The Entrepreneur Forum | Financial Freedom | Starting a Business | Motivation | Money | Success

The Entrepreneur's Forum for learning how to build wealth and financial freedom the Fastlane way!

Say "NO" to mediocre living rife with jobs, ascetic frugality, and suffocating savings rituals— learn how to build a Fastlane business that pays both freedom and lifestyle affluence. Join our forum with more than 70,000 entrepreneurs who are making it happen.
Join for FREE Today
Get the books
Remove ads? Join Fastlane INSIDERS
(Registration removes this block)

Money System: Technical Analysis Question (MZA vs FAX)

Anything related to investing, including crypto

Lucid Tech

Bronze Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
Feb 2, 2016
66
269
34
This relates to the Money System mentioned towards the back of Unscripted , and how to perform due diligence on quality of cash flows.

This will compare two examples (at least one is mentioned in the book): BlackRock MuniYield Arizona (MZA) and Aberdeen Asia-Pacific Income Fund Inc (FAX). Both are closed end funds that pay dividends monthly.

My question relates to the different types of distributions and whether this can give insight to the overall health of the fund.

This first screenshot is the allocation of monthly distributions (dividends) to the shareholders of FAX. There's a balance of income, gains, and return of capital.

The second screenshot is the allocation of MZA. All of the distribution amount is considered Income.

From a tax perspective, return of capital is great since it's typically tax free (i.e. your own capital being returned to you).

However, seeing so much capital being returned in FAX makes me question the overall health of the fund. Is it not performing as well as anticipated? Is the reason so much of this is "return of capital" that they are not making as much profit as needed?

Conversely, seeing all of MZA's distributions categorized as Income makes me conclude that it is doing as well as, or better than, expected. As in, all of its holdings are performing very well so there's no need to return any capital.

I don't have much experience with this so I may be completely missing something.

Anyone more experienced than me care to weigh in?
 
Don't like ads? Remove them while supporting the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Attachments

  • FAX_Distribution.png
    FAX_Distribution.png
    207.7 KB · Views: 8
  • MZA_distribution.png
    MZA_distribution.png
    162.6 KB · Views: 8

MJ DeMarco

I followed the science; all I found was money.
Staff member
FASTLANE INSIDER
EPIC CONTRIBUTOR
Read Rat-Race Escape!
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Summit Attendee
Speedway Pass
Jul 23, 2007
35,305
140,032
Utah
However, seeing so much capital being returned in FAX makes me question the overall health of the fund.

Good catch.

This is why I haven't owned FAX for at least 3 years.

Once ROC started happening more and more, I got out. That usually happens when the income from the fund can't meet the distribution level. Instead of lowering it (that scares people even more) they do a ROC.

I don't fully understand the math behind it, but for me, it's more of a conceptual thing that I usually perceive as a concern.

Conversely, seeing all of MZA's distributions categorized as Income makes me conclude that it is doing as well as, or better than, expected.

Yes, and that's why I go in and out of that fund, for now.

Things can always change though, like interest rates.
 

Lucid Tech

Bronze Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
Feb 2, 2016
66
269
34
Good catch.

This is why I haven't owned FAX for at least 3 years.

Once ROC started happening more and more, I got out. That usually happens when the income from the fund can't meet the distribution level. Instead of lowering it (that scares people even more) they do a ROC.

I don't fully understand the math behind it, but for me, it's more of a conceptual thing that I usually perceive as a concern.



Yes, and that's why I go in and out of that fund, for now.

Things can always change though, like interest rates.


Thanks for weighing in and glad to see confirmation of my theory.

That 8%+ yield is tantalizingly juicy, but dangerous.
 

cottonbuds

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Jan 3, 2018
28
23
41
India
From a tax perspective, return of capital is great since it's typically tax free (i.e. your own capital being returned to you).

Not exactly sure whats going on with this fund, but wanted to point out that a ROC does affect your taxes. It effectively reduces your cost basis (new cost basis of shares = original cost basis - ROC) and thus you will have higher taxable gains when/if you finally sell your shares. This wont affect you obviously if you hold the shares in a IRA.
 
Don't like ads? Remove them while supporting the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Lucid Tech

Bronze Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
Feb 2, 2016
66
269
34
Not exactly sure whats going on with this fund, but wanted to point out that a ROC does affect your taxes. It effectively reduces your cost basis (new cost basis of shares = original cost basis - ROC) and thus you will have higher taxable gains when/if you finally sell your shares. This wont affect you obviously if you hold the shares in a IRA.

Agreed, it does affect the capital gains when the shares are sold and gains are realized. I was referring to the tax treatment on the monthly distributions themselves. Generally, they aren't taxable as it's considered part of your original investment simply being returned to you.
 

cottonbuds

Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Jan 3, 2018
28
23
41
India

Lucid Tech

Bronze Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Read Unscripted!
Speedway Pass
Feb 2, 2016
66
269
34
True. This link may help you figure out the ROC vs dividend stuff.
https://funds.eatonvance.com/includes/loadDocument.php?fn=6348.pdf

Thanks this is very helpful.

For others who are reading, here is a summary from that page:

"So if the tax character of a fund’s distributions cannot be relied upon to reveal whether or not a fund has earned its distributions, how can a shareholder determine this important information?

It’s actually quite simple, and requires only information that is readily available to every fund shareholder. Look at the change in a fund’s NAV per share (net of distributions) over the course of a year: if NAV has increased, the fund earned more than it distributed. If NAV has gone down, the fund distributed more than it earned. Said differently, if a fund’s total return based on NAV has exceeded its distribution rate for the year, it earned its distribution. If not, the opposite. Pretty straightforward, right?"

NAV does seem to be declining year-over-year, so there is some cause for concern.
 
Don't like ads? Remove them while supporting the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Post New Topic

Please SEARCH before posting.
Please select the BEST category.

Post new topic

Guest post submissions offered HERE.

Latest Posts

New Topics

Fastlane Insiders

View the forum AD FREE.
Private, unindexed content
Detailed process/execution threads
Ideas needing execution, more!

Join Fastlane Insiders.

Must Read Books...

Explore books recommended by MJ DeMarco and other members of the Fastlane entrepreneurial community.
Fastlane Bookstore
Top