NAV
Navistar International
stock NYSE

Yeah I can't get around the gap between the price and the low NAV so I probably missed it.

Depending on your situation, if you could tax harvest, redeem regular fund and invest same amount in direct fund on the same day before cut-off time (assuming you have bank balance to execute this). You avoid market timing risk, better to do this on a day when markets are going down, as gains will be reduced.
>reinvest at new higher NAV
I am assuming you are concerned that NAV of direct fund is higher, that doesnt matter, your returns are on your investment value not on number of units, whether you get 10units or 12 units, if investment value is Rs 100 you % gains/losses are on 100.
However, if you are concerned that I redeem wait for money and then invest in direct, in this gap if market moves up, I will be buying units at higher price, yes this is a problem if market goes up, hence the plan to invest and redeem on same day before cut-off time.

Not SEBI registered.

VCX has the best basket of private companies but is currently trading at a significant premium to NAV. Therefore, DXYZ, which is currently only double NAV...and arguably close to the actual updated NAV.

Does it make sense to redeem Regular Funds or just stop SIP and leave it because you have already invested at that positions? Is there an annual charge on regular funds or just when you buy units?
Closing so many funds would inculcate LTCG and then you would reinvest at new higher NAV no?

Quick correction that matters for the math: XOVR's SpaceX weight is \~16%, not 23%. You're thinking of DXYZ (Destiny Tech100), which is \~23% headline. They are very different vehicles and conflating them changes the entire trade.
Three real options for SpaceX exposure through ETFs, ranked by $1-of-SpaceX efficiency:
\*\*XOVR (\~16% SpaceX)\*\*
\- Trades close to NAV (your read is correct)
\- Diversified pre-IPO basket: OpenAI, Stripe, Anthropic, etc.
\- 0.75% expense ratio
\- Most boring, most defensible — best for size positions
\*\*DXYZ (\~23% SpaceX headline)\*\*
\- ⚠️ Currently trades at +30-120% NAV premium (closed-end fund, not ETF)
\- The premium will collapse on IPO event. Two things happen simultaneously:
1. NAV jumps (the SpaceX private mark gets replaced by the IPO market price)
2. The premium compresses (because DXYZ is no longer "the only retail way to own SpaceX")
\- Effective $1 of SpaceX exposure is actually worse than XOVR despite the higher headline, once you back out the premium
\- Tactical only — if you hold through IPO you may capture the NAV jump but get crushed by the premium collapse
\*\*RONB (\~14-22% SpaceX)\*\*
\- Newer, thinner liquidity
\- Trades closer to NAV than DXYZ
\- Viable but I'd want more secondary market depth before sizing it
On your "double digit upside in a couple of months" thesis: that math only works if XOVR's current SpaceX mark is meaningfully below the IPO clearing price. ER Shares revalues quarterly, and their last mark was already in the $700-900B range. So the realized IPO event upside on the SpaceX bucket alone is maybe 30-50% (if IPO clears at $1.75T consensus), and that bucket is 16% of NAV. Net to XOVR holder: \~5-8% upside on the IPO event itself, not double digit.
The double digit upside for XOVR comes from the \*non-SpaceX\* holdings catching up — Stripe IPO, OpenAI tender at higher valuation, Anthropic round, etc. Frame XOVR as a basket play, not a SpaceX wrapper.
If you want maximum effective SpaceX exposure in a liquid US security, the actual answer is \*\*EchoStar (SATS)\*\* after the 2025 spectrum deal — they hold \~$11B of SpaceX private stock, which is \~37% of their market cap. But it comes wrapped with $15B of debt and a declining telecom (Hughes/Dish), so it's not a clean trade either. SATS has already run from $14 to $137, so the easy money there is gone.
Bottom line: XOVR is the right boring choice for most people. DXYZ is a trap unless you actively trade the premium. RONB if you want a slightly different basket. SATS if you specifically want concentrated SpaceX with the residual telecom drag as a price.

SBI Mutual Funds is India’s largest AMC with a 15.4% market share and over ₹12.5 lakh crore in AUM.It plans to start marketing for it’s IPO from next week and plans to get listed by September 2026. This IPO will set the ultimate benchmark for the Asset Management Industry."MAKE NAV GREAT AGAIN"

I’d just buy VCX; sure it’s above NAV, but market doesn’t care. Just look at the price this past week and that’s just based of rumors of a new Anthropic round. It’s only going up from here

Once you choose the vehicle you will invest in, if you're short of cash on hand to invest, you can get a temporary, short-term loan from your IRA to make your buy. You will then probably need to sell a significant number your shares and return all of your borrowed retirement money back to your IRA within 60 days to avoid penalties and taxes. Or, of course, you could just buy your shares directly within the IRA if you prefer (if your IRA brokerage is sufficient).
Do not buy VCX at its current inflated value relative to the NAV of its holdings. ARKVX (ignore the personality and look at its track record) and USVC (it's new) have some SpaceX exposure are are priced at NAV so they are a much better buy--but they are not liquid so it may take a while before you can get all your money out.

I cannot find a single good investment to gain leverage before these companies absolutely wreck the stock market.
Here's the only stocks I could come up with that have leverage on upcoming IPOs


**VCX** \- Holds a ton of Open AI, Anthropic, Spacex, Anduril - implied value/NAV is greater than the US GDP basically so it makes zero sense to invest in this
**Alphabet** \- Owns 6.1% of Spacex. Wont really move the needle. October Calls ATM?
**EchoStar $SATS** \- Set to acquire 11B worth of Spacex stock with their spectrum deal. Company is otherwise dying. Basically a gamble.. Calls?
**Amazon** \- Owns \~15% of Anthropic. Again. Massive company. 5% bump? What's the upside here?
**Salesforce $CRM Zoom $ZM** \- Both own tiny stakes (2-4B) of Anthropic- Maybe Zoom? Who TF uses Zoom anymore?
Nvidia owns 3% of Anthropic - Who cares. They will soon probably start their own country.
AGIX ETF - Owns \~3% of Anthropic. Niche ETF with low liquidity. Plus ETF Options suck. I am here to gamble

DXYZ - This **could** have been the trojan horse. Spacex and Anthropic is about 20% of it's holding. **but no options!**
ARKVX - Cathy Wood. I dont trust her. She got lucky in the covid boom and has been riding that ever since. Could be wrong but personally.. I'm staying away.
There's my list. Does ANYONE know of any other vehicles we can invest in and gain leverage before the mania? I am tired of missing out on investments because I'm not in the private investor insider trading group chat

In general most covered call funds with yields below 10% don't have any NAV erosion.
Funds with yields above 20% generally hav NAV erosion. between 10 and 20 is a gray zone. But most of the good ones in the 10% to 20% range cluster between 10% the 15%. But in generate there are exceptions. But if you look at the share price typically NAV erosion results in prolong periods of fallingshare price while the underlying index or asset the fund follows shows gain.
Generally QQQI, SPYI, iAUI, IGLD, GPIX, GPIQ are good ones to look at. QYLD, ULTY, are examples of funds with NAV erosion.

I usually sell between 1 and 3 years, as most of my savings are in taxable accounts, and 1+ year holding periods are heavily tax advantaged in the US for those in higher tax brackets.
I mainly invest in the small cap value space, at present heavily in resource extractive stocks (oil, fertilizers, base & precious metals). I'll only buy at a significant (60+%) discount to net asset value, but should they trade at 120-150% of NAV, I'll look to exit, especially if I find other prospects that offer more appreciation potential.
Of the companies OP mentioned, the only one I'd consider holding at current prices is Google. They've played this generative AI bubble well. IMO, transformer model LLMs will be commoditized, and those running on GPUs won't be able to compete with those running on less energy intensive TPUs, like those Google engineered. I'd still trim to a standard sized position (for me, 5% of investable assets) at highs.
I don't think even market leaders will be able to justify 30 P/Es (3.33% earnings yields) as rising bond yields lead to a equity market correction.

So first off:
I said almost never. You took that as a slight. That's your problem.
Second:
If you give me 20$ and I promise to give you $21, I've got to pull it out of somewhere (the NAV) and hey look, the same principle still exists! I can give you 19 from yourself, and 21 from our assets, which really means your principal dies faster on top of it.

Hey, u/Sit1234. Yes, a mutual fund can potentially pay no dividend distribution during a given period while still generating capital gains distributions from securities sold within the fund.
Using the Fidelity Growth Company Fund (FDGRX) as an example, the research page shows capital gains distributions even in periods without dividend distributions. You can review this in the "Fees & Distributions" section below.
[FDGRX- Research Page](https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/fees-and-prices/316200104)
It’s also important to keep in mind that when a mutual fund pays a dividend or capital gains distribution, the fund’s Net Asset Value (NAV), aka share price, drops by the amount distributed on the ex-date.
Tax situations can get complex, so a tax professional can often help review a specific scenario, but if you have any other questions, just let us know!

the way i think about it: every CC etf trades upside for income. in a ripping bull you'll lag the underlying on NAV, that's the deal. in a bear the premium cushions the drop but doesn't stop it. your 20-year window framing is actually the right lens tho. if you're reinvesting distributions the whole time, total return looks different from NAV alone. SPYI has a better shot at it than JEPI because it writes options on the index synthetically, not on individual holdings, so it tracks SPX tighter. no CC etf will fully match plain SPY through a real 40% drawdown though.

yeah the yield on cost tells the real story. and if you're turning it over every 6 months that changes the math too. shorter hold = less time for NAV drift to compound. makes more sense as a rotation play than buy-and-hold.

This complaint is so common that I wonder whether brokerages should include a tooltip that appears when looking at bond returns stating that it is common for bonds/bond funds to show a loss when just looking at NAV.

Not necessarily. The NAV of a bond fund varies with the prevailing rates (as does the value of a bond sold on the secondary market).
However, with a bond fund you do not have the option of holding the underlying bonds to maturity and in fact most bond funds do not do that. If interest rates go up, BND goes down but individual bonds you're already holding still pay out exactly what the contract says.

The bear market recovery is the part that trips people up most. When SPY drops 30% and then claws back 40%+ over the next 18 months, SPY captures ALL of that recovery. SPYI/QQQI are selling calls INTO that recovery — so they capture maybe half of it. NAV doesn't "recover" the same way because those short calls cap your upside precisely when you need the upside most.

NEOS funds are genuinely better-designed than QYLD/XYLD (OTM strikes, partial coverage, excess premium reinvested back) but the asymmetry still exists: CC ETFs participate FULLY in losses, partially in gains. Over a 20-year window that compounds into a meaningful gap vs. holding the underlying directly. The income is real, the principal recovery after a serious bear won't look anything like SPY's recovery. whether thats ok really just depends on how much you actually need the current income now vs. later.

NEOS actually has nav erosion, it's just unseen until you sell your position. The tax status on the dividends are deferred. Deferred doesn't mean cancelled. You pay tax on those dividends when you sell your position in NEOS, which effectively means that the taxes come out of your position in the NEOS fund -- therefore, a sort of NAV erosion.
I am with ELN (equity linked note) funds like JEPQ and JEPI because while I am taxed at a higher rate, I know that what I am getting in dividends is an actual dividend and I don't have to calculate how much of my principal is actually left to decide whether I need to "get out" or not.
ELN funds \*are\* covered call funds, they just are executed differently that allows for this.

QYLD is an OG cc etf. Came around in 2013 and was good until JEPI/JEPQ came around with a lower ER and less capped upside. Everyone is now competing for growth/income, no NAV erosion, and QYLD isn't there. They cap all upside for more income.