Hi @Ted and others,
Good information as I feel a good sector allocation is very important for good returns.
Something I feel has helped me and something that I strive to do is to maintain at least a 5% exposure in the minority sectors of materials, real estate, telecom and utilities and a minimum exposure of 9% in the majority sectors of consumer cyclicals, financial services, energy, industrials, technology, consumber defensive and health care. When the mimimun holdings amounts are added up this totals 83% and leaves 17% that can be moved around to increase the weightings in my sectors of choice.
Currently, my four most heavly overweighted sectors from their minimum base allocations are energy, financials, industrials and technology. Thus far this year as reflected in Dr. Carson's chart all four have been strong performers.
And, so it goes ...
Old_Skeet

FYI: For years, many refused to buy into the hype even as the stock market climbed to record after record. Wounds from the 2008 financial crisis were still too raw, and investors couldn't stomach the risk of watching their nest eggs drop by more than half for a second time. Instead, they favored bonds, which have pumped out relatively steady and healthy returns for decades.
Enter Donald Trump.
Since his surprise victory in last month's presidential election, stock prices have soared even higher, and bond prices have sunk on expectations that faster economic growth and inflation may be on the way. The change has been so seismic that investors poured a net $20.7 billion into U.S. stock funds last month. That's the biggest month for stock funds since 2014 and a stark turnaround from the nearly $76 billion that left those same funds in the 10 earlier months, according to Morningstar.
Regards,
Ted
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/eccce9265a14436696911e70363398df/greed-trumping-fear-investors-give-stocks-another-chance

Hi Guys,
This Adam Robinson, the subject of the article, seems like one strange guy with a philosophy and an occupation that appear to conflict with each other.
These days he earns his living as a financial advisor to a number of International hedge funds. Yet he thinks the world is so complex that it is impossible to logically understand or explain. The explaining only comes after the fact. The understanding may escape us forever.
He said: " explanation is impossible. The world is simply too complex to understand, so I don’t bother trying." But he likely draws a heavy salary for recommending investments to take advantage of perceived economic and market trends. How honest is that?
My simple interpretation of his complexity perspective is that an investor would be wise to invest in broad Index products. If an understanding is impossible, covering the waterfront seems like a prudent strategy.
Pete Seeger said: “Any darn fool can make something complex; it takes a genius to make something simple.” I'm not that genius with respect to investing so I do the default Index option.
Best Holiday Wishes.

FYI: In this article, we’ll discuss the differences between a target-date fund and a target-risk fund, and which can be a better investment choice depending on your specific financial goals.
Regards,
Ted
http://mutualfunds.com/target-date-funds/target-date-funds-better-than-target-risk-funds/

Zoneblitz said "This current market really makes this challenging."
Yes. I agree. And that's the difficulty of investing later in life. Were you 20 something or even in your 30s current valuations wouldn't pose much of an issue. Markets are very forgiving over very long time-spans (lasting several decades). Unfortunately, it's much easier to get caught leaning the wrong way when you've got a limited time span. And, if you're already taking distributions for subsistence, it makes it even harder.
I haven't responded earlier because I try not to give financial advice. But, couldn't resist diving in here. I'm sure the others have been helpful.
Wishing you success.

David: "(Edmond), do you have wisdom on PDI?
REPLY: Wisdom? No. I've traded in/out of it over the years. It seems to often generate a special year-end divd. It goes ex-divd on 12/22 (if I recall) a rather substantial special divd. So NAV and price will likely drop then accordingly. Its trading at a premium currently. Buy/sell points are not UN-important when trading CEFs -- just as they are not UNimportant in buying ANY security. The OP's initial inquiry indicated his objective was income. Several of the PIMCO CEFs especially seem extraordinarily good at maintaining their disty --- and (just as importantly) EARNING that disty.
As a general rule, with bond CEFs, besides evaluating current/historical premiums/discounts, I always like to review the most recent AR/SAR, and determine if the disty/share is covered by NII/share. If there is a substantial UNDER-earning of the disty, that is a big red-flag for me -- as it may portend a future disty cut (which is not fun for current shareholders. PIMCO publishes a monthy UNII/NII earnigs update on their website. PDI, PCI, PKO and a couple others look 'OK' to me -- but as always, choose buy points CAREFULLY, and consider easing into any position, rather than going 'all in' on one date.
=====================================
ZB: "..keep 20% on the sidelines for other opportunities"
REPLY: As a general comment, I think NOT being fully invested (holding cash) works well for a lot of people (this writer included!). Though I believe that position is a minority one. Most of the financial industry has a financial interest in keeping all retail investors fully invested all the time. And of course with the stock market at all time highs (as presently) those folks can point to the opportunity cost of holding cash. Of course we won't always be trading at all-time highs. Cash IS -- as it has been since 2009-- the most unloved of asset classes. But cash provides reliable "ballast" to a portfolio (bonds do too, but not always). Perhaps most importantly, as you note, cash provides optionality -- one cannot "buy low" if one is always 100% invested. And there is a "sleep easy" factor (speaking for myself) in holding cash. These are not quantitave benefits, they are qualitative. But that doesn't make them unimportant.
Good luck.

Hello,
Due to some medical issues I may be forced to find ways to generate income. I have read this forum for some time and think the members here are top notch. I've managed my own investments for about 15 years and consider myself pretty knowledgeable. However, truth be told, I'm no expert with bonds or bond funds.
I have sought out the advise of a financial advisor and one consultant from a major discount brokerage. Both had very different opinions. The financial advisor recommended a basket of American Funds. The consultant recommended several ETF's, like BAB and high yield mutual funds. ( The actual recommended portfolio only had 18% dividend paying stocks)
Most of the assets are in a taxable account. But, I guess, I can't allow the possible tax ramifications to dictate every investment decision.
I'm thinking of funds like:
VWINX
PONDX
SCHD
DLTNX
High yield bond ?
Short term ?
Trying to generate around 4% yield with around 30% in high quality stocks, if possible. I know that interest will likely keep going higher and this could cause serious issues with the bond portion.
I would absolutely love to hear the thoughts and opinions from forum members. Thanks in advance

Dow 20,000
Posted on December 12, 2016 by Bob Fleming
Acropolis Investment Management Insights
...part of the reason that it’s doing so well this year (16.4 percent, vs. 12.9 percent for the S&P 500) is that it is heavy in industrial and financial stocks, and underweight in technology stocks – a near perfect combination for the Trump bump.
I’m not making a prediction, but if the DJIA grows by 7.7 percent over the next ten years (which is how much it grew over the last 10 years), we’ll be looking at Dow 43,000.
http://acrinv.com/dow-20000/

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1423047/000116204416002687/kimberlite497201612.htm
497 1 kimberlite497201612.htm
KIMBERLITE INVESTMENT TRUST
Supplement to the Prospectus dated December 12, 2016
Effective as of December 12, 2016, Kimberlite Floating Rate Financial Services Capital Fund (the “Fund”), a series of the Kimberlite Investment Trust (the “Trust”), will end the public offering of its shares. Accordingly, shares of the Fund are no longer available for purchase. The Fund will continue to operate until the soonest practicable date on or after December 16, 2016 (the “Closing Date”), when it will be liquidated.
The Board of Trustees of the Trust (the “Board”), in consultation with the Fund’s investment adviser, Kimberlite Asset Management, LLC (the “Adviser”), made the determination to end the Fund’s public offering and to discontinue the Fund by unanimous vote of the Board during the Board Meeting held on December 12, 2016, based on, among other factors, the Board’s determination that the Fund’s current asset size, recent purchase and redemption history and projected expenses and expense structure indicate that it is unlikely that the Fund will grow for the foreseeable future. Through the date of the Fund’s liquidation, currently scheduled to take place on the Closing Date, the Adviser will continue to waive fees and reimburse expenses of the Fund, as necessary, in order to maintain the Fund’s fees and expenses at their current level, as specified in the Prospectus.
As of December 1, 2016, in response to market conditions, the Fund assumed a temporary defensive position and converted all of the Fund’s portfolio securities to cash. In connection with the liquidation: (i) the Fund will remain in cash until Closing Date; and (ii) all outstanding shareholder accounts on the Closing Date will be closed and the proceeds of each account will be sent to the shareholder’s address of record or to such other address as directed by the shareholder including special instructions that may be needed for Individual Retirement Accounts (“IRAs”) and qualified pension and profit sharing fund accounts. In addition, the Fund’s redemption fee for all shareholder redemptions on or after December 12, 2016 is eliminated. As a result of the Fund’s cash position described above, the Fund’s normal exposure to investments has been eliminated. Accordingly, shareholders should not expect the Fund to achieve its stated investment objective.
Shareholders may continue to freely redeem their shares on each business day during the Fund’s liquidation process. The distribution of proceeds from the closing of shareholder accounts remaining on the Closing Date will be considered for tax purposes a sale of Fund shares by shareholders, and shareholders should consult with their own tax advisors to ensure its proper treatment on their income tax returns. In addition, shareholders invested through an IRA or other tax-deferred account should consult with their own tax advisors to understand the rules regarding the reinvestment of these assets. In order to avoid a potential tax issue, shareholders may choose to authorize, prior to the Closing Date, a direct transfer of their retirement account assets to another tax-deferred retirement account. In addition, shareholders generally have 60 days from the date of the liquidation to invest the proceeds in another IRA or qualified retirement account; otherwise the liquidation proceeds may be required to be included in the shareholder’s taxable income for the current tax year.
If you have any questions regarding this Supplement, please call (855)- 318-2804.
Investors Should Retain this Supplement for Future Reference

Holy INSIGHT, Batman! ...Cripes, I've maintained this very approach ever since I began to learn my very first lesson in investing, going back to the 1990s. I listened and read a lot, and made a habit to watch PBS each week when Lew Ruckeyser offered his corny-jokes and puns in his opening monologue for "Wall Street Week." I paid attention AND "read between the lines" as I heard each panelist's weekly contributions. I realized that the first step was to learn how to translate all of the "money-speak" lingo. It helped me to find and identify their professional thought-matrix, even if I did not give it a name, for my own purposes. (The talking heads and guests on CNBC need to be constantly translated in one's head, as they go along, too.) Being able to just know it when I heard and saw it was (and is) good enough--- at least for starters. THEN, I could learn to MAKE something of it all. Along the way, I learned to hear the double-speak underneath the actual words being expressed. "Tax Reform" = making things better for Capital and screwing Labor, for example. Avoiding any talk about the underlying POLICIES being advocated and instead deciding to speak in terms of mechanics of the Market, is the "common currency." It's more politically correct to go about it THAT way, between Talking Head-host and Prestigious Guest.
Examining financial statements and doing analyses are Science. How one uses the information is Art. (All things being equal---and they never are--- why invest in A instead of B, when they look the same in terms of fundamentals? Ding!) One's investing elan needs to be tempered with skill, a certain legerdemain. Thus, I assert, the validity and usefulness of the paradoxes to be found in the likes of The Zurich Axioms. Eh???
Here, you can click on the link that will let you open or download the Axioms via .pdf:
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVr1ArE1YBa0ASO0nnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTEyNnJkMjI2BGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDQjI1ODBfMQRzZWMDc3I-/RV=2/RE=1481514176/RO=10/RU=http://www.forexfactory.com/attachment.php/706430/Zurich_axioms/RK=0/RS=vlCWaQCq0eLSeDxZtls.pv6Awv8-
...I hope it works for you all. ...At the same time, I hasten to add that I've never been able to perfectly follow Max Gunther's advice, here. I doubt it can be done, and I doubt it was ever written with that intention. The attempt would be to confuse the Art with the Science of the whole thing. ;)
Follow-up edit: Crap, that link is dead now. But Yahoo, as a kind afterthought, will allow you to click on THEIR OWN link to the same thing, once you click on my original link. Stupid stuff.

Hi Guys,
Investing successfully is far more difficult than it appears on the surface. Otherwise we would all be millionaires several times over.
Investing is especially challenging because it demands a set of skills and emotional factors that are not constant over time. What characteristics and styles worked in the past are not as dominant in today's marketplace. A changing market environment and flexible thinking to recognize those changes in a timely manner is not an easy assignment.
Financial,writer Morgan Housel examines the mixed requirements of science and art that an investor needs to be successful in that arena. Here is a Link to his recent article on this topic:
http://www.collaborativefund.com/blog/the-art-and-science-of-investing/
There are no answers here except that perhaps we should be very flexible in our attempts to understand the markets. What is popular today will likely not be so popular tomorrow. That's a probable explanation why the list of extraordinary investors is so short. Changing a winning strategy to reflect a changing marketplace demands a discipline that not many of us possess.
Even those in the investment profession are too glued to what worked for them historically. And history does not perfectly repeat itself. Therefore, as a group, these professional experts underperform the market on average. A few exceptions do exist, but even this elite group has a bad period on occasion.
It's never easy.
Best Regards.

The contrary view is that now is the time to accumulate health and biotech during this long pullback. Sectors do rotate. Take Financial and small value as examples.
When Trump is in his administration may want the FDA to shorten the new drug application period. That will be the impetus for a move in health.
Cutting profits to biotech is like saying I'll take my chances in life and if I get a serious disease like Alzheimer........ well thats to bad. But there are companies working and spending lots of money on this disease and they deserve to be handsomely rewarded. So will you if you own their stock. And there are many such examples. The FDA goes beyond the needs of safety. They are an inefficient bureaucracy.
prinx

Howdy folks,
Hope everyone is doing well.
The nut is how do we make money from this incoming administration, not whether this is either bullish or bearish. Every minute of every day for every bull there has to be a bear.
Right now 'sure' bets seem to be infrastructure, energy service and financial service. Any of you good folks have some favorites in these arenas? I've added FCX and DE for individual stocks and some fido sector funds - FSRFX, FSESX, and FSDAX (fido's easy for me these days).
What other sectors/segments/regions?
Thanks in advance and happy holidays,
and so it goes,
peace,
rono

All ratings have been updated on MFO Premium site, including MultiSearch, Great Owls, Fund Alarm (Three Alarm and Honor Roll), Averages, Correlation, Dashboard of Profiled Funds, and Fund Family Scorecard.
Fairholme entered the Top category on MFO's Fund Family Scorecard. All three Fairholme Funds have beaten their peer averages on an absolute return basis since inception. It joins other top performing families Dodge & Cox, FMI, Longleaf, Oakmark, Oberweis, Osterweis, Grandeur Peak, Gotham, Tweedy Brown, Artisan, Mairs and Powers, RiverNorth, PRIMECAP. Here is complete list of Top Fund Families:

Bottom families? State Farm, Timothy, Hussman, AdviserOne, Permanent, Pacific Financial, CMG, O'Shaughnessy, and Oak Associates are among the 75 families in the MFO Scorecard cellar.
So, how can a shop as thoughtful as O'Shaughnessy have 4 of its 5 funds trailing their peers since inception, as shown below?

Well, two of its funds, O'Shaughnessy Market Leaders Value Fund (OFVIX) and Small Cap Value Fund (OFSIX), are less than a year old and have each delivered shareholders more than 20%, despite trialing averages. The others too have delivered handsome returns for the past six plus years, granted with some healthy drawdown in 2011 and 2016, the latter by the Enhanced Dividend Fund (OFDIX). The global equity income OFDIX is still below its previous maximum.
Hmmm, relative returns aren't everything, are they? Will attempt to shed more light on this topic in future posts.
The Category Averages tool provides a summary of averages for 144 Lipper fund categories (excluding money market) across 10 different time frames. Looking at the current market cycle, which began in November 2007 and is now 9 years old ... below are the top and bottom categories and attendant total return, %:


Time to rotate into bottom dwellers?
Waddell & Reed have 19 funds with $24B in assets under management (AUM). Its parent Waddell & Reed Financial Inc trades publicly under ticker WDR. Currently, eight of its funds are in the Three Alarm doghouse, which means they have delivered bottom quintile absolute returns the past 1, 3, and 5 year periods:

Its subsidiary Ivy Funds has 39 funds with $39B in AUM. It too has eight funds on our Three Alarm list:

They have just launched three Ivy NextShares ETFs.
Neither Waddell nor Ivy have any funds on the MFO Honor Roll. They have one 3-year Great Owl: Ivy LaSalle Global Risk-Managed Real Estate Fund (IVIRX).

Examples:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/923184/000119312516784851/d299132d497.htm
497 1 d299132d497.htm 497
SUPPLEMENT DATED DECEMBER 5, 2016
TO THE INVESTOR AND INSTITUTIONAL PROSPECTUS OF
MATTHEWS ASIA STRATEGIC INCOME FUND AND
MATTHEWS ASIA CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES FUND
DATED APRIL 29, 2016
Effective immediately after market closing on December 30, 2016, the minimum initial investment for Institutional Class shares is lowered from $3,000,000 to $100,000.
Therefore, effective immediately after market closing on December 30, 2016, the Institutional Class Shares chart under the “Purchase and Sale of Fund Shares” section on page 11 is hereby removed in its entirety and replaced with the following:
INSTITUTIONAL CLASS SHARES
Type of Account Minimum Initial Investment Subsequent Investments
All accounts $100,000 $100
Minimum amount for Institutional Class Shares may be lower for purchases through certain financial intermediaries and different minimums may apply for retirement plans and other arrangements subject to criteria set by Matthews.
The minimum investment requirements for both the Investor and Institutional Classes do not apply to Trustees, officers and employees of the Funds and Matthews, and their immediate family members.
Also effective immediately after market closing on December 30, 2016, the Minimum Investments in the Institutional Class Shares chart under the “Purchasing Shares” section on page 31 is hereby removed in its entirety and replaced with the following:
MINIMUM INVESTMENTS IN THE INSTITUTIONAL CLASS SHARES OF THE FUNDS
(U.S. RESIDENTS*)
Type of Account Minimum Initial Investment Subsequent Investments
All accounts $100,000 $100
Minimum amount for Institutional Class Shares may be lower for purchases through certain financial intermediaries and different minimums may apply for retirement plans and other arrangements subject to criteria set by Matthews.
* Additional limitations apply to non-U.S. residents. Please contact a Fund representative at 800.789.ASIA (2742) for information and assistance.
Finally, also effective immediately after market closing on December 30, 2016, the second paragraph under the heading “Minimum Size of an Account” on page 35 is hereby removed in its entirety and replaced with the following: “The Funds reserve the right to redeem small Institutional Class accounts that fall below $100,000 due to redemption activity. If this happens to your account, you may receive a letter from the Funds giving you the option of investing more money into your account or closing it. Accounts that fall below $100,000 due to market volatility will not be affected.”
For all existing and prospective Investor Class and Institutional Class shareholders of Matthews Asia Strategic Income Fund:
Effective immediately, Gerald M. Hwang no longer acts as a Co-Manager of the Matthews Asia Strategic Income Fund. All references with respect to Gerald M. Hwang in respect of the Fund are hereby removed.
Please retain this Supplement with your records.
******** https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/923184/000119312516784870/d288429d497k.htm MICSX
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/923184/000119312516784873/d288429d497k.htm MIPIX
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/923184/000119312516784859/d299132d497.htm All other Matthews Funds & above

FYI: AQR is arguably one of the top fund firms in the world right now. They manage over $170 billion in a wide variety of quantitative investment strategies. They are able to marry financial research with real-world investible strategies as good as anyone in the marketplace.
Regards,
Ted
http://awealthofcommonsense.com/2016/12/know-your-audience/
M* Snapshot QSPIX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/QSPIX/quote.html

Getting the SARs and ARs from TGBAX, I haven't been on the Franklin website in ages -- but in poking around there this evening, I see the following items/updates, which were NOT distributed to shareholders via the same channels we get 'regular' fund info from. (I only noticed the reduced dividend when it hit my account for the first time, but otherwise if I didn't see my statement I'd never have known about that. And I just now learned of the Sept announcement about the change in distribution policy ... so if I hadn't checked the website I'd not have know about that, either.)
While probably legal, I don't appreciate such methods of under-the-radar shareholder updates from a fund company.
Sep 27 2016 Templeton Global Bond Fund Fiscal Year-end Date and Distribution Policy Changes Effective 12/31/16 - Read More
Templeton Global Bond Fund will change its fiscal year-end date from August 31 to December 31 and change its distribution policy to begin paying a variable distribution, scheduled to be effective on December 31, 2016. For more information on these changes, please contact your financial advisor or call Franklin Templeton Investor Services at (800) 632-2301.
May 18 2016 Templeton Global Bond Fund – Dividend Adjustments in May 2016 - Read More
In May 2016, Templeton Global Bond Fund adjusted its dividend as follows: Class A from $0.0300 to $0.0200 per share; Class C from $0.0262 to $0.0161 per share; Class R from $0.0276 to $0.0175 per share; Class R6 from $0.0338 to $0.0239 per share and Advisor Class from $0.0323 to $0.0224 per share. Dividends vary based on the fund's income. Past dividends are not indicative of future trends. For more information, contact your financial advisor or call Investor Services at (800) 632-2301.

In financial planning industry there is significantly more women these days. My parents still work with one at Vanguard and that was 30 years ago.

Hi Guys,
This is not a worrisome problem since it is slowly self-correcting as a function of time. What is true in the financial industry has been historically true in most other industries. I have first-hand experience in this arena.
Fifty-six years ago, I married the love of my life who was studying physics at that time. She was close to being the female Lone Ranger in that field at that time. Also, in my engineering class, only one female represented that sex in a cohort of about 70 engineering students. That situation is dramatically changing at the present time.
I have questioned my wife extensively about her motivations, her influences, and pressures that prompted her to swim against the prevailing tide in that period. She claims no unwanted pressures that moved her into the scientific field. For her, it was simply a matter of choice. It was what she wanted to do.
I asked if others attempted to dissuade her by treating her badly or unfairly. Again the answer was negative. Overall, other students (all male) and her instructors (all male) encouraged and helped her. It was a very positive experience with universally healthy interactions.
All this happened decades ago, and I believe the situation has improved immeasurably. It's always a mistake to automatically exclude 50% of the population from active participation. Predicting when or from where the next Warren Buffett will emerge is an impossible task. Men and women do emphasize different elements when making a decision. Each has a different decision pathway. That diversity of thinking will generate more varied approaches and better solutions when merged in a fair and respectful way.
I've learned that I'm a far more productive and more successful investor when I honestly discuss investment options with my wife. Getting more females to consider the financial industry as a life long career will improve that industry from just a sheer numbers perspective alone. But the likely improvement runs much deeper than the simple numbers game. The way in which decisions are formulated and made is greatly expanded which should benefit all of us.
When our family discusses financial matters with professionals, I am more comfortable when the professional team includes a few female members. That comfort extends well beyond trust; it includes a belief that options will be more fully explored.
Best Wishes.

FYI: We live in exciting times, don’t you think? November, punctuated as it was by wrenching changes in financial market expectations, was thrilling indeed. Equities, gold, the US dollar and domestic interest rates – pick one – they all jumped or dived substantially following Election Night.
Not that it was just the election that had investors electrified. Take interest rates, for example. Rates for the long government bond bottomed back in July at 2.11 percent. Yields had already risen more than 50 basis points by the time ballots were counted on Election Night. And now? Well now we’re at 3.12 percent.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.wealthmanagement.com/print/72426