Dividend FundBack to Armchair Insider fund
Armchair Insider

PTY PIMCO Corporate & Income Opportunity

Listed at 2.70% in Armchair’s Aug 28, 2026 public portfolio. The $100K model selects 20 source holdings and adjusts their relative allocations to 1–10% position limits; later holdings changes are not included.

Total-return consistency rank#89100 eligible investments

The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9375. Lower scores rank first.

Hypothetical investment

Growth of $10,000

Dividends reinvested · no additional contributions

PTY would be worth$10,2915-year growth · as of Sep 18, 2026
S&P 500 (SPY)$18,763Same $10,000 · same dates
Total gain / loss+$291+2.9% total return
PTYS&P 500 (SPY)
Sep 20, 2021 · $10,000 investedSep 18, 2026

Based on adjusted market prices through the latest available completed session, before personal taxes and trading costs.

Checking the latest completed session…

Market performance

Total return

Price movement plus reinvested distributions, compared with SPY.

+2.9% over 5 years
1 YEAR TOTAL RETURN-12.3%
Price-21.8%
Dividend+9.4%

Net loss; shares not shown.

#91 return rank · 97 peers
5 YEARS TOTAL RETURN+2.9%+0.6% / yr annualized
Price-1352% of return-39.4%
Dividend1452% of return+42.3%
#75 return rank · 80 peers

Dividend includes all distributions and reinvestment.

Sep 20, 2021Sep 18, 2026
Total return+2.91%
S&P 500 (SPY)+87.63%
Annualized return+0.58%
Largest drawdown-32.92%
Transparent ranking calculation

Why PTY ranks #89

Total-return consistency · Compared with the active Armchair Insider collection through Sep 18, 2026.

01 · Recent period

1-year period

Sep 18, 2025 – Sep 18, 2026
-12.30%cumulative total return

#91 of 97 eligible investments on these dates.

90 investments have a higher return.

(91 − 1) ÷ (97 − 1)≈ 0.9375
02 · Longer period

5-year period

Sep 20, 2021 – Sep 18, 2026
+2.91%cumulative total return

#75 of 80 eligible investments on these dates.

74 investments have a higher return.

(75 − 1) ÷ (80 − 1)≈ 0.9367

Period score = (rank − 1) ÷ (eligible count − 1). This is the fraction of other eligible investments ahead of this one, from 0 (none ahead) to 1 (all ahead). It makes standings comparable when the two periods have different peer counts. A single eligible investment scores 0.

03 · First sorting rule

Use the weaker period

max(0.9375, 0.9367)≈ 0.9375

Lower scores come first. A stronger period cannot cancel a weaker one.

04 · If scores tie

Add the two period scores

0.9375 + 0.9367≈ 1.8742

The lower combined score comes first when the weaker-period scores match.

PTY places #89 of 100

The recent period is the weaker standing, setting a ranking score of 0.9375. Lower scores rank first.

Remaining tie-breaks & return formula

If both scores tie, higher longer total-return rate comes first, followed by higher recent total return. Investments equal on both scores and both returns to eight decimal places share a rank; ticker A–Z only orders those tied rows.

For PTY, the longer total-return tie-break is +0.5764% annualized; the recent total-return tie-break is -12.3045% cumulative.

Total return = 100 × (ending adjusted close ÷ starting adjusted close − 1). The period standings compare cumulative total returns on the same dates. Annualization is only used for the longer-return tie-break.

Annualized return = 100 × ((1 + total return ÷ 100)^(1 ÷ years) − 1), with years measured as elapsed days ÷ 365.2425. Histories under one year are never annualized. Peer returns are compared to eight decimal places; score sorting uses unrounded fractions. Numbers above are rounded for display.

This ranks observed total-return consistency, not business quality, dividend safety or expected future return. Each investment is compared with eligible peers over its own exact dates, so peer counts can differ. No quality, valuation or risk factors are added to this calculation.

This explains the collection’s default ranking. Search, category filters and chart periods do not change it; choosing another sort changes the list order. This is Income Lens’s calculation, not a score published by the strategy creator.