@Old_Skeet,
From this linked BI Article with Morgan Stanley Analyst:

2,750 could also be the peak for next year, Wilson said. That's based on the expectation that S&P 500 earnings growth will peak and financial conditions will tighten as the Fed continues to hike rates.
"We would be very surprised if we don't return to a more normal environment and witness at least one if not several 10 percent plus drawdowns next year," he said.

businessinsider.com/stock-market-news-forecast-2018-morgan-stanley-2017-11

“The broadly simple answer, many financial experts say, is that taking some money off the table could make sense for anyone who needs it soon. But, they add, it might be a really bad idea for those who have a long-term investment horizon and are mainly just worried about another market correction.”
Nice to be able to pull up a WSJ article instead of drawing a blank. Don’t know how you did it @Ted. But a nice job. I didn’t read all of it. The couple sentences I quoted say it all. It really is all about time horizon. Unlikely most will heed the advice. General public like to buy when the sun is shining and sell after it rains. Song as old as time,

Mondays are always a good day to read this blog (linked below).
This Monday discusses (among other things) the Impact that The Tax Overhaul will have a financial sectors:

Link to the entire Blog:
dashofinsight.com/

I believe the equity market can act as its own re-balancing mechanism. Market price conditions change "moment by moment". When you are in the accumulation stage of life you might dollar cost average (dca) into these price conditions and in a sense your "dca" helps you re-balance into the market's price. Dca into investments over a long time horizons (many overbought and oversold changes) usually provide a positive return on investment. This might be considered a component of a re-balancing growth strategy.
When you move from the Accumulation (growth) Stage to the Distribution Stage, re-balancing is often impacted by the spending ("distribution of cash") of your portfolio. Re-balancing as a result of spending comes in many forms - retirement income, RMDs, one time tuition payments, wedding costs, house buying, and divorce to name a few. Most of these involve raising cash from your invested investments.
Raising cash in a portfolio is somewhat a kin to running a farm. Equities are the cows, the hens, the crops. The bonds are the working capital needed to run the farm- the fertilizers, the machinery, the outbuilding, the land, the service costs, etc. Think of cash as the profits from the corn, the hay, the eggs the milk. When a cow needs to be milked...milk it. When the field needs to be hayed, "make hay when the sun shines". Harvesting is part of farm's life and I believe it should also be a dynamic part of a portfolio's inner workings with respect to the cash needs (financial goals) of the portfolio.
Another take on re-balancing:
Using @Catch22 portfolio (50% FCNTX and 50% PIMIX) this farm has hired hands (Danoff and Ivascyn) who help manage the production and the operation of the farm separately. You need to roll up your sleeves and coordinate how these two managers are "running" your farm and "re-balance" their efforts. If your are young and your goal is long term growth, buy more FCNTX, but remember that you may need more land, more equipment, more fertilizer...so also buy some PIMIX. In a growth portfolio (with no need for short term cash) I would own enough PIMIX to cover the downside risks (Maximum Draw Down or MAXDD) of FCNTX. So every dollar you spend for future growth of FCNTX, an additional amount (in MAXDD percent) should be directed at PIMIX to hedge FCNTX's MaxDD risk. This will allow you to not sell FCNTX at the wrong time (in case you did need cash), but might even provide an opportunity to buy more FCNTX during oversold times.
For me, I gauge "overbought and oversold" using my portfolios holdings. I use PIMIX as my "risk off" portfolio indicator comparing it to my "risk on" investments, in this case FCNTX. "Overbought and oversold" conditions of FCNTX are compared against the performance of PIMIX dynamically. . In other words I use PIMIX to tell me when FCNTX is over or under performing PIMIX. Also, using @Old_Skeet's upper bands as a re-balancing trigger (+20% gain on the upside for FCNTX compared to PIMIX) - sell FCNTX and move proceeds (re-balance back into) PIMIX. Conversely, a (-10 percent loss of FCNTX compared to PIMIX) - sell PIMIX and buy (re-balance) into FCNTX
We can hire a manager to do this for us with hybrid/allocation/glide path retirement funds or we can "farm" a portfolio ourselves with individual securities (stocks or bonds) or with additional hired hands (stock or bond mutual fund managers). Either way, we still need to identify a strategy to deal with the spending dynamic and determine how that spending impacts portfolio re-balancing as we move through the distribution stage of life.

FYI: With Congress getting closer to passing a tax overhaul package and the Federal Reserve talking about easing regulation, a regional banking exchange-traded fund is getting a lot of love from investors.
The SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF, ticker KRE, took in $290 million on Nov. 29, its largest daily inflow since 2008. That added to the almost $270 million the fund received the day before, as investors line up bets that regional banks will benefit from tax reform and deregulation. The ETF has gained about 7 percent this week.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-30/regional-banking-etf-gobbles-assets-as-politics-grabs-attention
M* Snapshot KRE:
http://www.morningstar.com/etfs/ARCX/KRE/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot KRE:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/kre
KRE Is Ranked #11 In The (F) ETF Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/etfs/financial/spdr-s-p-regional-banking-etf/kre

Hi @Puddnhead, If you are referring to Eric Cinnamond, I believe he was part of the ICMBX team but I don't think he was ever the lead manager. I could be wrong. I think he was lead manager for Intrepid's small cap fund. You know, I was in his River Road small cap fund when it opened when he went out on his own. It really wasn't his deep value theme that turned me away. It was his persistence to be heavy in mining companies and energy when those sectors were collapsing. I believe he succumbed to the term "value trap", which to me is a sin for a mutual fund manager. In any case, below is what I found from M* in a Google search for "ICMBX Cinnamond".

Eric K. Cinnamond
01/28/2010 — 09/02/2010: Mr. Cinnamond serves as Portfolio Manager for River Road’s Independent Value Portfolio. Prior to joining River Road in 2010, Mr. Cinnamond served as Lead Portfolio Manager of Intrepid Capital Management’s small cap strategy, Co-Portfolio Manager and Analyst at Evergreen Asset Management, and Portfolio Manager at First Union National Bank of Florida. Mr. Cinnamond holds a B.B.A. in Finance from Stetson University and an M.B.A. from the University of Florida. He earned the Chartered Financial Analyst® designation in 1996 and is a member of the CFA Institute.

Thanks @Puddnhead. The fund didn't ring a bell so I forgot about that exchange. Now I remember. It's done well. I hope it continues going forward. You are right, not your typical REIT fund.
A lot of what I read is saying tech and financial going forward. Who knows. Back to my 'short'-necks, aka a can Genesee Cream Ale.

FYI: Big gains can be hard to find in the financial markets. Nowadays, though, they seem to be everywhere — and that could change how you feel about taking risks.
Regards,
Ted
http://jasonzweig.com/when-a-10-gain-makes-you-feel-like-a-loser/

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/889284/000119312517349112/d497145d497.htm
497 1 d497145d497.htm STERLING CAPITAL FUNDS
LOGO
STERLING CAPITAL LONG/SHORT EQUITY FUND
SUPPLEMENT DATED NOVEMBER 21, 2017
TO THE CLASS A AND CLASS C SHARES SUMMARY PROSPECTUS,
INSTITUTIONAL SHARES SUMMARY PROSPECTUS,
CLASS A AND CLASS C SHARES PROSPECTUS,
INSTITUTIONAL SHARES PROSPECTUS,
AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION,
EACH DATED FEBRUARY 1, 2017, AS SUPPLEMENTED
This Supplement provides the following amended and supplemental information and supersedes any information to the contrary with respect to the Sterling Capital Long/Short Equity Fund in the Class A and Class S Shares Summary Prospectus, Institutional Shares Summary Prospectus, the Class A and Class C Shares Prospectus, Institutional Shares Prospectus, and Statement of Additional Information, each dated February 1, 2017, as supplemented:
The Board of Trustees of Sterling Capital Funds has approved the liquidation of the Sterling Capital Long/Short Equity Fund (the “Fund”). The liquidation is expected to occur on or about January 26, 2018.
As of the date hereof, shares of the Fund are no longer being offered for sale.
Please contact your financial advisor or Sterling Capital Funds at 1-800-228-1872 if you have any questions.
SHAREHOLDERS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT WITH THE PROSPECTUSES
AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
SUPPLS-1117

FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
Financial incentives and poor products run rampant in the non-ERISA 403(b) realm, especially for educators teaching kindergarten through 12th grade, according to advisers
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=s-UTWt_TGo6hggfkwLvACA&q=investment+news+403(b)+advisers+disappointed+with+TIAA,+but+say+other+providers+are+'way+worse'&oq=investment+news+403(b)+advisers+disappointed+with+TIAA,+but+say+other+providers+are+'way+worse'&gs_l=psy-ab.3...1393.10457.0.11599.18.18.0.0.0.0.160.1451.16j1.18.0....0...1c.1j2.64.psy-ab..0.17.1462.6..0j35i39k1j0i131k1j0i67k1j0i131i20i264k1j0i20i264k1j0i131i67k1.106.QF6dDvM8oYQ

What I look at first (and I figure pretty much everyone looks at first) is what index is being tracked. "Similar" is a vague term. I wouldn't call the S&P 1500 "similar" to the S&P 500, or VOO "similar" to VTI. Likewise, I wouldn't call the EAFE index (900+ stocks, $16B mean average cap) similar to the EAFE IMI index (3,000+ stocks, $5B mean average cap). But those are what the article says are similar.
After figuring out which index I want, I look at costs, all costs. That includes spreads, expense ratios, and to a lesser extent tracking error. Spreads relate to liquidity, but liquidity of an ETF is more than just the volume (in number of shares) traded daily identified in the article.
Vanguard, "Understanding ETF Liquidity and Trading: Average daily trading volume is only a small part of an ETF’s total liquidity profile."
The article says that "Well-known funds such as SPDR S&P 500 (SPY) and SPDR S&P MidCap 400 ETF (MDY) weren't changed for the same reasons EEM still exists."
Maybe. But with these funds, there's more to the story. S&P 500 index funds exist not only for traders and institutional investors (the target audience given for EEM hanging around), but because retail investors buy the sizzle, the familiar name.
About a decade ago, Vanguard worked with MCSI in designing indexes that could be tracked better, with lower turnover and better tax efficiency. Vanguard promoted funds based on these indexes, including VLACX / VV . Yet it kept VFINX around. When I questioned a Vanguard financial planner why he recommended VFINX over VLACX, I didn't seem to get an answer much beyond a couple of basis point difference in costs. The main reason appeared to be familiarity, i.e. sizzle.
There's yet another reason why SPY and MDY won't be changed. They use an archaic unit investment trust structure. This has the cost disadvantage of cash drag (underling dividends cannot be invested by the fund but must be distributed quarterly to investors). Given their structural disadvantage, they're not good candidates for cost reductions.
Vanguard: What are the Five Etf Structures?

Hi @Crash, with rising rates, in general, prices fall and yields increase.
As far as HY goes, an old rule of thumb is buy HY at a spread to Treasuries of around 8 and sell around 4 **. If you look at the last ten years on this FRED chart, 8 was way too soon during the financial crisis, but about right at the peak spreads of 2011 and 2016. The spread dipped below 4 about the beginning of Q2 this year and continued slowly down till toward the end of October, and is mainly up since.
** That 'rule' refers to HY in general, on average, as that FRED chart tracks. Differently rated HY credits typically run at different spreads, so there's more nuance to get into for real junk aficionados.

It's the quality of the business much more than covenants that provide protection to bond holders. You're already giving up lots of protection by investing in junk - the entire company may be shaky, or these may simply be very junior bonds, the first to default if the company later develops problems.
Here's a background paper by Loomis Sayles (admittedly written at the tail end of that 33% covenant-lite junk bond period, as opposed to the current 70% environment). Its headline states clearly that what matters is credit quality. The text goes on to explain what covenants can and cannot do in terms of protection.
https://www.loomissayles.com/internet/InternetData.nsf/0/0BF67A378755F21085257B5000566A43/$FILE/CovenantLitePaper.pdf
(Remember too, that Meridith Whitney predicted a massive run of defaults in munis, which she later clarified to include "technical defaults", i.e. minor breaches of covenants; for the most part real money wasn't affected.)
LS writes that "As it turned out, covenant-lite loans did relatively well versus covenant heavy loans over the course of the global financial crisis [see graphic data in paper]. In fact, the [ratings] agencies admitted as much, but could not let go of the concern and warned that maybe next time it will be worse. Maybe, maybe not."
Gundlach continues to push his sector of the market (mortgage backed securities) without explaining the specific risks associated with the asset class that relate directly to changing interest rates:

“Buy things that people foolishly don’t understand, like mortgaged-backed bonds,” Gundlach advised.
“Get out of things, like investment-grade bonds, that people don’t understand ..."

Say what?

Let me take an "espresso shot" at this by sharing the research of Russel Napier. The last few minutes of this interview explains the historical problem of chasing yield, especially EM corporate debt (High Yield).
My paraphrasing his words:
When open ended funds, seeking a 5% yield for their client (the pensioner), invest in HY debt and that HY bond defaults on its obligation, the manager ends up having to sell something else to meet redemptions and/or cover the bad debt, the risk here is contagion (where a bad asset impacts and spreads to "less bad" assets). Something small can have a very big impact on the larger whole.

I will also link a longer presentation that is a bit "noisy" at the start of the video so fast forward through the introduction to the start of his presentation.
Much like we have come to know words like "Quantitative Easing" and "Austerity", Mr Napier discusses the next possible financial tools still left in the tool box such as "Financial Repression" and "Macro-prudential Regulation".

I’m starting to think that managing other people’s money is a tough racket. Like Miller’s Willy Lowman -
A man out there in the blue riding on a smile and a shoe-shine. And when they stop smiling back, that’s an earthquake.
What got me thinking is the half-hour “infomercial” broadcast throughout northern Michigan by Centennial Advisors every Sunday morning. Michael Reese is a slick “advisor”/promoter, usually with one or two less articulate “associates” tagging along on the (paid-for) broadcast. The sales line never changes: (1) Mutual funds are too risky for seniors. Bad things can happen, (2) Come in and see us about our superior product (artfully dodging the “A” word), (3) To prove what nice guys we are, we’ll treat you to a free dinner while we talk.
In recent weeks these televised promotions have grown increasingly strident sounding. Appear really trying to frighten people and rope them in. I’m wondering if perhaps they’re attracting less money nowadays with public interest in the feverish equity markets so high? To top things off, I had a “cold call” (knock on the door) from a rep from Edward Jones last week. Turned the unexpected/unwanted visitor around and pointed them down the road quickly (in my usual diplomatic manner). Seem to be noticing more large ads from EJ in the area newspapers too (usually couched as “advice columns” - easy to see through).
Tough times for the financial advisory profession?
-
After thought: Words can clarify. But they can also obsucate. I’m afraid that some well known financial “authorities” are using words for the second purpose.

@catch22: I don't know how many times I've told you lighten up on the caffeine !
Regards,
Ted :)
Lipper: High-Yield Flow Chart 2012-2017
http://lipperalpha.financial.thomsonreuters.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Slide1-2.jpg

FYI: Kristi Mitchem, CEO of Wells Fargo Asset Management has the research on the strong connection between control of your finances and happiness.
Regards,
Ted
http://wealthtrack.com/retirement-expert-kristi-mitchem-why-financial-planning-makes-millennials-and-boomers-happier/

FYI: Mohamed A. El-Erian is the chief economic advisor for Allianz SE. Before joining Allianz, Dr. El-Erian held positions as chief executive and co-chief investment officer of PIMCO and president and CEO of Harvard Management Company, the entity that manages Harvard’s endowment and related accounts. Dr. El-Erian was also a managing director at Salomon Smith Barney/Citigroup in London and spent 15 years with the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC.
Dr. El-Erian has published widely on international economic and finance topics. His 2008 best-seller, When Markets Collide, was named a book of the year by The Economist, and one of the best business books of all time by The Independent (UK). He was one of Foreign Policy’s “Top 100 Global Thinkers” for four years in a row, and is a contributing editor for the Financial Times. His newest book – The Only Game in Town: Central Banks, Instability and Avoiding the Next Collapse – is another New York Times best-seller.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2017/11/15/mohamed-el-erian-which-asset-classes-are-most-vulnerable

FYI: There are no easy answers in the financial markets right now because of the run-up we’ve experienced over the past number of years. The alternative — lower valuations, higher yields, more bargains, etc. — is, however, worse because that would mean everyone would have less money in their portfolios. We have to play the hand we’re dealt and anyone who tells you with certainty they know how things will work out from here is nuts. Legendary investor Howard Marks gave investors 6 options in an update this summer. In a piece I wrote for Bloomberg, I give the pros and cons of the best options.
Regards,
Ted
http://awealthofcommonsense.com/2017/11/caution-alone-is-not-an-investment-strategy/

FYI: For the past 20 years or so, as a business columnist for The New York Times, I’ve had a front-row seat for bull and bear markets, scandals, crises and management mischief.
But I am leaving The Times, and this is my last shot at Fair Game. So it seems a fitting moment to look back at what’s changed and what hasn’t in the financial world, for better or worse.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/business/after-20-years-of-financial-turmoil-a-columnists-last-shot.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/business&action=click&contentCollection=business&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront