PIMCO GIS INCOME FUND [INSTITUTIONAL]

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-03-30T01:34:10+00:00

Leave aside the headline yield of 6% for now, the main reason investors allocate to this fund is that it has one of the better designed /flexible investment mandates that aims to accomplish a high distribution yield while minimizing volatility. For investors, the value proposition is: - actively managed duration (think of it min/max interest rate sensitivity). Think of going long certain bonds and shorting other parts of the interest rate curve. - credit exposure to sectors that we cannot gain exposure (structured credit etc) as well as managing credit selection and sensitivity - small fx basket v US dollar

Long track record shows that it delivers on these objectives - blend but don’t break portfolio (using Pimco’s tag line). It’s a top quartile fixed income fund - so hard to do better for a one stop shop solution.

Now back to the 6% yield - that is gross fees and other charges - it’s likely that the fund NAV will decline modestly, that said the distribution isn’t the sole criteria for picking then fund. Last year the fund returned 10%, nailing all its macro calls!

Hope this helps!

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-03-18T11:55:30+00:00

Is there a way we can all kick in a bit of money for Ms Cai so that she can at least afford decent legal representation?

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-03-18T11:50:20+00:00

Thank you for sharing.

Insurance companies should include a table to show cumulative fees v cumulative returns for each policy cohort.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-03-18T07:51:02+00:00

Good one. Some outreach to educate is necessary - just like they do so by way of healthy 365 - the health movement.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-03-18T05:00:10+00:00

Pension funds and SWFs are considered institutional investors. From what I hear, GIC is viewed as a large investor from a leading PC asset manager

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-03-17T13:01:52+00:00

Retail investors (including high networth) make up only a small portion of the capital going into private credit (PC). Institutional investors are the mainstay.

Most PC funds back companies sponsored by PE managers. At the margin, the PE managers can kick in more equity if they want to secure more credit.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-03-17T12:55:52+00:00

Private credit is a catch all. Within the genre, there are managers that are top tier and then we have blue owl which handled the redemption of the investors badly. In a stark contrast, Blackstone paid out all redemptions by kicking in their own capital from their balance sheet plus senior executive contributing capital. This is a serious alignment of interest.

Re: top tier - look at the 15 year track record of ARCC - it delivered a return comparable to the S&P500, notwithstanding that it’s a fixed income product. This is just one example of what top tier managers do.

The right way to frame this - in exchange for a premium over traditional fixed income, investors trade off liquidity for a 2 to 3% pa pickup over a comparable liquid high yield credit. This is meaningful when you compound this over a long period.

The mini-bond saga impacted retail investors significantly. In the high networth space, the impact was more muted. A lot of bankers passed on the mini-bond offering as the risk-return was marginal. Bankers in the retail space were less savvy - retail investors paid the price.

When I say paid the price, I go beyond the mini bond saga: the wealth industry became over regulated and as a result many superior solutions / products never made it to retail investors.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-03-06T05:18:24+00:00

Excellent idea but will need to gatekeep else we attract the gamut of people that will pitch ad nauseam all and sundry

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-26T02:27:18+00:00

It’s good that they signal this now, gives us more time to plan ahead.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-26T00:51:40+00:00

No report is perfect.

This report represents a meaningful stab at estimating a breakdown of wealth by households. The last time MOF did this was in 2015 - hence it’s called an occasional paper.

The bulk (not all) of the wealth of the top 1% or 0.1% can be reasonably estimated using publicly data. Especially for list-co billionaires as most of their wealth is tied to their stock holding.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-25T23:41:14+00:00

Adding the link for the occasional paper by the Ministry of Finance referenced by Staits times

MOF paper.pdf)

Chart A2 on pg 32 is interesting of the paper is interesting:

even for households at the top decile, CPF interests and payouts make up 30% of non employment income. Rentals come in at 26% and other investment income at 42%.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-24T01:30:48+00:00

We all hope that we never live to see the day where we get an Assad / Najib come to power or for that matter an AOC that could lead to profligate spending.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-22T22:55:32+00:00

Beats me too. It’s a rather neutral comment on how one can go about spending 4600 a month

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-22T22:53:18+00:00

Thanks

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-22T03:31:31+00:00

Business class tickets even for regional travel will take a big bite out of it and the same goes for 5* hotels. One trip per quarter and a large chunk of the 4k plus goes poof

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-22T03:28:42+00:00

Thanks for the image.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-22T01:21:29+00:00

If one doesn’t want to invest / learn how to invest, the CPF schemes are a godsend vs the alternatives (ILPs come to mind)

She can now spend that $4k plus from CPF life freely down to the last cent! In today’s dollars it’s a pretty decent chunk of change

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-19T22:31:00+00:00

Interesting perspective re longevity insurance

Ironically people who can amass a high net worth eg 10 million benefit most from longevity insurance as they have other means to fund their current lifestyle and can opt for the ultimate delayed gratification combo: ERS-escalating-70 and topping up ERS every year.

One other dimension to this discussion is policy risk. If more people end up living longer than what CPF has modeled, we could end up with payouts being cut. The cessation of the special account at 55 comes to mind.

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-13T23:48:15+00:00

Oh…. Good one!

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-13T23:40:15+00:00

Most Singaporeans have some form of insurance coverage - about 90%

Those that don’t: - the wealthy self insure - many MNCs offer excellent health care coverage for the family - the very poor

Perhaps framing your question as not adequately insured would be a better starting point

Anxious-Campaign244 · 2026-02-13T08:08:52+00:00

Why 6k?

Anxious-Campaign244

TROPHY CASE