Talk:Closed-end fund

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Removal

I removed a comment that the section on premium/discount may contain original research. The section is purely conventional.

Removal

I removed this:

"CEFs are usually considered a subset of the ETFs, or exchange-traded funds, although there are closed-end funds that don't trade on any exchange. The newer ETFs such as QQQQ and SPY are not strictly closed-end funds, since the fund managers do create and destroy shares in huge blocks from time to time."

Because:

Closed-end companies can issue more shares or buy back their shares. This paragraph is therefore misleading.
Also ETFs are a modern innovation to duplicate some aspects of open-ended funds and some aspects of listed stocks. It is misleading and confusing to imply that they are a subset of CEFs. --Simon West 10:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

Merge the Premium and Discount section.
Comparison section needs to be split into advantages and disadvantages, even if only at the paragraph level. Likewise, there are a few hints of disadvantages, but they aren't really brought into clear relief here- there must be at the very least some perceived disadvantages to explain why investors do not take advantage of the higher returns- obscurity? complexity? illiquidity? too long a lock-in of funds?
Examples? It might be helpful to devote a section to detailing an actual closed-end fund- ie. describe its IPO, its operations, trading of shares on markets, and final liquidation and achievements. As it is, this is not really clear as to what makes closed-end funds so different; it seems to focus more on their peculiarities. --maru (talk) Contribs 22:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please include definition in this as included in Open End Funds —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.160.82.235 (talk) 06:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update the "Among the biggest, long-running CEFs are:" list. Because these are traded equities, "biggest" will fluctuate. ADS, FRCL, and WTAN aren't even among the 20 largest by TNA (Total Net Assets). Make seperate lists, one for longest running and one for biggest. AOD, listed under "newer" also happens to be the 2nd largest (as of 12/2007) --LawBeefaroni 20:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preferred shareholders?

I've traded CEFs for a number of years in the US markets, and never heard of preferred shareholders in CEFs, and never seen preferred shares listed for CEFs. Is this an important enough topic to include here? Of course regular open-end mutual funds have preferred shares, and regular stocks do, but CEFs? Potzy 11:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFter the long discussion of preferred shareholders and common shareholders, there is a statement: "One additional characteristic of closed-end funds is that they rarely have classes of shares." This seems clearly inconsistent with the previous text. I suggest deleting the discussion of preferred shareholders, or moving it to a separate section, and it's not a basic characteristic of most CEFs. Potzy 11:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is important when it exists, however. Current events, for example, are creating problems for muni CEFs, almost all of which are leveraged with preferred shares. Bsharvy (talk) 13:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tri-Continental Corporation (NYSE: TY) has long issued preferred shares (TY Pfd). CUSIP: 895436202. IPO was 06 MAY 1963. Tri-Continental Corp., $2.50 Cumulative Preferred Stock. Security Type: Traditional Preferred Stock. $2.50 Cumulative Preferred Stock, liquidation preference $50.00 redeemable anytime at the company's option on 30 days notice at $55.00 per share plus accrued dividends, and not subject to mandatory redemption. Each share has two (2) votes. I purchased shares for about $35.00 each in 1995 and still hold the shares. Tjlynnjr (talk) 20:07, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

it is important to enow what exactly the difference is between the open end and closed end investment companies/ funds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.240.130.75 (talk) 05:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Closed-end fund. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:48, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citations lacking

Four sections have no inline citations to reliable sources. The rest lean heavily on a single book (Lemke) and an SEC publication. I'd like to strengthen this with citations to scholarly sources, such as Bodie, Cane and Marcus^[1], Thau^[2] and The Journal of Finance^[3].

^ Bodi, Zvi; Kane, Alex.; Marcus, Alan J. (2010). Essentials of Investments (eighth ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. ISBN 978-0-07-338240-1.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
^ Thau, Annette (2001). The Bond Book (Revised ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-135862-5.
^ LEE, C.M.C., SHLEIFER, A. and THALER, R.H. (1991). "Investor Sentiment and the Closed-End Fund Puzzle". The Journal of Finance (46): 75–109.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 16:10, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've beefed up the citations. There's more work to be done to describe reasons that CEFs tend to trade at a discount. BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 15:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My work here is done for the time being. Comments are welcome. BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 22:13, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Bodi, Zvi; Kane, Alex.; Marcus, Alan J. (2010). Essentials of Investments (eighth ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. ISBN 978-0-07-338240-1.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

[2] Thau, Annette (2001). The Bond Book (Revised ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-135862-5.

[3] LEE, C.M.C., SHLEIFER, A. and THALER, R.H. (1991). "Investor Sentiment and the Closed-End Fund Puzzle". The Journal of Finance (46): 75–109.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

[1]

[2]

[3]