Hi Guys,
What a disaster! The chart tells a story of cumulative failure. It is an outright disgrace.
The failure that I perceive is not a national failure. It is the failure of the individual and/or the individual family unit. The USA is a prosperous nation with almost unlimited potential wealth for its citizens. Yet the wealth depicted in the accompanying chart is truly dismal for individual folks.
The opportunities exist, but our financial discipline fails us as individuals. We want and demand the storybook good life before we can afford it. Delaying gratification would go a long way to resolving this problem. The small numbers shown in the chart as a function of age demonstrate the issue. The problem would quickly desolve if we just practiced the saving discipline that many of us displayed until roughly the early 1980s. We seemed to toss frugality to the wind in that era and have never recovered from that reckless joyride.
Here is a Link to a nice PBS presentation that highlights some of the significant conflicting issues:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/why-so-many-americans-in-the-middle-class-have-no-savings/
My wife and I never succumbed to the temptation to overspend. We always saved about 15% of our gross income and invested wisely. I suppose that it was a wise decision to study the investment process. We did and we prospered. As a result, it is no exaggeration to claim we are chart busters. Some luck, some skill, but above all a disciplined saving and spending behavior.
I truly feel sorry for the median and below folks that are depicted by the chart. Those folks are in constant danger of being decimated by an unexpected negative happening that a few hundred dollars could easily cure.
Best Wishes.

Great article. Many of the investments in the endowment are quite complex and very difficult for smaller investors to own (assuming they would want them). Minimums tend to be high and there's lots of legal restrictions imposed by IRS or SEC which impede liquidity and add tax liabilities for small investors.
If (for the above reasons) these investments are not in a financial assets manager's basket of offerings to begin with, it's difficult for the manager to add them to a target date fund.
Article suggests that a target fund dated 30 years in the future is comperable to a college endowment in investment horizon. I'm not sure that's true. However, assuming it is ... what percentage of small investors in that age group (say 20-35 years of age) actually elect to invest through target date funds? Is there a sizable market there to make such a diversified offering profitable for the financial services provider?
---
More thoughts after sleeping on this one: A big difference (which I think the M* article largely ignores) is that humans age - and that this life-long transition must be taken into account over one's ever changing investment horizon. That's where target date glide-slopes come into play. Most rational advisors wouldn't allocate an individual's money as aggressively at age 60 as the would at age 30-40. However, with a university endowment there would seem to be no need for such a glide-slope. Assuming the university continues to grow and prosper, it's endowment investment horizon should remain constant - allowing an aggressive broadly diversified approach for many decades - even centuries. Do I have it right? Or am I missing something in highlighting this difference?

FYI: Burton Malkiel has been saying the same thing about investing for more than 40 years. What’s new is that a big chunk of the financial industry now admits he was right all along.
In 1973, Malkiel, a Princeton professor, published the first version of his investment guide, A Random Walk Down Wall Street. He wrote that “a blindfolded monkey throwing darts at the stock listings could select a portfolio that would do just as well as one selected by the experts.” Since most investors can’t beat the market average over time, he argued, they’d be better off in some kind of low-fee fund that simply held all of the stocks on a widely followed index. Problem was, no such retail fund existed.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-22/the-professor-who-was-right-about-index-funds-all-along

FYI: The importance of actively managed mutual funds in the financial sector has led to substantial research focused on their performance. The overwhelming evidence is that it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to identify ahead of time the shrinking percentage of active managers who will outperform in the future. Among the reasons for the difficult nature of this task is that so few managers succeed, and that it’s difficult to separate skill from luck.
Regards,
Ted
http://mutualfunds.com/expert-analysis/do-upside-downside-ratios-predict-mutual-fund-performance/

FYI: As markets have grown steadily more efficient in recent decades, it has become more difficult – and expensive – for fund managers to deliver excess returns relative to benchmarks, or “alpha”.
Even though investment fund flows into passive strategies have accelerated steadily in recent years, active strategies still account for fully 70% of the $15 trillion in U.S. mutual funds. But active and passive are not the only choices. We are also seeing a booming trade in “smart beta” – an imprecisely defined cluster of rules-based strategies that avoid traditional cap-weighted index construction and seek profits amid market factors and inefficiencies
Regards,
Ted
http://lipperalpha.financial.thomsonreuters.com/2016/09/active-passive-and-smart-beta-whos-winning/?elq=6a3fe31c696445ed923814b3e87dbf10&elqCampaignId=166&elqTrackId=CAAB29B325AC713511E713F32E02F308&elqaid=1815&elqat=1&utm_campaign=Newsletter_LipperAlphaInsight_FundInsightsWeeklyUpdate&utm_content=Newsletter_FundsWeekly_September20&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua

FYI: Exchange officials on Monday morning busted more than 1,000 trades tied to hundreds of thousands of shares of the $148 million Guggenheim S&P Equal Weight Financial ETF (RYF) after ruling execution prices were “clearly erroneous.” Many other unusual-looking trades were allowed to stand.
Regards,
Ted
http://blogs.barrons.com/focusonfunds/2016/09/19/hundreds-of-thousands-of-trades-were-busted-in-a-financial-etf-this-morning/tab/print/

@PressmUP
The prospectus link covers Seafarer, GP, Emerald, Aspen Partners and other mutual funds. The prospectus is all-encompassing of the funds issued by Financial Investors Trust. GP is down the page.

Derf, I think so. Financial advisor told me in person 3 months ago and msf's chart shows 3% also.

Hi Guys,
You all probably realize that I'm a big fan of Monte Carlo simulations when making financial decisions. Monte Carlo methods were specifically developed to address uncertainties and that's in the wheelhouse of investment decision making.
That was why I posted the Link to MoneyChimp. There are plenty of free Monte Carlo simulators available on the Internet. I selected the MoneyChimp offering because of its simplicity in inputs. But it is limited.
Upon further thought, I concluded that I could make a better suggestion with just a little more demanding input, but definity a more flexible planning tool. In fact the code is called The Flexible Retirement Planner. Here is a Link to it:
http://www.flexibleretirementplanner.com/wp/
Please give it a fair try. What-.if, sensitivity explorations are easy and fast. Sorry that I did not include this option earlier. Good luck to all.
Best Wishes.

Hi Old Joe,
You are always free to interpret my posts in whatever way you choose.
It is never my intent to talk anyone down. I don't comment on specific fund choices or portfolio asset allocations. I hesitate to offer any recommendations because I understand my limitations, the sagacity of the MFO population, and the uncertainties of any financial forecasts. I expect and respect a diversity of investment decisions from individual investors.
A large majority of my posts, perhaps a fraction approaching 100%, provide Links to investment tools and research findings. My only purpose is to expose MFOers to tool sets and careful studies that just might improve their investment decisions. All MFOers are free to use or reject my references. I anticipate a mixed reaction.
I have never claimed to be an investment professional; I retain my amateur status. I learn from the references that I submit. Since I'm in a constant learning mode, I try to keep an open mind. It is certainly true that when I reach some tentative conclusion, I report in a manner that reflects my assessment. I suspect most MFOers do the same.
Note that I said my conclusions are tentative. I try to keep an open-mind and am humble. I make plenty of mistakes and freely admit it. I do emphasize statistical analyses and perhaps that makes a few folks uncomfortable. That need not be the case. Sorry, but that's beyond my control.
Best Wishes.

FYI: If you have tuned into financial media over the past few weeks, you have heard plenty of talk about the uncertainty surrounding Fed policy—with many investors wondering how fast and high the Fed will raise rates.
While the prospect of a Fed policy change is significant, it doesn’t mean rates overall will rise dramatically, and it doesn’t change the important role bonds can play in a portfolio. If you have a diversified portfolio that makes sense for your investment goals, time horizon, and financial circumstance, you can probably ignore the short-term concerns about a rate change.
Here are four features of bonds that may help you maintain your perspective
Regards,
Ted
https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/investing-ideas/fed-rate-hike-worries

@AndyJ, You're right that the insurance industry is way ahead on this issue as are asset managers owned by foreign financial conglomerates. It's no accident I think that funds run by Allianz and Deutsche Bank are voting for these resolutions. They've begun to do the math on how much climate change could cost their investment portfolios and financial institutions in general--both from just a physical damage standpoint and a regulatory standpoint. You can't be a financial institution in Europe today and believe that regulators will continue to give fossil fuel dependent companies a free pass forever. I think science will eventually prevail over rhetoric with regulators in the U.S. too.

Short Press Release from Wasatch
Wasatch International Opportunities Fund to Close to New Investors on September 29, 2016
(September 08, 2016)
Salt Lake City, Utah, September 8, 2016—Effective at the end of market trading (4:00 p.m. EST) on September 29, 2016, the Wasatch International Opportunities Fund (WAIOX/WIIOX) will be closed to new purchases, except purchases by new shareholders purchasing directly from Wasatch Funds, existing shareholders, and current and future clients purchasing through financial advisors and retirement plans with an established position in the Fund.
“Wasatch takes fund capacity seriously and, given the international micro-cap focus of the International Opportunities Fund, we believe that this step will protect the integrity of our investment process,” said Gene Podsiadlo, Director of Mutual Funds.
Contact Information:
Jody Lowe: 414.322.9311 / [email protected]
Steve Rung: 801.415.5523 / [email protected]
https://secure.wasatchfunds.com/News/Article.aspx?a=WAIOX Close 2016
Total Assets:
(All Classes) $654.0 (million) as of 09/08/16
https://secure.wasatchfunds.com/Our-Funds/Overview.aspx?fund=WAIOX

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/806633/000119312516704743/d254531d497.htm
497 1 d254531d497.htm WASATCH FUNDS TRUST
WASATCH FUNDS TRUST
Supplement dated September 8, 2016 to the
Prospectus dated January 31, 2016 and
Statement of Additional Information dated January 31, 2016, as amended and restated on July 8, 2016
Investor Class
Wasatch Core Growth Fund® - Investor Class (WGROX)
Wasatch Emerging India Fund® - Investor Class (WAINX)
Wasatch Emerging Markets Select Fund® - Investor Class (WAESX)
Wasatch Emerging Markets Small Cap Fund® - Investor Class (WAEMX)
Wasatch Frontier Emerging Small Countries Fund® - Investor Class (WAFMX)
Wasatch Global Opportunities Fund® - Investor Class (WAGOX)
Wasatch International Growth Fund® - Investor Class (WAIGX)
Wasatch International Opportunities Fund® - Investor Class (WAIOX)
Wasatch Large Cap Value Fund® - Investor Class (FMIEX)
Wasatch Long/Short Fund® - Investor Class (FMLSX)
Wasatch Micro Cap Fund® - Investor Class (WMICX)
Wasatch Micro Cap Value Fund® - Investor Class (WAMVX)
Wasatch Small Cap Growth Fund® - Investor Class (WAAEX)
Wasatch Small Cap Value Fund® - Investor Class (WMCVX)
Wasatch Strategic Income Fund® - Investor Class (WASIX)
Wasatch Ultra Growth Fund® - Investor Class (WAMCX)
Wasatch World Innovators Fund® - Investor Class (WAGTX)
Wasatch–1st Source Income Fund® - Investor Class (FMEQX)
Wasatch-Hoisington U.S. Treasury Fund® - Investor Class (WHOSX)
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the Wasatch Funds Prospectus dated January 31, 2016 and Statement of Additional Information dated January 31, 2016, as amended and restated on July 8, 2016 for Investor Class shares. You should retain this Supplement, the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information for future reference. Additional copies of the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information may be obtained free of charge by visiting our web site at www.WasatchFunds.com or calling us at 800.551.1700.
Effective at the close of market on September 29, 2016, the Wasatch International Opportunities Fund (WAIOX) will be closed to new purchases, except purchases by new shareholders purchasing directly from Wasatch Funds, existing shareholders, and current and future clients purchasing through financial advisors and retirement plans with an established position in the Fund.
As described in more detail in the Statement of Additional Information, the Advisor retains the right to make exceptions to any action taken to close a Fund or limit inflows into a Fund.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
WASATCH FUNDS TRUST
Supplement dated September 8, 2016 to the
Prospectus dated January 31, 2016 and
Statement of Additional Information dated January 31, 2016, as amended and restated on July 8, 2016
Institutional Class
Wasatch Core Growth Fund® - Institutional Class (WIGRX)
Wasatch Emerging India Fund ® - Institutional Class (WIINX)
Wasatch Emerging Markets Select Fund® - Institutional Class (WIESX)
Wasatch Emerging Markets Small Cap Fund® - Institutional Class (WIEMX)
Wasatch Frontier Emerging Small Countries Fund® - Institutional Class (WIFMX)
Wasatch Global Opportunities Fund® - Institutional Class (WIGOX)
Wasatch International Growth Fund® - Institutional Class (WIIGX)
Wasatch International Opportunities Fund® - Institutional Class (WIIOX)
Wasatch Large Cap Value Fund® - Institutional Class (WILCX)
Wasatch Long/Short Fund® - Institutional Class (WILSX)
Wasatch Small Cap Growth Fund® - Institutional Class (WIAEX)
Wasatch Small Cap Value Fund® - Institutional Class (WICVX)
Wasatch World Innovators Fund® - Institutional Class (WIGTX)
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the Wasatch Funds Prospectus dated January 31, 2016 and Statement of Additional Information dated January 31, 2016, as amended and restated on July 8, 2016 for Institutional Class shares. You should retain this Supplement, the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information for future reference. Additional copies of the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information may be obtained free of charge by visiting our web site at www.WasatchFunds.com or calling us at 800.551.1700.
Effective at the close of market on September 29, 2016, the Wasatch International Opportunities Fund (WIIOX) will be closed to new purchases, except purchases by new shareholders purchasing directly from Wasatch Funds, existing shareholders, and current and future clients purchasing through financial advisors and retirement plans with an established position in the Fund.
As described in more detail in the Statement of Additional Information, the Advisor retains the right to make exceptions to any action taken to close a Fund or limit inflows into a Fund.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

In Jan 2015 Richard Wiggins wrote a fascinating article at the Journal of Indexes called "Cloning DFA".
This "must read" article is available here: http://tinyurl.com/cloning-dfa
As noted by Mr Wiggins in his article:

However, low-cost funds, especially ETFs, now occupy every asset category offered by DFA. As new indexes have come to market, investors can get the unloved and unwanted part of the market for a lot less. Today DFA offerings are very close to what other major market benchmark providers deliver; the DFA U.S. Small Cap Value [DFSVX], for example, is not dissimilar from the iShares SmallCap 600 Value Index Fund (IJS|A-87). Where there’s not a perfect substitute, it’s rather easy to combine two less expensive funds and create an effective clone.

The article then proceeds to show how DFSVX can be cloned with a combination of two ETFs: VBR and IWC, the Vanguard Small Cap Value and the iShares Micro Cap, respectively. While DFA funds may only be available through financial advisors that have been approved by DFA, and can charge additional fees, the ETFs are open to anyone with a brokerage account.
Below are the current (Sep 2016) expense ratios of DFSVX, and the two ETFs used in the article. At the time that the article was published (Jan 2015) the ER of DFSVX was 52 bps, and the blended ER of the Vanguard and iShares ETFs was 17 bps.

DFSVX: 52 bps
VBR:    8 bps
IWC:   60 bps

A footnote to the conclusion of the article noted that:

The authors [of the JoI article] are working with Silicon Cloud Technologies, LLC which will offer software at PortfolioVisualizer.com that computes these factors automatically.

As originally noted by MJG in Feb 2014, that site - [https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com] - is available to all. Today, it contains (among other things) the following tools:
Fama French Factor Regression Analysis (For individual funds or ETFs)
Match Factor Analysis
Once you have identified a set of potential similar funds or ETFs - based on fundamental or factor analysis - to a target fund, you can use the latter tool to derive a two-investment "clone", based on either the results of factor regressions or historical performance. The site then provides various metrics that can be used to assess the quality (i.e. accuracy) and performance of the clone versus the target fund or investment.
Here, for example, is a clone as inspired by the article: http://tinyurl.com/dfsvx-vbr-iwc
Thought that others might find the website and Jan 2015 JofI article interesting.

FYI: ETFs are shutting down at a record clip, but the shakeout is seen by some financial advisers as the natural evolution of a market saturated with too many funds.
Last month, 41 ETFs shut down, and 11 more are already slated to close in September. That compares to 40 closings through the first seven months of the year
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20160902/FREE/160909986?template=printart
Ron Rowland's August 2016 ETF Deathwatch:
http://investwithanedge.com/etf-deathwatch/august-2016

Thanks for all of your responses.
Gmarceau, thanks. I actually already own DSEEX (institutional shares of DSENX) . Great fund.
VintageFreak, thanks. One of the main catalysts for a market pullback should be a rise in interest rates IMHO. Looking at the top holdings, JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, and Bank of America make up 3 of the top 13. One of the reasons these stocks have not kept up is interest rates remaining low. If the market goes down due to a rise in interest rates, I would think these financial stocks should benefit (or at least not go down as much as the rest of the market). Other top holdings have low PE's, which I would think would not go down as much as higher PE stocks in a downturn...but who knows.
AndyJ. Thanks. I do not know much about the longer history of the fund as far as it's holdings are concerned. I just assumed the fund was concentrated in financials, consumer cyclicals, and healthcare because that is where the fund mangers currently see value. It is good to know that you say the fund is always in those sectors, and that its previous outperformance was due to that. Something to consider.

Wow, Hancock Horizon Funds - never heard of them, I'm impressed!
I do think that the heyday of the regional funds was the late 90s or so (the era from which my links came). "Regional stock funds are becoming more popular in the mutual fund industry." Washington Post, March 2, 1998.
If you thought the Golden Gate Fund (focused on the Bay Area) was a bit too narrow, how about Gateway Cincinnati Fund (closed 2003)? P&G and what else?
The funds that hung around for some time did so by broadening their mandates - Franklin Calif. Growth reduced its regional exposure from 80% to 50% before getting rid of it. Safeco NW played games to keep Boeing after it moved its headquarters to Chicago (which I guess makes it fair game for Mairs & Power).
So finding any fund actually focuses on regional companies (as opposed to giving brownie points, i.e. "some emphasis") these days really does impress.
That said, I think that NY Ventures is stretching it a bit - it's more NY because of its name than its portfolio.
Looking at NYVTX (it holds only 57 stocks), the ones in the Northeast I see are :
#5 JPM (Chase)
#8 UTX (United Tech. CT)
#10 AXP (Amex)
#11 BK (Bank of NY Mellon)
#18 PX (Praxair CT)
#31 CB (Chubb NJ)
#32 TYC (Tyco Int'l - US operations HQ in NJ)
#32 DGX (Quest Diagnostics NJ)
#33 CFG (Citizens Financial Group, RI)
#36 PCLN (Priceline CT)
#40 (L Loews)
#43 MCO (Moody's).
Even if I missed a couple, it's hard to consider this a northeast fund.
Kudos on Hancock Horizon, A for effort on the rest.

For those who prefer the deep South there's this fund:
hancockhorizon.com/files/2016/2Q/Burkenroad%20Small%20Cap%20Fund%202Q16.pdf
And for those who prefer the NorthEast: morningstar.com/funds/xnas/nyvtx/quote.html
Throw in a tech fund and you probably have California covered. Then if you combine all four including M&P, you might have the entire nation. The interesting question is what sort of regional economic risks and sector concentrations you might end up with favoring one region over the other. If you like the Northeast, you will most likely end up heavily in the financial sector, which hasn't been the best place to be lately, but could be deemed undervalued in today's market. Note though: Davis NY Venture is not a pure New York play, but still has that financial services emphasis.

Hi Guys,
Although it has taken a number of informed comments, we have finally arrived at deploying the Presidential Cycle as a market entry/exit timing mechanism.
Like most market advice, it is not without considerable controversy. To be fair, I provide two Links, one that favors the proposition and one that opposes it:
http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/2012/10/presidential-cycle-and-stock-market/
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-presidential-cycle-is-nonsense-2012-01-20
The divergent opinions are not surprising. That mix is what makes for a dynamic marketplace.
Since I favor a Buy-and-Hold approach, I am a neutral on the matter. There certainly is evidence to support the proposition, but that evidence can be questioned from a statistically meaningful perspective.
It’s amazing how often experts offer faulty forecasts on significant matters. Their error quotient is disappointingly high. Remember the “x-rays are a hoax” statement by Lord Kelvin. And Thomas Edison’s prediction that “….. alternative current is just a waste of time. It could kill a man as quick as a bolt of lightning. Direct current is safe.” And the military is certainly not immune to bad projections. Recall RADM Clark Woodward exclaiming that “as far as sinking a ship with a bomb is concerned, it just can’t be done.”
So much for the accuracy of the expert class. That’s even more so in the financial community. The forecasts are often fun and entertaining, but I’m not convinced that they can be relied on in terms of action for positive outcomes. Forecasting is a risky business for both professionals and amateurs alike.
Best Wishes.