| | | Re. I have RNP, RQI, UTF and NXBG on your safe/borderline list. Looks like I might be in trouble.
Not necessarily, but it does mean those positions deserve context and monitoring, not autopilot ownership.
DSS v2.0 isn’t saying “sell immediately” or “these funds are broken.” What it’s flagging is how the income behaves relative to capital, especially in a higher-rate environment.
Here’s how to think about each of those:
- Cohen & Steers REIT & Preferred Income Fund (RNP) and Cohen & Steers Quality Income Realty Fund (RQI)
These are classic REIT income vehicles. The distributions may continue, but capital has not been a reliable partner. They fall into “yield works only if you accept capital drift”. That’s a risk, not a crisis — especially if position sizes are modest and expectations are realistic.
- Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Fund (UTF)
UTF is closer to the borderline/safe line. It’s not a yield trap, but it is rate-sensitive. In DSS terms, this is a monitor, not a red flag — particularly if you’re holding it for diversified infrastructure exposure rather than pure income.
- Neuberger Berman Next Generation Connectivity Fund (NBXG)
NBXG’s returns have been capital-driven, not distribution-driven. That doesn’t make it bad, but it means it’s misclassified if you’re relying on it as an income anchor. Think of it more as a growth-tilted CEF that happens to pay.
Bottom-line, I do own many of these funds, but I don't own them as a buy and forget investment. I regularly watch their premiums/discounts and make my buy/sell/trim decisions based on that. They are seldom a long-term hold for me. I try to take profits when such funds are trading at a high premium and rotate into something at a discount. I would do that even with funds that are rated as Safe/Very Safe such as UTG, BUI, BST, and BME.
In short, you’re not “in trouble” — but DSS v2.0 is doing its job by telling you which holdings deserve active attention and sizing discipline rather than blind trust. |
|
