I used to run a high yield port which held several Pimco funds. I dealt with this type of decision at two levels, which for lack of a better name will call them levels 1 and 2.
Level 1
Here I’d look at the characteristics of the funds themselves. For example, in the last five years PDI lost about $10 in NAV while accumulating $14.30 in distributions giving it a CAGR of roughly 3%. You might have done better with a CD. On the other hand, during the same period PTY lost $2.89 in NAV but accumulated $7.52 in distributions giving it a CAGR of 5.8%.
Of course this will all depend on your starting and end points and NAV is only one consideration. PDI has about twice the leverage and twice the expense of PTY. The portfolio holdings are different. The managers are different. On and on, many factors to consider.
Also, most of your port sounds like it’s vulnerable to credit crunch. Perhaps you’d want to explore swapping out one of the Pimcos for an entirely different class of risk. Note: AGNC is just more credit crunch risk.
So that’s an example of Level 1.
Level 2
Level 2 has to do with things like what I was asking about earlier – your thinking about Safe Harbor, Mr. Buffett’s comment about consumption vs yield, and so on. Here I’d include things like how much do Animal Spirits (competitiveness, need for action, etc.) play in my decision? Maybe I’d think about life stage: how much is Enough? Do I really need More?
After factoring in some of these level 2 qualifiers, it might lead me to a different decision.
In fact, in my case it did.
Ears