Riding The Slope Of Hope, When Zero Is Different Than Free, 2019, And “Feels Great Baby”

30 Jan 2020

Last Friday marked the 70th consecutive day for the S&P 500 without a greater than 1% higher or lower close than the previous day. As the chart below shows, most of the closes since early October have been UP. With the Federal Reserve again pumping money into the financial markets, we’ve had a market that has felt like it would never go down.

We know rationally that’s not possible. Sentiment and valuation indicators are reaching multi-year extremes. At some point, this excessive optimism will matter, and probably not in a good way. A decline of some magnitude will eventually commence, and perhaps already has, blamed on the China virus fears. We’ll examine the near-term prospects, along with cycle work related to 2020.

In addition, we’ll dive into the recent move by Schwab and other discount brokerage firms to eliminate trading commissions on most equity trades, while also examining an area that investors are mostly not aware of—internal expense ratios. As always, we’ll present an objective look at the 2019 performance of our various strategies, in context with market indexes. And finally, we HAVE to comment on this weekend’s upcoming Super Bowl. My 49ers are in it, to win it.

The Slope of Hope

Back in 2017, stocks had a solid year, and one which was marked by a distinct lack of downside volatility. For the entire year, there was never more than a -3% decline in the S&P 500 from any peak. That’s not normal. The average decline in any given year is -14%. When prices go up or down for extended periods of time, this has an obvious effect on investor psychology. History shows that the more a market goes up, the more optimistic investors get. Similarly, the more prices go down, the more pessimistic they get. As the chart below shows, courtesy of The Elliott Wave Financial Forecast (www.elliottwave.com), stocks have been going nearly straight up since early October.

As a result, sentiment has become extremely bullish, meaning investors are betting that stocks will continue to rise. This is shown in the chart above, with the CBOE Equity Put/Call Ratio displayed in the lower half of the chart. The indicator is at its lowest level in 6 years. In addition, according to SentimenTrader.com, last week investors purchased 22.8 million call options to open, a record amount over the last 20 years. When one purchases call options, it’s a bet on higher prices. All of this is happening AFTER the stock market completed a 30% plus gain in 2019. As it’s been said, when everyone’s bullish, there’s nobody left to buy. It’s possible we may be at that point.

Though stock prices definitely follow business fundamentals in the very long run, there is no doubt that investor psychology plays a hugely important part in the short to intermediate term. In that vein, look at the Consumer Confidence Index chart below, courtesy of Ned Davis Research (www.ndr.com). Along with the Present Situations Index, both indicators are at their highest levels of optimism since 1999. Stocks peaked in March of 2000 and preceded to fall 3 consecutive years. Peaks in the Present Situation Index have in the past led recessions by about 8 to 12 months, so unless another surge is coming, it is very possible a recession could emerge in the second half of 2020.

Psychology is one of the big reasons stocks are at record valuations. It’s important to understand that the positive forces that have driven prices beyond their fundamentals can also work in the other direction. It’s just impossible to know what will be the cause. Below is an example of how optimism has driven certain areas to record levels. It’s a chart of the S&P 500 Index Price/Sales Ratio, also courtesy of Ned Davis Research.

Since the end of 2010, sales of the Index have grown at a compound rate of 4.1%, while the Index itself has compounded at 10.4% annually (not counting dividends). In the last 65 years, the median Price/Sales ratio has been about 1.3, but it now sits at a record 2.30. Much like an expansion in the Price/Earnings ratio, this is all psychology. Since about the middle of 1997, investors have chosen to value companies at higher levels, with the exception of the drop in the 2007-09 period. Should investors turn pessimistic, simply taking this indicator back to the median would result in a drop in the Index of about -53%.

The Crystal Ball for 2020

If you read us regularly, you know that we feel paying attention to forecasts is a waste of time and mental energy. How many strategists predicted the huge drop in interest rates last year? How about the 30% gain in the S&P 500? Not many, if any. And those that are successful, will almost surely fail the next time. Better to pay attention to what the market is doing and saying. But, for those that insist on peering into the future, below is the S&P 500 Cycle Composite for this year, which is composed of the 1-year cycle, the Election Cycle and the Decennial Pattern. Take it with a grain of salt, but the cycle chart shows a pretty big decline from April into early summer, followed by a big rally peaking in September.

The Decennial Pattern is simply a record of what stocks have done in each calendar year. This year is the 10th of the decade, ending in zero. The historical record is not favorable, with median losses of -6.6% over 13 prior cases. There have been calendar year losses in 8 of the 13 years. That is significant, in that over time, stocks have one-year positive returns 3 of every 4 years. The problem with the Decennial Pattern, though, is the lack of statistical reliability. Remember statistics class? You need 30 to 35 events to get into reliable probabilities. I won’t be around to plot that data. Remember to put data analysis into context. It’s not everything. Sometimes, relationships break down. Sometimes, we can be fooled by patterns that really aren’t there. So, again, we prefer to let the market tell us where it’s likely going, not a forecast.

See NDR Disclaimer at www.ndr.com/copyright.html. For data vendor disclaimers refer to www.ndr.com/vendorinfo/.

Zero Trading Commissions—Some Perspective

After passing the Series 63 securities license test, I started my career in financial services with E.F. Hutton in July of 1982. Back then, the sales commission on a $20,000 mutual fund purchase was typically 8.5% for an equity fund. Even at the $100,000 level, it was still 3.5%, or $3500. If I recall correctly, at the $1 million level, there was no fee. Costs to buy and sell stocks were pretty high, both in terms of nominal dollars and the percentage of the trade.

I certainly didn’t save any commission schedules from that time period, but I don’t think it would have been unusual to pay $200 on a $10,000 trade. That’s 2% in, and another 2% on the way out. Remember, that was some 38 years ago. A few months ago, Charles Schwab eliminated commissions for U.S. stocks, ETFs and options, shortly after Interactive Brokers had done so (Interactive is a much smaller, active trader-oriented firm). The next day, TD Ameritrade and E-Trade followed suit, with Fidelity joining them a week later.

So, is this a big deal? In short, no. There have been no-commission mutual funds for years on the various discount brokerage platforms, and only the uninformed are still paying commissions to advisors at wirehouses who are not acting in a fiduciary capacity. One should know, though, that zero is not the same as free. Nothing is free, not even zero commissions.

These firms have to make money in some manner in order to provide all the services that are offered. Many firms send customer orders to market makers in exchange for cash. This is called payment for order flow. Some firms, like Schwab, earn hundreds of millions of dollars in profit by investing clients’ cash balances at market rates, and then paying their customers a fraction of those yields, and pocketing the difference.

In TABR’s client accounts, several years ago we eliminated the use of almost all actively managed equity funds, and switched to ETFs, most of which were no commission, with much lower expense ratios. However, we still use actively managed bond funds, and use institutional share classes in almost all types of portfolios. At Fidelity, that formerly involved paying a transaction fee (TF), but those were eliminated for most fund companies if they agreed to work with Fidelity, and only come into play if an initial position is held less than 60 days.

As an exercise, I decided to examine the transaction fees that were levied on my IRA account for 2019. This is one of several real money accounts that are managed identically to those of client accounts in a particular risk profile or strategy (moderate, conservative, bond, passive, dividend stock). To be clear, I am not referring to management fees. I’m talking about transaction fees, or commissions. The total for my IRA for 2019 was $116 on an ending balance of $898,000. This amounted to 0.01%, or 1 basis point. It’s the difference between earning 9.32% and 9.33%. The dollar level of the commissions would have been the same, even if the account size were $250,000. At that level, the percentage of the account would have been 0.04%, or 4 basis points.

So, no, zero commission trading is not an earth shattering revelation, unless you’re a professional trader who is trading 10 or more times a day. That’s not our world, nor is it the world of our clients. However, an area where investors should be much more diligent, but aren’t, is in knowing the expense ratios of their portfolios. One fact–for portfolios of individual stocks and bonds, there are no expense ratios. This is true of TABR’s Dividend Stock strategy. One note on that—Fidelity has indicated they are eliminating the asset-based fee on these accounts, which in the past, enabled unlimited trading. We’ve not been officially notified from Fidelity that this has taken place, but when it does, it will save these accounts about 0.40% annually. That’s pretty significant.

Expense ratios are associated with owning mutual funds and ETFs. This represents the sum of all fees that a fund charges shareholders to manage the fund and provide all the services. Depending on the share class, actively managed stock funds might have expense ratios ranging from 0.75% to 1.50%, with bond funds in a range of perhaps 0.40% to 0.85%. In contrast, with the proliferation of passive indexing the past several years and the growing market share of Vanguard and Blackrock, the vast majority of index-based ETFs have expense ratios of 0.25% or lower. Below is the current breakdown of TABR’s Moderate Risk portfolio. It should be noted that the total expense ratio will change slightly when portfolio allocations change, such as a shift in or out of high yield bond funds.

Description	Symbol	Market Value	% of Account	Expense Ratio	Total
Fidelity Cash Reserves	FDRXX	$48	0	0.38%	0
Fidelity Money Market	SPRXX	$62,216	0.068987	0.42	0.028974
Invesco Bullet Share 2024	BSCO	$64,095	0.07107	0.1	0.007107
Invesco QQQ	QQQ	$132,101	0.146476	0.2	0.029295
IShares S&P 100 ETF	OEF	$124,384	0.13792	0.2	0.027584
IShares S&P 500 Value	IVE	$127,779	0.141684	0.18	0.025503
Leuthold CoreInvestment	LCORX	$22,473	0.024918	1.24	0.030899
Lord Abbett High Yield	LAHYX	$112,153	0.124358	0.7	0.08705
Lord Abbett ShrtDurat	LLDYX	$27,801	0.030826	0.39	0.012022
PGIM High Yield	PHYZX	$113,323	0.125655	0.54	0.067854
PGIM ShrTrm CorpBond	PIFZX	$27,934	0.030974	0.47	0.014558
PIMCO Income Fund	PIMIX	$63,612	0.070534	0.5	0.035267
Sierra Tactical Core Inc	SSIRX	$23,939	0.026545	0.96	0.025483
Total Expense Ratio					0.391%

You can see that in the lower right hand corner, the total expense ratio of the portfolio is currently 0.39%. This is significantly lower than back in 2015 and prior, when we were still using actively managed equity funds. Most of those funds were, and still are, sporting expense ratios of 1% and greater, probably on average closer to 1.25%. That is because, in part, that in order to be part of the no-transaction fee platforms that Fidelity, Schwab and the others offer, the fund companies are normally expected to pay the custodians 0.40% of the assets held there. They are paying for “shelf space.” Again, investors may think they are getting something for free, but they’re not. To be able to shop from over 3000 different mutual funds in one place, and pay no commissions is a really convenient thing. It certainly wasn’t available back in 1982 when I started. But, it’s not free.

Some additional information. We run a Passive Index account (see below), which uses all Vanguard funds. Its overall expense ratio is about 0.13%. Well, isn’t 0.13% cheaper than 0.39%? In other words, why don’t you just use all Vanguard funds? That’s easy. Despite some of the lowest fees in the industry, Vanguard funds aren’t the best in all categories, or necessarily any categories. Low expenses definitely help one’s bottom line. But, they aren’t the only factor an investor should be considering. You can see, though, why it is much tougher for active funds to beat indexes. In the past, we formerly owned the Brown Small Company Institutional Fund. A very good fund in its category. But, its expense ratio is 1.26%. The three ETFs we own above are all at 0.20% or lower. Brown has to beat them by over 1% annually just to be even. That is not easy to do over many years.

Bottom line, the industry has changed quite a bit during the last several years. We’ve changed with it. Many of the changes are good, and helpful to investors and clients. But, I can tell you with a quiet bit of confidence—the vast majority of investors and clients have no idea as to what I’ve just written about above in regards to their own portfolios. In meeting prospective clients, we continually come across portfolios where the internal expenses are running at 0.80% and often, much higher. That’s a giant red flag in today’s environment. It would easily beg the question—why?

Quick Note on Market Breadth And This Week

Despite the longer term warnings I cited above in regards to sentiment and valuations, I want to emphasize a key point. Market breadth continues to confirm the new highs in stocks, based on the advance/decline line and number of stocks making new highs. There is always the risk of a near-term pullback such as what appeared to start late last week, but with a friendly Fed who is not raising interest rates any time soon, the ongoing signs of strength continue to suggest based on history that the final peak is likely months away. I would suggest paying attention to the yield on the 10-year Treasury Note. It has now been rebuffed at the 1.90% level three different times, and currently sits around 1.64%. At some point, it will finally go above, and stay above, 1.90%. How stocks react to that development will be a telling story.

A Look Back at 2019

We’ve always found it useful to look backwards and contemplate what we’ve done. This can be helpful even when things seem to be going right, but even more so when they’re not. It’s how one can make course corrections, and fix things.

Transparency has been a fixture at TABR since we were founded in 2004. The vast majority of RIAs in our business do not publish a track record. They may cite compliance issues, or the work necessary to comply with regulations, or that all their clients have “customized” portfolios. Simply put, we do publish one, because we believe in our process, and our staff backs that up by investing the vast majority of their personal savings in the exact same strategies we use for clients.

Sometimes, the numbers aren’t pretty, and other times, they are great. That is part of being in investment management. Even the best money managers in the business go through years of underperformance. We are no different. The key is, in our view, sticking with your discipline, but also having the courage to fix things when something may be amiss.

And though below you will see comparisons to industry benchmarks, ultimately we are judged by helping our clients achieve their goals, with substantially less risk than passive, buy and hold strategies. Besides our combined 53 years of financial planning and investment management wisdom, that is probably the one big difference and edge we have over competitors.

Entering 2019, the stock market was quite oversold, having dropped nearly -20% in less than four months, thanks mostly to Federal Reserve tightening of monetary policy. I doubt many foresaw what would happen. Most of those losses were recovered by April, in a V bottom type of formation, and interest rates fell sharply. When all was said and done, large company stock indexes gained over 30% for the year, and intermediate term government and corporate bond funds gained over 8%, the strongest year since 2013.

Stock Allocations

Our tactical equity allocations began the year 100% in cash, with all of our models negative. That helped quite a bit in December 2018, when stocks fell -9%, but hurt in January 2019 when they rebounded. By the end of January, exposure had increased to 56%, and by February 19, we were at 85% invested. We were never less than 70% invested through mid-June, and have been 85% invested since then, with no changes. Our average equity exposure for the entire year was a robust 76%.

The lag you see in our tactical strategies below, compared to their fully invested benchmarks, was due to our limited exposure in the first 50 days of the year. In those 50 days, our “equity pie” gained all of 2.51%, while the benchmark (75% Vanguard Total Stock plus 25% Vanguard Total International Stock) gained 11.21%. We’re confident, though, that our selection process is working. From February 19 to the end of the year, our equity pie earned 15.80%, edging the benchmark at 15.36%, and accomplishing that while being mostly 85% invested.

There was very little turnover in our relative strength selections, with just three changes taking place the entire year. Had we been fully invested the whole year in the four top-ranked ETFs which we evaluate monthly, we estimate the return would have been 29.45%, beating the benchmark of 28.34%. The level of allocations will almost always be a big factor in determining returns, and in 2019, being fully invested was the best outcome, in contrast to it being the worst outcome in 2018. This was evident in TABR’s Passive Index Mix, which gained over 19%, while TABR’s Dividend Stock accounts gained nearly 17%.

That’s a strong nominal return, but paled in comparison to the S&P 500 Index, up over 31%. The latter is heavily influenced by growth stocks, which continue to shine, while the Dividend Stock approach tends to own mostly value-oriented names, with dividend yields averaging over 4%, and growth in dividend income increasing over 9%.

Bond Allocations

The 10-year Treasury Yield started the year at 2.68%, and fell over 75 basis points, closing the year at 1.91%. This fueled bond prices in all sectors, and the Vanguard Total Bond Market Index gained 8.61% for the year. Below are the full year returns for 3 of the 4 strategies in our accounts.

BSCO Invesco 2024 Bullet Share 10.86%

Sierra Strategic Income Fund 8.19%

PIMCO Income Fund 8.05%

About 60-65% of our bond money is devoted to corporate high yield, in combination with short term bond funds. Exposure is driven by our high yield bond risk model, which turned positive on January 14, and remains on a BUY signal at this writing, over 12 months later. The two most traded high yield ETFs, HYG and JNK, were up 14.23% and 14.97%, respectively. We own 10 different high yield funds for clients, and full year returns ranged from 13.47% to 16.08%. There’s no getting around it—it was a very good year for junk bonds, and we continue to be quite pleased with our process. Just don’t extrapolate the numbers to this year, as current yields are about 5%.

Below is the performance, net of management fees, of TABR’s six different portfolios at present. These represent a majority of the strategies we are using in client accounts, but not all. The differences are mainly attributed to risk (example—moderate allocation versus conservative allocation or aggressive) and account size. The numbers are for the one year ending December 31, 2019.

Type of Account/Strategy	2019 Return	Benchmark
TABR Tactical Moderate	11.49%	18.47%*
TABR Tactical Conservative	10.54%	15.51%**
TABR Bond Account	9.21%	8.61%***
TABR Dividend Stock	16.81%	31.33%****
TABR Passive Index Mix	19.24%	20.45%*****
TABR Tactical Stock Strategy	14.21%	28.34%******
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index	30.65%	n/a
Vanguard Total International Stock Index	21.43%	n/a
Vanguard Total Bond Market Index	8.61%	n/a
Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund	31.33%	n/a

*consists of 37.5% Vanguard Total Stock Index, 12.5% Vanguard Total International Stock Index and 50% Vanguard Total Bond Index
**consists of 26.25% Vanguard Total Stock Index, 8.75% Vanguard Total International Stock Index and 65% Vanguard Total Bond Index
***Vanguard Total Bond Index
****Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund
*****consists of 45% Vanguard Total Stock Index, 15% Vanguard Total International Stock Index and 40% Vanguard Total Bond Index.

******consists of 75% Vanguard Total Stock Index and 25% Vanguard Total International Stock Index

Returns shown are net of management fees, and include reinvested dividends

Remembering John Altobelli And His Family

No doubt you’ve heard about Sunday’s terrible tragedy, with Lakers star Kobe Bryant and his daughter being killed in a helicopter crash, along with 7 others. Three of those individuals included Orange Coast College baseball coach, John Altobelli, along with his wife Keri and daughter, Alyssa. College baseball is a small world, and many of you know of my on-going involvement with the Cal State Fullerton baseball team. Though I didn’t know John, I do know his son, J.J. Altobelli (above, second from right). J.J. played college baseball at the University of Oregon under former Fullerton Titan coach George Horton, and just a few years ago, spent the 2016 and 2017 seasons as one of our three assistant coaches with the Titans, before moving on to his current position as a scout with the Boston Red Sox. Coach Altobelli has mentored many former Fullerton players, not to mention hundreds of others and was the leader of one of the most successful junior college programs in all of California, if not the nation. I hurt and pray for J.J. and his sister, to have the strength to deal with the unimaginable pain of losing their Mom, Dad and sister.

The 49ers Are In The Super Bowl (Feels Great, Baby!)

Until Sunday, January 19, I’d never been to Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara. Our son, Adam and I have been patiently waiting through several crappy teams and horrible coaches like Chip Kelly, before spending decent money to go watch our favorite NFL team. The wait was worth it. Above, we attended the NFC Championship Game vs Green Bay, and well, you already know the result. It was unbelievable, with 76,000 people pulling on the same rope, and almost no Green Bay fans. Now, they have one more mission this Sunday. And, no, we’re not going to the Super Bowl. I was fortunate enough to go back in 1995 (also in Miami) when the 49ers demolished the Chargers. It would someday be great to go with our son, as these kinds of things don’t just happen very often. But, honestly, it’s just too expensive. Unless you can get tickets at face value through relationships (or luck!), you are looking at spending at least $15,000 or more for tickets, airfare, hotel and food. And those would be lousy tickets. So, we’ll be cheering from home.

Earlier in the year, after the 49ers had come from behind to win in a nationally televised game, reporter Erin Andrews of Fox TV was interviewing Niners QB Jimmy Garoppolo. At the end of the interview, she asked Jimmy, “how’s this feel?” Jimmy smiled and said, “Feels Great, Baby!” And that’s how we feel going into Sunday’s game. Hopefully, we’ll be feeling great again around 7 pm Sunday!

Material Of A Less Serious Nature

An old man was sitting on a bench in the mall when a young man with spiked hair came over and sat down beside him. The boy’s hair was yellow and green and orange and purple. He had black makeup around his eyes.

The old man just stared at him. The boy said, “What’s the matter, old man haven’t you ever done anything wild in your life?

The old man answered, “Well, yes, actually, I have. I once got drunk and had sex with a parrot. I was just wondering if you might be my son.”

Here’s hoping your entire 2020 is Super.

Sincerely,

Bob Kargenian, CMT
President

TABR Capital Management, LLC (“TABR”) is an SEC registered investment advisor with its principal place of business in the state of California. TABR and its representatives are in compliance with the current notice filing and registration requirements imposed upon registered investment advisors by those states in which TABR maintains clients. TABR may only transact business in those states in which it is notice filed, or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from notice filing requirements.

This newsletter is limited to the dissemination of general information pertaining to our investment advisory/management services. Any subsequent, direct communication by TABR with a prospective client shall be conducted by a representative that is either registered or qualifies for an exemption or exclusion from registration in the state where the prospective client resides. For information pertaining to the registration status of TABR, please contact TABR or refer to the Investment Advisor Disclosure web site (www.adviserinfo.sec.gov).

The TABR Model Portfolios are allocated in a range of investments according to TABR’s proprietary investment strategies. TABR’s proprietary investment strategies are allocated amongst individual stocks, bonds, mutual funds, ETFs and other instruments with a view towards income and/or capital appreciation depending on the specific allocation employed by each Model Portfolio. TABR tracks the performance of each Model Portfolio in an actual account that is charged TABR’s investment management fees in the exact manner as would an actual client account. Therefore the performance shown is net of TABR’s investment management fees, and also reflect the deduction of transaction and custodial charges, if any.

Comparison of the TABR Model Portfolios to the Vanguard Total Stock Index Fund, the Vanguard Total International Stock Fund and the Vanguard Total Bond Index Fund is for illustrative purposes only and the volatility of the indices used for comparison may be materially different from the volatility of the TABR Model Portfolios due to varying degrees of diversification and/or other factors.

Past performance of the TABR Model Portfolios may not be indicative of future results and the performance of a specific individual client account may vary substantially from the composite results above in part because client accounts may be allocated among several portfolios. Different types of investments involve varying degrees of risk, and there can be no assurance that any specific investment will be profitable.

The TABR Dividend Strategy presented herein represents back-tested performance results. TABR did not offer the Dividend Strategy as an investment strategy for actual client accounts until September/October 2014. Back-tested performance results are provided solely for informational purposes and are not to be considered investment advice. These figures are hypothetical, prepared with the benefit of hindsight, and have inherent limitations as to their use and relevance. For example, they ignore certain factors such as trade timing, security liquidity, and the fact that economic and market conditions in the future may differ significantly from those in the past. Back-tested performance results reflect prices that are fully adjusted for dividends and other such distributions. The strategy may involve above average portfolio turnover which could negatively impact upon the net after-tax gain experienced by an individual client. Past performance is no indication or guarantee of future results and there can be no assurance the strategy will achieve results similar to those depicted herein.

Inverse ETFs
An investment in an Inverse ETF involves risk, including loss of investment. Inverse ETFs or “short funds” track an index or benchmark and seek to deliver returns that are the opposite of the returns of the index or benchmark. If an index goes up, then the inverse ETF goes down, and vice versa. Inverse ETFs are a means to profit from and hedge exposure to a downward moving market.

Inverse ETF shareholders are subject to the risks stemming from an upward market, as inverse ETFs are designed to benefit from a downward market. Most inverse ETFs reset daily and are designed to achieve their stated objectives on a daily basis. The performance over longer periods of time, including weeks or months, can differ significantly from the underlying benchmark or index. Therefore, inverse ETFs may pose a risk of loss for buy-and-hold investors with intermediate or long-term horizons and significant losses are possible even if the long-term performance of an index or benchmark shows a loss or gain. Inverse ETFs may be less tax-efficient than traditional ETFs because daily resets can cause the inverse ETF to realize significant short-term capital gains that may not be offset by a loss.

For additional information about TABR, including fees and services, send for our disclosure statement as set forth on Form ADV from us using the contact information herein. Please read the disclosure statement carefully before you invest or send money.

A list of all recommendations made by TABR within the immediately preceding one year is available upon request at no charge. The sample client experiences described herein are included for illustrative purposes and there can be no assurance that TABR will be able to achieve similar results in comparable situations. No portion of this writing is to be interpreted as a testimonial or endorsement of TABR’s investment advisory services and it is not known whether the clients referenced approve of TABR or its services.

By Bob Kargenian | Monthly Updates