I'm not doing anything special; when things I want to own come into my buy range I will buy ... and I'm not investing in or avoiding any specific sector per se just b/c of "rising rates."
The article was okay but I detected a whiff of "OMG DO SOMETHING" to the readers. I'm sure CNBC will be full of talking heads this week about how to invest for rising rates, sectors to avoid, etc, etc, etc too. Sorry guys, I own stuff in sectors you recommend avoiding, and you know what? I'm totally ok with that.
The only sector I refuse to own directly are banks and financial companies -- with the possible exception of maybe Lazard, Blackstone, or TRP. Why? I dont' trust them and they treat shareholders as a source of free money.

@dryflower Yes, I do impugn their motives. If you click on many members of that list, you can find their relationships to the organizations and industries of which I speak. But even in the case of scientists without industry conflicts of interests, let's put it in more human terms:
Suppose you went to 100 heart doctors and 97 of them said if you don't stop eating Big Macs and exercise more, you're going to have a heart attack. The remaining 3, said they aren't so sure Big Macs are the problem. Two of those remaining three you find out have a financial relationship of some sort with McDonald's and will receive some sort of bonus or paid speaking gig if you continue to eat Big Macs. The third just disagrees with the science. Would you take no preventive measures whatsoever based on that diagnosis? Would you continue to eat as many Big Macs as you normally do and do no exercise, or maybe cut back at least a little on the burgers? Because right now 97% of climate scientists say if we don't curtail our use of fossil fuels, the earth will have a heart attack.

@Lewis You may be an excellent writer of financial news, but apparently you didn't hear the latest news about climate change. The Trump administration has proven once and for all that global warming does not exist.

FYI: (Click On Article Title At Top Of Google Search)
Morningstar Inc. has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission to launch nine mutual funds for use in its managed portfolios that are specifically for financial advisers.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.google.com/#q=Morningstar+Inc.+has+filed+with+the+Securities+and+Exchange+Commission+to+launch+nine+mutual+funds+f&*

FYI: In part 2 of our exclusive interview with Wall Street’s number one economist Ed Hyman, and top global investor Matthew McLennan we look at the dramatic financial changes occurring around the world and what they mean for business and investors.
Regards,
Ted

FYI: Wall Street pros say bull markets don’t die of old age. But after eight years of rising stock prices, being on the lookout for signs of a market peak makes good financial sense.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2017/03/07/bear-market-warning-flags/98695888/

Hi Guys,
Hooray for Larry Swedroe! In this current article Swedroe identifies Monte Carlo simulators as an important tool when making a retirement decision. He joins many financial advisors who also exploit this useful tool when making that life changing decision. I too have recommended application of Monte Carlo simulators since the early 1990s.
Swedroe emphasizes that a projected failure rate from these Monte Carlo estimates is not sufficient as a standalone output. He argues that the time of potential portfolio exhaustion failure during the retirement lifecycle is also critical. I completely agree.
The code that I frequently recommend, from Portfolio Visualizer, does provide that information in a graphic format. Once again, here is a Link to that excellent website tool:
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/monte-carlo-simulation
When I first became interested in the retirement riddle, Monte Carlo calculators were not readily available. So I built my own copy. I too recognized that the time of failure was a critical output. So on my version of a Monte Carlo code I included a user option to reduce withdrawal rate percentage by a user input if the portfolio suffered negative returns for 3 consecutive years.
An input of a 10% withdrawal rate reduction after 3 down markets lowered the portfolio failure rate substantially. These Monte Carlo studies encouraged my early retirement. Other approaches to protect against a portfolio failure exist.
I encourage you guys to visit the Portfolio Visualizer website and to consider using their Monte Carlo code. It's a terrific tool; give it a try.
Best Wishes.

The NY Times article cited is really depressing reading for current or former teachers. I may have made this point in another thread, but my view, as a retired faculty member and union officer and the spouse of a retired public school teacher, is that the NEA and its state affiliates have failed to properly represent the interests of teachers, especially with respect to retirement. I have observed a paternalism that expresses itself in opaque arrangements with third parties, probably negotiated in expensive restaurants in full knowledge that most teachers won't notice the commissions and high ERs on the products sold. @bee is obviously very knowledgeable about what is available in CT (my home state) and I wish others were as well informed. I was ignorant about my retirement plan when I started work and I doubt I was alone. I wonder if a course in financial literacy in HS might help.

@MFO Members: " Why Leveraged ETFs Are Not a Long-Term Bet"
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/financial-advisors/082515/why-leveraged-etfs-are-not-longterm-bet.asp

@Ted Your starting to get on my nerves. You had better start reading the board before you knee-jerk you articles
But thanks for the reminder!
RMB Mendon Financial Services Fund to close to new investors
TheShadow TheShadow
RMB INVESTORS TRUST
(formerly Burnham Investors Trust)
RMB MENDON FINANCIAL SERVICES FUND
(formerly Burnham Financial Services Fund)
RMBKX (Class A)
RMBNX (Class C)
Supplement dated January 25, 2017
January 25 http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/31125/rmb-mendon-financial-services-fund-to-close-to-new-investors#latest

Hi @Maurice ...............1997?, as in finance melt in Asia? Well, a face slap for sure; but the markets did recover. Heck, I don't sense there is going to be another "melt" right now. As to the central banks; well, many European banks likely have very crappy balance sheets. I don't know how many more props can be placed for support, and I wonder whether the central banks really know the full story about another central bank, eh? We're talking egos for some of these top of the pile folks and I'm confident they do keep some secrets.
Hi @JohnChisum @Old_Joe
You'll have to help me with the chickens and eggs (too tired today, I suppose; and cold).
And I still keep a watchful eye, at least for the next few months. I run all the numbers related to holdings every weekend; as well as other areas looking for a trend...up or down.
Hi @MikeM
I did a quick M* review of the 67% of the portfolio that is equity and the following was shown (domestic and foreign): The top 3.........
-health related at 41% (sector has had a happy new year)
-tech related at 12%
-banks, related financial at 12%
These 3 above account for much of the push YTD; although today it appears I can remove a mental quick view of about .5%. Close guess at 5.5% YTD, as of today.

FYI: he RMB Mendon Financial Services Fund (the “Fund”) will “soft close” on March 15, 2017. This “soft close” is designed to ensure that the Fund continues to be managed in the best interests of its existing shareholders. Effective as of the close of trading on March 14, 2017, the availability of the Fund to new investors is limited. New investors in the Fund must meet certain requirements as set forth in the Fund’s prospectus to make an investment. Those who are shareholders of the Fund as of March 14, 2017, and who continue to be shareholders thereafter, may make additional investments in the Fund and also reinvest dividends and capital gain distributions in the Fund unless RMB Capital considers such additional purchases not to be in the best interests of the Fund and its other shareholders. Tickers impacted by the soft close are RMBKX, RMBLX, and RMBNX.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170302006265/en
M* Snapshot RMBKX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/rmbkx/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot RMBKX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/rmbkx
RMBKX Is Unranked In The (FS) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
http://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/financial/rmb-mendon-financial-services-fund/rmbkx

FYI: For the record, Charles Schwab (SCHW) took the first shot last month when it reduced trade commission on online stock and exchange-traded fund trades earlier this month. Fidelity undercut Schwab this week by slashing its fee to $4.95, which turned into an all out brawl among the online brokers. Schwab matched Fidelity’s price. TD Ameritrade (AMTD) knocked down its price.
And it’s not over!
E*Trade Financial (ETFC) just announced that effective March 13, it would charge $6.95 instead of $9.99. It also introduced an active trading program and pricing tier for those who do more than 30 trades per quarter, which is lower than the 150+ trades it required to qualify for the “active trading tier.” CEO Karl Roessner made a statement about how investors “experience” matters more than price. You can read it here if you want.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2017/03/02/etrade-cuts-fees-too-active-traders-win-this-round/tab/print/

Good morning,
Yesterday the S&P 500 Index closed at another record setting high of 2,295.96 with the U S 10 year yielding 2.458%. The three best performing sectors were financial, energy and materials.
In checking the markets as I write this morning Asia-Pacific is mixed with Australia, Japan and Singapore being up. In Europe France and Italy are up. In the States the futures are indicating stocks to be down and government bonds up.
Old_Skeet's market barometer reflects readings that have not been seen before. I developed the market barometer and my equity weighting matrix to help me throttle my equity allocation (within certain ranges) within my portfolio.
The barometer consist of three feeds. They are a breath feed which is a measure of how many stocks within the S&P 500 Index are above (percent wise) the 200 day moving average. The second feed is a fundamental feed consisting of both TTM reported earnings and forward estimates. The third feed is a technical score feed consisting of the RSI and MFI readings.
I usually run floors and ceilings on each feed. With the floors in place the barometer has a reading of 130. With the floor stops removed the barometer has a reading of 112. The feeds below their floor stops are the breath feed and technical strength feed. Remember, the lower the barometer reading the less value there is to be had in the Index while a higher reading indicates more value. For reference purposes the barometer had a reading on election day of 162 indicating stocks were undervalued (just short of being oversold) and a reading of 157 when Trump took office, still at this point, a touch undervalued.
Since, the barometer is producing unprecedented low readings that I have not seen before makes me wonder what is really up with this market. In reading many thoughts and drawing my own conclusion here is what I have come up with. Since year-over-year reported earnings are up strongly and forward estimates have been on the rise with little downward revisions, thus far this year, investors are willing to pay premium prices for stocks because of their earnings outlook.
I have read where the carry trade is very favorable at this time and with this a lot of foreign money has been coming to the States along with some retail investors now beginning to buy stocks and perhaps sell off some of their bonds. Whoevery is buying has now bid stock prices to elevated levels and thus extended the markets.
So, what is Old_Skeet going to do? Usually, and in the past, I have followed my barometer and equity weighting matrix and would have reduced my allocation to equities pursuant to matrix readings. This year, I decided to ride the Trump rally and I am now fining myself overweight equities by 10% over what the barometer and equity weighting matrix are calling for. With this, I have decided to continue to ride the rally through March or until I see my technical score feed starting to break down. In addition, I will probally, monitor the slow stoch and MACD as well.
In the nearterm, Old_Skeet is looking to reduce his allocation to equities by coming in alignment with what my barometer and equity weighting matrix are calling for. Since, March has historically been a good month for stocks I am not ready just yet to start my rebalance process but stand ready to move should I feel conditions warrant.
Because, I am doing this does not mean you should. I'm stronly up and well above my normal equity allocation but just short of its ceiling. Based upon this it will soon be time for me to start a rebalnce process anyway but I'm going to give March a go.
I'll be leaving today and traveling through Sunday. I most likely will not be able to write much but plan to check the board when time permits.
Thanks for reading ... and, I plan to be back on Monday, Tuesday at the latest.
I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

@Prof Snowball.
I also owned Utopia Funds. I do recall receiving communication from them. It said something like Dodd Frank + state regulations in the state of Michigan made it quite impossible for them to operate as a low cost shop and remain viable as a business. They cited hardships in general for smaller financial firms in general. There may have been more specifics I don't recall.

FYI: Dennis Gartman is the man behind The Gartman Letter, a daily newsletter discussing global capital markets. For almost 30 years, The Gartman Letter has tackled the political, economic and social trends shaping the world's markets. ETF.com recently caught up with Gartman to discuss the latest developments in the financial markets.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/gartman-dont-buy-stocks-consider-gold?nopaging=1

Good morning,
In checking the markets this morning as I write Asia-Pacific is mixed with China and Japan being up Europe is mostly up with the exception being Germany. In the States stocks look to be down and government bonds flat to up. The three leading sectors yesterday in the 500 Index were energy, financials and real estate. The three leading commodities this morning are lumber, feeder cattle and live cattle. For the latest data you might wish to check the links below because often times things change throughout the day.
http://markets.wsj.com/usoverview
http://finviz.com/futures.ashx
Yesterday, Jeffrey Saut of Raymond James posted his weekly commentary which I feel is worth the read. Its theme ... is that ... it is sometimes best to just sit.
https://www.raymondjames.com/wealth-management/market-commentary-and-insights/investment-strategy
In addition, Brian Gilmartin of Trinity Asset Management published a piece titled "Financial Sector Estmates Still Show Favorable Trends" that is well worth the read. Seems, there are some revisions already taking place within forward estimates.
http://fundamentalis.com/?p=6729
Old_Skeet's market barometer still has a read of 131 indicating that the 500 Index is overbought. I wonder how the markets will be effected tomorrow after President Trump's speach this evening? And, I am indeed looking to see what the resulting barometer reading will be. It is interesting that all of the feeds are at (or below) their floor scoring readings with the exception being earnings. The earnings feed is comprised of both reported TTM earnings and forward estimates so if forward estimates get revised downward this will indeed have a negative impact on the feed's reading as well as faltering reported earnings. The barometer has a floor reading of 120 and a ceiling reading of 180. So, you can see we are currently well into the overbought zone and 11 points from the barometer's floor reading of 120. Please remember, a lower reading indicates there is less value to had in the 500 Index while a higher reading indicates more value. The zone indicators on the barometer are overbought, overvalued, fair value, undervalued, and oversold. Currently, 131 scores as overbought with the other feeds at or below their floor readings. With this, the strong earnings feed reading is all that is keeping the current barometer reading off it's floor. For me, this indicates the market is indeed extended and I look for a nearterm pullback and/or some sideways range bound price movement within the Index. I'm thinking that the markets are looking for a good message from our President this evening and this is currently already priced into stock market valuations. I see the markets as being very vunerable at this time!
As in the card game of bridge ... Anybody wanting to double?
For me, I going with Jeffrey Saut's sugguestion ... "I'm just going to sit" as I am towards the upper limit within my asset allocation for equities along with I am thinking that the stock market will continue to climb the earnings wall although there could be a nearterm pullback. Got some cash and will most likely become a buyer of stocks in a stock market pullback perhaps to the upper limit of their allocation within my portfolio. But, I need to see the barometer score some good value can be had first. That would take one heck of a movement on the barometer.
The primary reason that I am overweight equities, at this time, is because of a seasonal investment strategy that I follow where I load equities in the fall and generally keep their weighting towards their upper limit within my equity allocation until spring. I then begin a process to trim equities back towards a more normal weighting. March historically has offered up some good returns for stocks so, at this time, I going with the calendar over the barometer.
Thanks for stopping by.
Have a great day ... and, most of all ... I wish all "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

@msf I agree it is virtually impossible to do business or invest without entering some of these ethical/political grey areas. It is part of life and it would be hard to function on a practical level otherwise, so yes we can try and must sometimes separate these political and financial goals to function. But there is inevitably a point for many people where the political/ethical intersects with investment goals to such a degree that action for a person of conscience is necessary. It is the reason socially responsible investing exists.
What the particular ethical line is beyond which is unacceptable is of course up to each individual's taste and conscience. But for an investor to say such ethical lines don't exist for them and that they are thus "apolitical" is actually I think misguided. That person is actually endorsing a harsh libertarian ideology, an extreme political stance that believes that profit takes precedence over everything else.
Among the embedded political views in the profit above everything else investment philosophy you can deduce the following:
1. Low to no taxes--corporate and capital gains especially--as getting rid of these increases investor profits.
2. No government regulations of business except for those that protect property rights as this increases corporate profits.
3. Anti-labor. No minimum wage, no labor safety requirements, no unions as all of these reduce profits.
4. No consumer protection--as class action lawsuits and federal regs to protect consumers reduce profits.
While an investor may disagree with these ideas in their separate political silo as you say, they are implicitly endorsing them by investing in companies and with money managers that are actively seeking these goals. There is a kind of hypocrisy to this, and many people have pointed this out with regard to Warren Buffett. But we live in a world where to function one must be hypocritical sometimes. It is a matter of degrees. But the extremist politically is the libertarian investor who claims those degrees don't matter or don't exist.

I will keep this simple so you can focus OJ. Your first paragraph was all that was needed to make your point regarding the time frame and financial climate. The second paragraph is your response from the other thread which you cannot let go. Throwing out words like censorship is mighty big of you while trying to shut up anyone who might disagree with you.
You are being the @rse here, not I. To make it even simpler for you, I'm going to stop here. No more responses. I expect this thread to be locked anyway. It's way off the original subject.
It's too bad a handful of people here ruin the experience for everyone else. I'm going to step aside. There is no need for me to wade in your excrement.
So long.

And while I do respect your desire to keep politics out of financial affairs, it is a real fact (not one of the new "alternative" variety) that Mr. Obama was the president during that time frame. I'm not postulating that the presidency is directly responsible for financial losses or gains, simply remarking on the facts.
So your response is to hijack this thread just to get the last word? Desperately pitiful.
I apologize @johnN. This was a good discussion you started. Do not let the political interruption overrun your thread.