM is going to do. It's a way for Barclay to level the playing field, taking away the advantage of the stale markets by inflating or deflating the I fund price. All that they are trying to do is reduce the impact of people trying to "game the system".
Click to expand...

I thought I understood the "leveling the playing field" concept but IMO that is different from "price gouging" which is what it seems like to me if Barclays is checking the numbers of TSP shareholders buying into the I fund and using that as criteria to add or not add an FV.

If they simply used criteria based on the OSM markets closing early, that is another thing entirely. This is exactly the kind of question that collecting of data would shed light on IMO but I'm not smart enough to know which data to collect without some add'l help. Oh well.
 
ayla said:
I thought I understood the "leveling the playing field" concept but IMO that is different from "price gouging" which is what it seems like to me if Barclays is checking the numbers of TSP shareholders buying into the I fund and using that as criteria to add or not add an FV.
Click to expand...

Hey, whatever it takes to discourage us from day trading the I fund.

If they simply used criteria based on the OSM markets closing early, that is another thing entirely. This is exactly the kind of question that collecting of data would shed light on IMO but I'm not smart enough to know which data to collect without some add'l help. Oh well.
Click to expand...
Ok, for situations like last Monday, half day trading in OSM, we should make a note of it. I don't know if it deserves a sticky thread since this rarely happens. Anyway, this is probably how they calculated the 19 cents +FV. Since the OSM closed well before the USM opened, the FV clock started ticking right at the open of the USM. All that was needed then was .50% change or more. On that day, they used the DOW. I think it had a gain of .75%, which equates to 18 or 19 cents for the I fund.
 
Here's another example of why I don't think collecting data is going to help:

Last week, there were two days where the EFA spiked up in the last few minutes of trading. On both days, the spike put the EFA change well into +FV territory. On the first day, Barclay did nothing. On the second day, they did a +FV. I have absolutely no idea why they did what they did.
 
350zCommTech said:
Hey, whatever it takes to discourage us from day trading the I fund.

Ok, for situations like last Monday, half day trading in OSM, we should make a note of it. I don't know if it deserves a sticky thread since this rarely happens. Anyway, this is probably how they calculated the 19 cents +FV. Since the OSM closed well before the USM opened, the FV clock started ticking right at the open of the USM. All that was needed then was .50% change or more. On that day, they used the DOW. I think it had a gain of .75%, which equates to 18 or 19 cents for the I fund.
Click to expand...

Totally brilliant! I think you nail it! I can't imagine that Barclay would try to do something "completely" arbitrary. There's got to be more than our eyes watching them!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - So far so good for the holiday rally
Replies
1
Views
308
WorkFE
WorkFE
tsptalk
I-Fund benchmark index change is complete
Replies
19
Views
995
exnavyew
exnavyew
tsptalk
The I-Fund 2025
Replies
2
Views
379
James48843
James48843
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - Stocks mixed as Santa tries to find his way on Wall Street
Replies
0
Views
185
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
A low volume sell off on Friday - Did it mean anything?
Replies
0
Views
230
tsptalk
tsptalk
Back
Top