Hi, hank.
I was pondering that very point ("in a 100 years") on the drive in this morning. At least in terms of political culture, the last shift this disruptive might have been when Andrew Jackson came to power in 1829. Mr. Jackson represented a sharp break from both the policies and style of the dominant political culture.
There's a particularly interesting episode in Jackson's tenure; he triggered an economic boom by dismantling the Second Bank of the United States, which functioned as the era's regulator of financial markets. The surge of economic activity rolled on to wild excesses in the financial markets, defaults, eventually a strong government (over)reaction and collapse in the financial panic of 1837 - 44.
Just pondering,
David

The Second Bank of America only had a 20 year charter that expired in Jan 1836. During its tenure there were 4 recessions. The Panic of 1837 was caused by factors that began in 1834.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1837
While looking for parallels between Trump and Jackson might be made; the one with the Second Bank of America is not one of them. If you want to ponder something try this one: Why does Trump confound the elite, news media and Hollywood? His history and the things he said during the election and after would have mortally wounded any other politician.
http://www.history.com/topics/jacksonian-democracy
"It has confounded some scholars that so much of this ferment eventually coalesced behind Andrew Jackson..."
The real test of Trump affect on the future will be if he gets a second term. If he gets one term and a Democrat wins, his changes will be superficial and short term. The politicians will look at him as an exception and not a mandate for change. If he gets a second term then even his opponents will have to move closer to his positions.

Hi, hank.
I was pondering that very point ("in a 100 years") on the drive in this morning. At least in terms of political culture, the last shift this disruptive might have been when Andrew Jackson came to power in 1829. Mr. Jackson represented a sharp break from both the policies and style of the dominant political culture.
There's a particularly interesting episode in Jackson's tenure; he triggered an economic boom by dismantling the Second Bank of the United States, which functioned as the era's regulator of financial markets. The surge of economic activity rolled on to wild excesses in the financial markets, defaults, eventually a strong government (over)reaction and collapse in the financial panic of 1837 - 44.
Mr. Trump has endorsed with comparison, in part by hanging a picture of Mr. Jackson behind his desk in the Oval Office.
William Jennings Bryan (1900, 1908) might have been a similarly transformative if he'd won. Huey Pierce Long, likewise, if he hadn't been assassinated and had beaten FDR in the '36 primary.
Just pondering,
David

Oh, that's book's not bad in general, and in many particulars too. But as a journalist (or anyone else) you're never going to communicate efficiently, 'omit needless words' and all that spirit, much less ingratiate your confidence-boosted readers into grokking things for themselves, if your basic tenet is that they know nothing. Readers just love to be flattered, actually, treated with respect about knowledge just slightly beyond their grasp, and trusted to remember what they read earlier. There are nice, cool ways to do that.
And then Zinsser jumps oddly from journalism to TW, of which financial writing is a subset, I suppose. I'll have to go get my buried copy and see what he was about in that extreme passage. He had a huge career as writer, teacher, and preacher of this stuff.
I've spent almost 50y doing paying technical journalism, writing and editing writers, a fair amount of it financial, including a beginner bond guide for Fidelity. Prudently balanced reader assessment is seldom easy to achieve, and is an area where reasonable people forever disagree about assumptions and sophistication. I bet a nickel that comm professor Snowball has thoughts about and considerable experience in this slippery area, as he deals with it all the time with students and moreover does such a solid job balancing info are this site.
I read recently how a 9th-grade-English teacher in our largest (Mass.) high school was assigning her kids to write a note instructing a younger sib how to make a PB&J sandwich. Not her original idea for sure, but always a good thing to do as a writing teacher for kids (or anyone), down even to like 5th grade. Do you start with turning on the kitchen light? Do you explain what the sandwich is? Do you do branching for toasting, or crust removal? Do you assume they've had one and just need to be reminded of the steps for what they saw mom do? What if they're impaired? Cognitively (adult) or physically? Do you adhere to / guide toward a standard outcome or discuss freedom of quantity and spreading? Etc.

Hi, guys.
So far as we can tell, nothing's at risk. We don't collect any personal or tracking information about anybody, other than the email address you sign up with. We channel contributions, including those in support of MFO Premium, through sites with far better security resources than we could ever afford, so there's no financial data anywhere here.
It literally looks like this group breaks into sites, announces their presence (you can Google their name to see a list of who they've tagged) and goes.
We're still trying to answer the "how did they get into WordPress?" question, but we may never know for sure since there's an entire underground industry devoted to challenging their software. It's the software behind 76 million websites, nearly a quarter of the planet's total, so it's also an understandable target.
We'll get back to cleaning up the mess and getting February posted, but the need to do the security changes is slowing us.
Be well!
David

I spoke with Eric Huefner, GP COO, with whom I've had previous conversations in the past, about the subject of this thread. Here's a summary of what he said.
The table in the SAI only shows ownership in the funds managed by the PMs. If it included their investments in all of the GP funds, given the collaborative effort at the firm, then one would see meaningful investments across the board and one that is a sizeable percentage of their investable assets. Because GP doesn't approve much trading in personal accounts, the focus of the managers' investments is alongside the shareholders.
He also added another point: The GP business model, if it goes as planned, will allow its team to have a "nice living" but not with the compensation that many others in the financial industry are looking for or planning to receive. The company has developed a team primarily focused on building a special relationship for themselves and their clients. That relationship includes voting to give a significant amount of their revenue to local and global charities rather than taking it themselves.
The less I know about something, the more I make decisions based on what I do know -- and for me, there's a lesson in that. In this case -- I'm glad I reached out.

http://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/mutual-funds/mutual-fund-managers-cite-tech-financial-energy-and-industrial-names-they-like-for-17/
Mutual fund stock managers and strategists name names.

@MJG
Re: "Jack Bogle is a great man."
Bogle, as you say, changed the fund industry fundamentally. But I try not to put anyone up on a pedestal. Bogle, like most, has his share of detractors.
In the financial world Bogle looms great - but among many other greats who've made huge contributions. There I go nit-picking again!

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000104916917000049/fit-grandeurpeakemopm22017.htm
497 1 fit-grandeurpeakemopm22017.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
SUPPLEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 1, 2017 TO THE PROSPECTUS AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THE GRANDEUR PEAK
EMERGING MARKETS OPPORTUNITIES FUND (THE "FUND") DATED AUGUST
28, 2016
Effective January 30, 2017, Spencer Stewart is no longer serving as a Portfolio Manager of the Fund. Therefore, all references to Spencer Stewart with respect to the Fund in the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information are hereby deleted as of that date. Blake Walker and Zach Larkin will remain as Portfolio Managers of the Fund.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

@MikeM2 This is way more than you are bargaining for but am just now working on a free update to something I wrote long ago. Below is a small part of that and a work still in progress. So I apologize for the tedious read. As you will see below, I am not a fan of diversification. I was unable to attach the equity curves mentioned below. If someone can explain how to attach a document from my computer on the board would be glad to do so. The part on bonds is at the very end.
"So let’s get into my particular style of trading. It may well not be anyone’s cup of tea and that suits me just fine. First off you have to know I have an extreme aversion to risk. Such an aversion that some could argue I had no business whatsoever trying to make it as a trader. So to compensate for my risk aversion I developed a methodology that eliminates risk and volatility as much as possible. I realize the academics might say otherwise, but to me volatility *is* risk. Unlike most traders who thrive on volatility, it is my enemy. My primary goal as a trader is to NOT lose or as little as possible. To cut my losses in the blink of an aye. To not think/analyse - just react when price moves against me.
Once I changed my mindset back in the spring of 1985, my goal was to make money every month. A goal that has remained my primary constant to this very day. I could best achieve that goal by low risk, yet consistently profitable strategies. Hitting singles and doubles and then using the compound effect to accumulate wealth over the years.
For me, profitable low risk trading and consistently compounding my capital over time can be summarized in three words - TIGHT RISING CHANNELS. Tight rising channels have little to no volatility. With the tight rising channel pattern and its inherent low volatility that enables me to deploy (in increments) 100% of my nest egg. So what does a tight rising channel look like. It looks much like my equity curves as previously shown in this update of my futures trading and my mutual fund trading.
You may wonder how I handled tight rising channels while day trading stock index futures - an asset class notorious for its wild intraday swings. What I did was uncover three particular early morning patterns which more often than not led to later day tight rising channels in the futures. I uncovered these patterns from my constant monitoring of the market and the stock index futures via the CNBC tape. Unfortunately the CNBC tape nowadays is a different animal of that back in the 80s and 90s.
I have discussed these day trading patterns ad nauseam in books, magazine articles, and seminars so no need to go into detail on them here. Plus, I overlayed these patterns with a host of indicators, primarily sentiment, on whether or not to take the trade. That is where the art of trading came into play. These patterns were such that I traded maybe 3 or 4 times a week at best.
While consistently profitable as a part time day trader, because of my aversion to risk I was unable to ever trade more than one contract. The stock index futures are leveraged vehicles and leverage can be a killer. My monthly profits were a very modest and mundane $716 a month over a 122 month period. I had other part time employment which paid the bills. This enabled me to roll my day trading profits into the trading of mutual funds. That is where I made my real money as a trader. In fact, there were two monthly periods where I made more money in the funds than the entire 122 months I day traded the stock index futures.
So why mutual funds? Primarily because since they are diversified with a large number of holdings, they are more prone to tight rising channels when they are in uptrends. Secondarily, everyone trades the futures, options, and individual equities, while very few trade mutual funds. That alone, not following the trading herd, is reason enough for me. My entire life I have never been a follower or into grouthink. So I would like to believe that streak of independence is also what led me into the trading of mutual funds.
In the 90s, I was focused most on trading sector funds - technology, healthcare, leisure, etc. as well as small cap growth funds. While Fidelity had a host of sector funds, they also imposed short term trading fees. That led me to INVESCO which also had several sector funds and where there were no fees for in and out trading. I also had a trading account at the now defunct Strong Investments.
I believe a large part of anyone’s success has an element of luck - being in the right place a the right time. I could not have been any luckier than having my accounts at INVESCO and Strong. I could trade free of any commissions and fees and as often as I wanted. I fully participated in the new fund effect back in those days being that both firms brought new funds to the market frequently. I could also dateline international funds whenever the datelining pattern occurred.
Datelining and the constant in and out trading without fees are now a thing of the past. But I adjusted. As my account grew over time, my aversion to risk became even more extreme. That led me to the trading of bond mutual funds, more specifically high yield corporates, high yield munis, and floating rate. This was an easy transition as junk bonds had always been my one true love in the financial arena dating back to the early 90s when I began trading them along with the sector funds. The bond funds were custom made for me because they had even tighter rising channels due to even less volatility. So it was much easier to deploy 100% of my trading capital there."
























Thanks. Kinda weak articles and arguments, seemed to me, except the middle Israelsen one that starts in 01, bad case for US LC.
But sure for the 7Twelve. He is like Merriman and his Lazys.
Not sure how much deeper most need to go than this, though (Waggoner updated, from 2015):
... do international funds help your portfolio? In terms of return, it's hard to argue that they have, at least within most investors' experience. The past 25 years, large-cap U.S. funds have gained an average 691%, vs. 338% for international funds. U.S. funds have beaten international funds the past five, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years.
You could argue that European stocks are cheap, relative to U.S. stocks, which is quite true. But then again, they nearly always are, because they don't grow as rapidly. You could also argue that there are more foreign companies than there are U.S. companies, and that investing in them gives you broader market exposure. That's also true. Then again, companies in the S&P 500 get 46.2% of their earnings from overseas, and that's enough international exposure for anyone.
Why have U.S. investors rushed to international funds? In part because much of U.S. mutual fund purchases are controlled by financial advisers, and conventional wisdom is that a stock portfolio should have about 20% of its assets in international stocks. As of the end of November, about 25% of all garden-variety mutual funds were in international stocks, up from about 8.6% in 2000. Advisers have been doing their jobs.
Israelsen is one of those advisers, and his 01-15 data do look compelling. But who do you know (and who here?) who would want the same small amount in US LC as in REIT, cash, commodities, or NR?
Much less stick with it.
Not I.
And his is really an arg for very broad diversification, not for foreign, which is 17% of total (and note that that total = 93% of egg) and half of that foreign is EM.
(Trying to think what EM, NR, and commod vehicles there were in 2001.)

Vanguard founder John BogleVanguard founder John Bogle.Vanguard:
"These active managers have a real business problem. They are losing money. Vanguard accounts for over 100% of the cash flow in the industry (since 2014). One firm. All the other firms in the industry together are losing money, losing cash flow. Of course they don't like it. I understand that. But it was never my design to build a colossus.
I'm a small-company guy, but I happen to have two great ideas. One is a mutual company, which is focused not on the management company shareholder but on the fund shareholder. That's the structural thing we bring to the table. And the strategic thing we brought to the table was the index fund. We created the first index fund, and it took 20 years before it started to catch on in, the mid-1990s, and now it’s dominating everything we say in this financial field, and it's changing it forever."
Business Insider Link to Interview:
businessinsider.com/vanguard-jack-bogle-401k-active-management-index-investing-2017-1

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/277751/000119312517020127/d336634d497.htm
497 1 d336634d497.htm 497
Janus Investment Fund
Janus International Equity Fund
Supplement dated January 27, 2017
to Currently Effective Prospectuses
The Board of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of Janus Investment Fund has approved a plan to liquidate and terminate Janus International Equity Fund (the “Fund”) with such liquidation effective on or about March 30, 2017 or at such other time as may be authorized by the Trustees (“Liquidation Date”). Termination of the Fund is expected to occur as soon as practicable following liquidation.
Effective at the close of business February 3, 2017, the Fund will no longer accept investments by new shareholders. The Fund may be required to make a distribution of any income and/or capital gains of the Fund in connection with its liquidation.
Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their shares or exchange their shares for shares of another Janus fund which they are eligible to purchase at any time prior to the Liquidation Date. Effective at the close of business February 3, 2017, any applicable contingent deferred sales charges (“CDSC”) charged by the Fund will be waived for redemptions or exchanges through the Liquidation Date. Exchanges by Class A shareholders into Class A Shares of another Janus fund are not subject to any applicable initial sales charge. For shareholders holding shares through an intermediary, check with your intermediary regarding other Janus funds and share classes offered through your intermediary.
If a shareholder has not redeemed their shares as of the Liquidation Date, the shareholder’s account will be automatically redeemed and proceeds will be sent to the shareholder of record. For shareholders of Class D Shares investing in a tax-deferred account, the shares will be placed in Janus Government Money Market Fund.
To prepare for the closing and liquidation of the Fund, the Fund’s portfolio managers may increase the Fund’s assets held in cash and similar instruments in order to pay for Fund expenses and meet redemption requests. As a result, the Fund may deviate from its stated investment strategies and policies and accordingly cease being managed to meet its investment objective during the liquidation of the Fund.
Additionally, any asset reductions and increase in cash and similar instruments could adversely affect the Fund’s short-term performance prior to the Liquidation Date. The Fund will incur transaction costs, such as brokerage commissions, when selling portfolio securities as a result of its plan to liquidate and terminate. These transaction costs may adversely affect performance.
The redemption or exchange of shares held by a shareholder will generally be considered a taxable event. A shareholder should consult their personal tax adviser concerning their particular tax situation.
A shareholder may obtain additional information by calling their plan sponsor, broker-dealer, or financial institution, or by contacting a Janus representative at 1-877-335-2687 (or 1-800-525-3713 if you hold shares directly with Janus Capital). ...

Bing is your friend. He has been around for a long time but is not a household name on the financial media.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_de_Vaulx

@MSF For the most part you're right. They both should be ashamed at this point, although in my piece I stated that BlackRock has long voted against such proposals. What's moved the needle is BlackRock's messaging about anthropogenic climate change having a material impact on companies' financial prospects. Vanguard hasn't even gone that far on its web site, claiming environmental proposals are social issues that have nothing to do with its fiduciary duty to shareholders. BlackRock has some other albeit small differences with Vanguard. If you examine BlackRock's ESG and socially responsible funds and ETFs you will see that their voting record differs from BlackRock's other funds, and they do in fact vote in favor of some environmental proposals. The really galling thing about Vanguard is even in its socially responsible fund--Vanguard FTSE Social Index VFTSX--a fund where they know very well that its investors believe in the importance of climate change--it still votes against or abstains from all environmental proposals the last time I checked. That is shameful in my view. Vanguard has given environmentally conscious shareholders no real option. BlackRock at least offers such options that vote differently: https://ishares.com/us/literature/shareholder-letters/proxy-voting-policy-social-index-funds.pdf
But both are still a long way from how a more boutique socially responsible fund shop addresses environmental issues. The fact that Larry Fink at BlackRock has acknowledged climate change as a financial issue with market impacts is an important wedge, though, for investors to say to index fund managers, how can you claim to be upholding your role as a fiduciary if you routinely vote against or abstain from voting on all of these proposals? This is especially so for index fund managers as they must buy and hold stocks in their index forever. They are the ultimate long-term shareholders, meaning that climate change as the ultimate long-term risk will definitely affect the financial prospects of their investments. Shareholders who care about these issues must keep holding their feet to the fire.
I just found BlackRock's iShares voting records for individual ETFs on its site. They should make it easier to do this, but you can see if you look at the ESG themed ETFs they do in fact vote differently: vds.issproxy.com/SearchPage.php?CustomerID=228
Here is a list of their socially-responsible ETFs: https://ishares.com/us/products/etf-product-list#!type=ishares&tab=overview&view=list&fst=50586

Investment portfolio science is always evolving. There is a big push towards the low fee, indexing narrative as it is a huge profit center and the financial industry flocks to where the sales $ exist.
The 21st century has afforded the investor and portfolio researcher alike, the benefit of the use of ETFs that focus on underlying academically based CAPM "factors" and other attributes. Implementing these products within a tactical framework can provide much more flexibility in the goal towards asset accumulation https://docs.google.com/document/d/14OG8dGZolcXg7WGy_vGFN1dTJq1TccfgKwK7x27HAAA/edit?usp=sharing.
The additional innovation of "motif" investing allows users and investors to build managed portfolios that other retail investors can track and invest in; this without the staffing, SEC approval, advertising, legal, etc. involved with the launch of funds and maintenance of running a "brick and mortar" fund enterprise.

FYI: Below is a look at the recent performance of various asset classes using key ETFs that we track on a daily basis. For each ETF, we show its performance year-to-date, since the Fed hiked rates on December 14th, and since the close on Election Day 2016 (11/8/16).
Most US equity ETFs (left side of matrix) are up between 0-2% so far year-to-date, but the Nasdaq 100 (QQQ) has been a standout to the upside with a 2017 gain of 3.95%. The Dow 30 (DIA) has lagged with a gain of just 0.60%. Looking at sectors, Consumer Discretionary (XLY) and Telecom (IYZ) are up the most YTD, while Energy (XLE) and Consumer Staples (XLP) are down the most.
Since the Fed hiked rates in mid-December, the Energy sector is the only area of the US market that has felt any kind of pain (-2.48%), while Consumer Staples is down less than 1%. Since the election, the Financial (XLF) and Telecom (IYZ) sectors are the only ones up more than 10%.
Outside of the US, many countries have already posted nice gains in 2017. Brazil (EWZ) is up 7.8% YTD after posting a big gain in 2016 as well. Hong Kong (EWH) and Australia (EWA) are both up more than 5%, while Canada (EWC), China (ASHR), India (PIN), and Japan (EWJ) are all up more than 3%. Mexico (EWW) is the only country on our matrix that is down year-to-date, and that follows a very weak Q4 as well.
Looking at commodities, gold (GLD) and silver (SLV) have both gotten off to good starts to 2017, while oil (USO) and natural gas (UNG) are in the red. Treasury ETFs are up both YTD and since the Fed hiked rates, but they’re all still down since the election.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/recent-asset-class-performance-international-markets-bounce/

On the topic, I'd recommend the Hyman-McLennan interview about international markets/economies that's current on WealthTrack.
Mc made the point that foreign equities (he was mainly talking developed, as I understood it) look cheaper than the U.S., but that the valuation differential is almost entirely in the financial sector. Both still think the U.S. is the best value, for now. When asked the "one investment" question about foreign markets, both brought up Japan. (Hyman's recommendation came with currency hedging).

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318342/000139834417000539/fp0023990_497.htm
497 1 fp0023990_497.htm
Towle Deep Value Fund
(Ticker Symbol: TDVFX)
A series of Investment Managers Series Trust (the “Trust)
Supplement dated January 13, 2017 to the
Prospectus, Statement of Additional Information and Summary Prospectus, dated February 1, 2016.
IMPORTANT NOTICE ON PURCHASE OF FUND SHARES
Effective as of the close of business on January 27, 2017 (the “Closing Date”), the Towle Deep Value Fund (the “Fund”) will be publicly offered on a limited basis.
After the Closing Date, only certain investors will be eligible to purchase shares of the Fund, as described below (the “closure policy”). In addition, both before and after the Closing Date, the Fund may from time to time, in its sole discretion based on the Fund’s net asset levels and other factors, limit the types of investors permitted to open new accounts, limit new purchases into the Fund or otherwise modify the closure policy at any time on a case-by-case basis.
The following groups will be permitted to continue to purchase Fund shares after the Closing Date:
1. Shareholders of record of the Fund as of the Closing Date may continue to purchase additional shares in their existing Fund accounts either directly from the Fund or through a financial intermediary and may continue to reinvest dividends or capital gains distributions from shares owned in the Fund.
2. Existing registered investment advisor (RIA) and bank trust firms that have an investment allocation to the Fund in a fee-based, wrap or advisory account may continue to add new clients or purchase shares.
3. New shareholders may open Fund accounts and purchase shares directly from the Fund (i.e. not through a financial intermediary).
4. Certain financial intermediaries may continue to open new underlying customer accounts provided the platform on which they offer access to the Fund has an existing funded position.
5. Group employer benefit plans, including 401(k), 403(b), 457 plans, and health savings account programs (and their successor, related and affiliated plans), which make the Fund available to participants on or before the Closing Date, may continue to open accounts for new participants in the Fund and purchase additional shares in existing participant accounts. New group employer benefit plans, including 401(k), 403(b), and 457 plans, and health savings account programs (and their successor, related and affiliated plans), may also establish new accounts with the Fund, provided the new plans have approved and selected the Fund as an investment option by the Closing Date and the plan has also been accepted for investment by the Fund by the Closing Date.
6. Members of the Fund’s Board of Trustees, persons affiliated with the Advisor and their immediate families will be able to purchase shares of the Fund and establish new accounts.
In general, the Fund will rely on a financial intermediary to prevent a new account from being opened within an omnibus account established at that financial intermediary if the account would not otherwise satisfy the conditions outlined above. The Fund’s ability to monitor new accounts that are opened through omnibus accounts or other nominee accounts is limited and the ability to limit a new account to those that meet the above criteria with respect to financial intermediaries may vary depending upon the capabilities of those financial intermediaries. Investors may be asked to verify that they meet one of the exceptions above prior to opening a new account in the Fund. The Fund may permit you to open a new account if the Fund reasonably believes that you are eligible. The Fund also may decline to permit you to open a new account if the Fund believes that doing so would be in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders, even if you would be eligible to open a new account under these exceptions. If all shares of the Fund in an existing account are redeemed, the shareholder’s account will be closed. Such former shareholders will not be able to buy additional shares of the Fund or reopen their account.
Please file this Supplement with your records.

Week Ending January 6, 2017 © 2016 Payden & Rygel All rights reserved.
Highlights of the Week:
Municipals: The municipal market continued to see heavy mutual fund outflows over the holiday period; however, municipal/Treasury ratios actually rallied, and the market delivered strong positive performance for the month of December. With limited supply and strong demand in the new year, we expect the “January effect” to provide support for municipals in the coming weeks.
Corporates: Corporates started the year with a bang with heavy issuance right out of the gate. Total new issuance for the week was $53 billion,
well above the $20-$25 billion anticipated for the week and reflective of strong sentiment among issuers. Last year was the heaviest year of
issuance ever, but 2017 is forecast to decline by 5-10% by many analysts.
High Yield: In recent years, high yield issuers have taken advantage of low rates to refinance their balance sheets. As a result, only 2% of the high yield universe will mature in 2017. Headed into the new year, we believe this financial cushion will provide a measure of security for the asset class.
Treasuries The 5/30 yield curve remained flatter and close to the lows of the past 12 months at 107 bps. Two rate hikes are currently 100% priced in for 2017, with the Fed’s “median dot” signaling three hikes.
© 2016 Payden & Rygel All rights reserved.
https://www.payden.com/weekly/wir010617.pdf

FYI: In an exclusive interview, Ed Hyman, Wall Street’s # 1 ranked economist for a record 36 years describes how much the financial world has changed in the last year. He and top investor, Matthew McLennan describe what it means for the U.S. economy and markets.
Regards,
Ted
http://wealthtrack.com/u-s-growth-acceleratingu-s-recession-years-away-exclusive-outlook-from-wall-streets-1-economist-ed-hyman/