Playing the I fund

Sort by newest Sort by date
Griffin said:
Dave,

I find it highly unlikely that this enormous gap can be legally attributed to FV. It is too much of a coincidence that the EAFE was down .549% and the I was down .54%. Today's share price was calculated by not accounting for yesterday's gain. Their is no way to not account for the substantial gains made on January 2nd by the FTSE, CAC40, DAX etc... That's the problem, they can use models to generate projected numbers, but they can't dismiss things that actually happened. The FV process must follow some rigorous regulated algorithm to generate the FV numbers. Otherwise, it would create an arbitrary process by which brokers could manipulate prices.
Click to expand...

I have been watching and studying this FV thing for a long time. I taught many on this board what it is. I have seen FV's this big before. Furthermore, I have seen FV's go in the opposite direction that you would expect based on the afternoon action. So I don't know if it follows a "rigorous" or "regulated" process or not (in fact, by definition it should be somewhat arbitrary. You are not supposed to be able to figure it out.) I will give you this though, it is more than a little suspicious that the FV just happened to equal Tuesday's gain. Let me know what they say, even if I already think I know what it is going to be.
 
Now if memory serves me well I do believe the TSP has went back and adjusted errors to the share price in the past. I can not remember the circumstances. Could this be the case here? :confused: I really does seem like a blatant over -FV even though the USD rallied sharply and the USM misfired. For me I will more than likely bail back to the G fund in hopes to nail some of the FV going the other way.

Sorry some of you got caught in the wake of the FV.:(
 
Wheels said:
I have been watching and studying this FV thing for a long time. I taught many on this board what it is. I have seen FV's this big before. Furthermore, I have seen FV's go in the opposite direction that you would expect based on the afternoon action. So I don't know if it follows a "rigorous" or "regulated" process or not (in fact, by definition it should be somewhat arbitrary. You are not supposed to be able to figure it out.) I will give you this though, it is more than a little suspicious that the FV just happened to equal Tuesday's gain. Let me know what they say, even if I already think I know what it is going to be.
Click to expand...

Reposted below.
 
Griffin said:
I attempted to submit the following message but I got the internal error also:

On January 2, 2006 MSCI Barra's EAFE shares were up 1.512%, however the I-fund was not adjusted accordingly due to memorial services for President Ford and the priced remained at $22.22 per share instead of being adjusted to $22.55. On January 3, 2006 MSCI Barra's EAFE share price was negative .549%, however the I-fund was adjusted down from $22.22 to $22.10 (for a loss of $.12 or negative .54%) instead of being adjusted from $22.55 to $22.43. This is obviously a serious mistake. What is TSP going to do to correct this error?
Click to expand...

Wish you the best of luck. I complained last year myself, coincidentally in January. All I got was what looked like a form letter pointing me to the verbage Wheels was talking about.

My theory is that since I-fund has the least amount of money moving in and out, big swings in movement of money, (ie someone with a large balance moving 100% I in or out) causes them some trouble and results in FV.

Once you get into the situation that Barclay's has to buy/sell significant more I-fund to cover all the money moving into/out of the I-fund, Barclay's has to estimate what the buy/sell price will be the next day. You can bet that they will GUESS conservative. This is part of the reason S&S has been able to do the steal manuver. She knows that Barclays will GUESS conservative. My bet is that today there was a significant more amount of money moving out of I-fund than moving in so Barclay's Guesses that OSM prices will drop significantly and thus gives a big -FV.

I agree that it looks like the intern did the calculations and screwed up. I do not expect them to admit the mistake. Wheels is right, they want the frequent trader to be discouraged. I think they will be happy to get your upset e-mail. I'd almost bet that they have a list of frequent traders that they refer to in these situations. If you are in I-fund, stay there, you'll get most of it back.
 
Wheels said:
I have been watching and studying this FV thing for a long time. I taught many on this board what it is. I have seen FV's this big before. Furthermore, I have seen FV's go in the opposite direction that you would expect based on the afternoon action. So I don't know if it follows a "rigorous" or "regulated" process or not (in fact, by definition it should be somewhat arbitrary. You are not supposed to be able to figure it out.) I will give you this though, it is more than a little suspicious that the FV just happened to equal Tuesday's gain. Let me know what they say, even if I already think I know what it is going to be.
Click to expand...

I think what he's saying is that there was NO FV done at all. They simply omitted Jan 02 like it never happened. They NEVER took that date into account for their current figure. If you do not use ANY 2 Jan data, it all adds up perfect and current. Time will tell. If they give back .34, then it was a FV.
 
Somewhere in this MB there has to be a legal begal that can perhaps take a case to the SEC...I believe not only did we in the I fund unfairly lose $, but somebody gained those lost $. Gotta love white collar crime... you can see it but it is hard to prove. freaking suiters.
 
frokker said:
I think what he's saying is that there was NO FV done at all. They simply omitted Jan 02 like it never happened. They NEVER took that date into account for their current figure. If you do not use ANY 2 Jan data, it all adds up perfect and current. Time will tell. If they give back .34, then it was a FV.
Click to expand...

I understood that's what he meant. And I agree that's what it "looks" like. But I'll be surprised if he gets any satisfaction.
 
erichschuette said:
Somewhere in this MB there has to be a legal begal that can perhaps take a case to the SEC...I believe not only did we in the I fund unfairly lose $, but somebody gained those lost $. Gotta love white collar crime... you can see it but it is hard to prove. freaking suiters.
Click to expand...

This has all been discussed before, probably before you joined us. The SEC is in fact the body that gives mutual fund companies the authority to apply fair valuation to keep the traders from harming the buy and holds. If you were in the I fund and you stayed there, then you did lose any money. It'll be there in a day or two. If you tried to trade in and out and you got hurt, then FV is working exactly how it is intended to. Keep in mind there are other companies with other retirement money in this fund. This is not just a TSP thing. There is nothing unfair about it. There is no white collar crime. If you are going to "trade" the I fund, then you have to know this is going to happen from time to time. When it puts extra pennies in your account, it's great. When it takes extra pennies out of your account, it stinks. Except it and move on. Or stop trading the I fund.

This reminds me of a blackjack table where somebody is playing poorly. Everyone is yelling at him because he is screwing up the cards. Statistically, mathematically, factually, that guy can't hurt anybody but himself. Over time, his bad play will do as much good for the table and bad for the dealer as vice versa.

Climbing down off my soapbox. Goodnight.
 
350zCommTech said:
Yup, I'm definitely one of your students. I learn a lot about the I-Fund's calculations and FVs from reading your posts. Please continue to teach.

Thanks!:)
Click to expand...

I appreciate the compliment. Especially since I now consider you the master of the I fund. Your estimates are deadly accurate.
 
December 29, 2006 G11.71 F11.14 C15.69 S18.76 I22.22
January 03, 2007... G11.72 F11.16 C15.67 S18.76 I22.10
................... G+0.09% F+0.18% C-0.13% S 0.00% I-0.54%
..................................................................... USD up 0.79%

USM & TSP were closed 1st & 2nd. :confused:
Why all the disappointment? The I was .12 down on a heavy USD; FV applied.
erichschuette said:
Somewhere in this MB there has to be a legal begal that can perhaps take a case to the SEC...I believe not only did we in the I fund unfairly lose $, but somebody gained those lost $. Gotta love white collar crime... you can see it but it is hard to prove. freaking suiters.
Click to expand...
 
0743412044.jpg
Wheels said:
This has all been discussed before, probably before you joined us. The SEC is in fact the body that gives mutual fund companies the authority to apply fair valuation to keep the traders from harming the buy and holds. If you were in the I fund and you stayed there, then you did lose any money. It'll be there in a day or two. If you tried to trade in and out and you got hurt, then FV is working exactly how it is intended to. Keep in mind there are other companies with other retirement money in this fund. This is not just a TSP thing. There is nothing unfair about it. There is no white collar crime. If you are going to "trade" the I fund, then you have to know this is going to happen from time to time. When it puts extra pennies in your account, it's great. When it takes extra pennies out of your account, it stinks. Except it and move on. Or stop trading the I fund.

This reminds me of a blackjack table where somebody is playing poorly. Everyone is yelling at him because he is screwing up the cards. Statistically, mathematically, factually, that guy can't hurt anybody but himself. Over time, his bad play will do as much good for the table and bad for the dealer as vice versa.

Climbing down off my soapbox. Goodnight.
Click to expand...
 
Being a late nighter, I just saw something that many of you will see tomorrow....

I fund is now priced at $22.44 (+0.22) for January 3rd.

Everybody happy now? :)
 
Yep= a CONTRACTOR is pricing it, and forgot January 2nd.

It's fixed now.

Interesting.

And this- I did a trade yesterday, and still have not yet received my IFT confirmation email. I bet they are going to have a hard time going through all the IFT's yesterday and checking twice before sending the IFT confirmation out.
 
And the "account access" feature still only shows data from 12/29-

Hasn't been updated yet at of 6:40 am.

Somebody is having a difficult night over at TSP.gov.
 
sugarandspice said:
G+.01
F+.02
C-.02
S--
I-.12 This looks like a major -FV If the expected price is +.22 cents then this equates to a -.34 cent FV. That bodes well if you got in today.
Click to expand...

As you may have already read the I fund was corrected to the +.22 cents that it should have been. Now take back what you all said about TSP/Barclay. LOL :D
 
Please fix the front page and add the 22 cents before my coworkers check it.....they think I'm lying.

Thanks
GA
 
Oh, and I know I'm a mere woman and not nearly as smart as the rest of you.....but I am not stupid enough to think the webmaster at tsp.gov could fix it......I asked him to please pass our message to someone at tsp because we were having trouble with contacting someone.

It's lovely, because I have blonde hair, I keep getting comments on this board like, "why did you do that!"

Laughing all the way to the bank.

GA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
What is the New I Fund Ticker Symbol?
Replies
1
Views
114
TommyIV
TommyIV
tsptalk
The I-Fund 2024
Replies
6
Views
2K
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - The stock market dismisses weak tech earnings and rallies on lower yields
Replies
0
Views
98
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - Stocks bounce back, but Google's earnings may get in the way
Replies
0
Views
91
tsptalk
tsptalk
tsptalk
  • Article Article
TSP Talk - A rally, tariffs, and Apple earnings
Replies
0
Views
170
tsptalk
tsptalk
Back
Top