In today's SA article https://seekingalpha.com/article/4359538-pimco-cef-coverage-update , note that Capecod has posted a comment concerning "the dissonance between strong NAV growth accompanied by (in all cases but PKO) growing UNII deficits".
Note that he is temporarily using/sharing the id FD100000 for this due to an "ID glitch". If you click on this ID, you will see earlier posted comments by this ID .... those from Capecod are signed "regards, Dick".
edit: And at other times, he's posted SA comments under ID "Dick Cod".
Thanks, @fpajerski, for this information about capecod.
I remember he had some health issues in the past, so I am glad to see he is well since his rather sudden departure from the Fidelity Forum in April.
A very interesting comment-exchange over some days occurred in https://seekingalpha.com/article/4359538-pimco-cef-coverage-update between the article author ADS and Dick Cod (aka sometimes as FD100000). I can't say how truly informative it is, it's at a level above the understanding of we mere financial mortals ... but it does make one wonder (shudder?) at the financial manipulations occurring behind the walls of the bond houses.
Several takeaways from Mr Capecod: 1) " Maybe all we've demonstrated in this chat is that month-to-month NII/UNII disclosures may often be of limited utility in assessing the likelihood of future distribution changes. " 2) " I think MAYBE PIMCO sometimes uses swap books to "store" as cost basis and unrealized gains an embarrassment of income riches even when portfolio m-t-m takes hits......? " .
I agree Fred 495.
Another interpretation Frank-- 'At times like these, Pimco may buy swaps to replace income from monthly bond coupons.' But don't know if I'm right.
Anyhow, final proof is in the NAV.
and good stuff continues ....