@Ted Actually, the byline could have been better, and it was almost accidental that my half-addled brain didn't move on by. Thanks for playing clean-up and finishing off the post "right and proper," as I'd intended to do (lately, my glass being only "half-full").
p.s. And may I say that you have been pretty darn sharp lately in finding most of the nuggets in the pile of largely useless goo the financial MSM has been spewing out for several months now. You may consider that a pat on the back for a labor of love well-done! I had no idea hula hoop usage could elevate one's game so noticeably, in the short-term. :)

"This time it's different".
Typically when this trope appears it refers to a situation in some particular sector of finance which is suspected of being in the "bubble" mode. For example, internet/tech, housing, etc. The "this time" characterization is usually an attempt by the financial barkers to rationalize whatever particular short-term market distortion is taking place, and to convince the unwary that everything is just fine, not to worry, keep on buying.
Junkster appears to be considering a much more fundamental situation, regarding general long-term changes in the financial markets which can affect or change basic expectations in the overall operation of the financial markets. He interprets Catch22's question as a suggestion that just such a basic change may in fact be well underway.
I'm inclined to agree with both Catch and Junkster. I believe that the effects of the last short-term housing distortion were so devastating that they triggered a massive effort by central banks and other major financial regulators to restore market equilibrium and head off a full blown international depression. In this attempt previously untried regulatory and "guidance" maneuvers have possibly resulted in an unanticipated long-term change, the end effects of which are still really unknown.
It's interesting that at this point there are no barkers shouting "Step right up! Put your money here!" Evidently even the promoters and financial con men really have no idea of where this whole thing is headed. Time to be really careful, folks.

Old_Joe You read my mind and much more succinctly stated than my attempt. Thanks!

"This time it's different".
Typically when this trope appears it refers to a situation in some particular sector of finance which is suspected of being in the "bubble" mode. For example, internet/tech, housing, etc. The "this time" characterization is usually an attempt by the financial barkers to rationalize whatever particular short-term market distortion is taking place, and to convince the unwary that everything is just fine, not to worry, keep on buying.
Junkster appears to be considering a much more fundamental situation, regarding general long-term changes in the financial markets which can affect or change basic expectations in the overall operation of the financial markets. He interprets Catch22's question as a suggestion that just such a basic change may in fact be well underway.
I'm inclined to agree with both Catch and Junkster. I believe that the effects of the last short-term housing distortion were so devastating that they triggered a massive effort by central banks and other major financial regulators to restore market equilibrium and head off a full blown international depression. In this attempt previously untried regulatory and "guidance" maneuvers have possibly resulted in an unanticipated long-term change, the end effects of which are still really unknown.
It's interesting that at this point there are no barkers shouting "Step right up! Put your money here!" Evidently even the promoters and financial con men really have no idea of where this whole thing is headed. Time to be really careful, folks.

Hi Guys,
Only on rare occasions does my wife read my posts. That’s too bad since her IQ is two standard deviations higher than mine, and her reviews often generate constructive suggestions. That didn’t happen in my earlier post which she has subsequently read and has identified some shortfalls. Based on her critique, here are a few additional thoughts on the topic.
I was far too circumspect in getting to an Indexing investment approach. And I only cited Warren Buffett as an Indexing convert. He is just one from a pantheon of famous, skilled financial professionals who have changed horses, and now endorse Index investing for a major portion of most individual investor’s portfolios. Charles Ellis and David Swensen are two other excellent examples.
In the Charles Ellis case, it is not a recent conversion. My wife reminded me of an article that Ellis wrote in 1975 that made the argument using mostly sports analogies. The published work is only a short 7 pages. Here is a Link to that pioneering piece:
https://www.ifa.com/pdfs/ellis_charles_the_losers_game_1975.pdf
Please give it a visit. It is a breezy piece of work with many familiar, understandable analogies – some even appropriate in today’s investment world. Enjoy.
Even at that early date, Ellis argued that investing had morphed from a Winner’s Game to a Loser’s Game because of the fact that well trained and well financed professionals were now competing against their equals rather than against much less informed amateurs. Ellis was still singing the same song when he updated his “Winning the Loser’s Game” book in 2010.
David Swensen wrote a nicely reasoned forward for that edition. He became a more recent convert while planning his “Unconventional Success” book. He changed horses when preparing the text for that volume. He realized that “The overwhelmingly large number of investors should seek membership in the passive management club”. That realization prompted him to completely reorganize his work in progress. Private investors can not practice what Yale does with its portfolio.
Investment advice comes in many colors and in as many flavors. Choosing to disregard most of it while accepting a small fraction is a difficult challenge. Getting similar advice from such financial lions as Buffett, Ellis, Swensen, and other industry superstars makes the decision a little easier.
In the end we always get to choose. To choose wisely is yet at another level. Good luck to all.
Best Wishes.

FYI: For a lot of financial advisers, the primary appeal of exchange-traded funds boils down to low fees and liquidity. There is no disputing the low fees, which provide investors with varied and broad market exposure for mere basis points, in most cases. But the liquidity has become a growing point of contention throughout the financial services industry and is something advisers using ETFs need to follow.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20160710/FREE/307109998?template=printart

I started following Synchrony Financial SYF recently.
Had to sell OAK back in Feb/March with roll-over of my 401. Left proceeds in cash.
Sold HCP this week with departure of Lauralee E. Martin. I've basically owned the stock her entire tenure. Left proceeds in cash.
Remain heavy long-time holdings: BAC, AIG, AA, FAAFX and SIGIX.
c

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
July 14, 2016
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
For inspiration and levity I occasionally turn to Lewis Carroll’s classic,
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. As I survey the still unfolding saga of Brexit, spreading negative interest rates around the world and the unsettling political scene in Europe and the U.S. two quotes seem particularly apt. As the Cheshire Cat told Alice about Wonderland: “We’re all mad here.” And as Alice opined: “it would be so nice if something made sense for a change.”
This week’s guests are trying to make sense of highly unusual and in some cases unprecedented developments. One of those is Brexit. After decades of opting into the European Union, albeit on some of its own terms such as keeping the pound sterling as its currency, the United Kingdom opted out. A pressing question is will Britain be the lone exception, or the first of many to do so?
A recent Pew Research poll found the EU was unpopular among substantial numbers of citizens in many countries. 71% of Greeks view the EU unfavorably, 61% of the French do, 49% of Spaniards and 48% of Germans agree.
Since the financial crisis there has been talk of Grexit, Greece’s possible exit from the Eurozone. The latest candidate is Italy with “Quitaly” envisioned as its struggling banking industry reels under pressure from EU regulators.
Then there is the impact of the unprecedented easing policies of central banks in major developed countries. On this week’s program, we’ll show you a chart from Evercore ISI that tells the story of the “Incredible Balance Sheet Expansion” of the big three. Since 2009, the Federal Reserve, European Central Bank and Bank of Japan balance sheets have increased a cumulative +$8 trillion! Among other things, this helps explain why bond yields have plunged. The yield on the benchmark U.S. Treasury 10-year note has hit new lows in recent weeks, while yields on German and Japanese bonds are trading below zero in negative territory.
In the week after the Brexit vote, Evercore ISI counted 18 more easing moves by central banks. How do these developments affect global economies and markets?
On this week’s WEALTHTRACK, we will hear the views of two experienced global investors. Nicholas Sargen, Chief Economist and Investment Strategist at Fort Washington Investment Advisors, the asset management arm of Western & Southern Financial Group will join us for a rare television interview. Sargen holds a PhD in Economics, and has been international economist, global money manager and Chief Investment Officer for several major financial firms as well as an official at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
We’ll also be joined by William Wilby, in a WEALTHTRACK television exclusive. One of our Great Investors, now a private investor actively managing his own retirement account, Wilby was the Portfolio Manager of the award winning Oppenheimer Global Fund which was ranked number one in its category for the 12 years he ran it. A graduate of West Point, Wilby has a PhD in International Monetary Economics and has held various international finance and investment positions at several top financial institutions, including the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
Both Sargen and Wilby believe the Brexit effect is far from over. I asked them why it is still so significant.
If you miss the show on Public Television this week, you can watch it at your convenience on our website. You’ll also find web exclusive EXTRA interviews with Sargen and Wilby about investing in the 21st century.
Thank you for watching. Have a great weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one.
Best Regards,
Consuelo
http://wealthtrack.com/
.

         



@AndyJ said ...yesterday sold a fairly large position in one muni cef (up a mind-boggling 14% ytd) and put the $ in PONDX and PTIAX, neither of which involve as much rate risk
Good call Andy.My only holding in the space down 2.25 % today
https://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:OIA&ei=9TuIV8m9N8PCmAGIzqfgBw
PTIAX has re-done it's web site.Good comparison to the big boys and where it differentiates here
http://www.ptiafunds.com/documents/ptam-difference_ptiax_final.pdf
New fact sheet here
http://www.ptiafunds.com/documents/ptiax_factsheet.pdf
Reviewing Jeremy Grantham's Mid May remarks.
This relative optimism was an unusual position for me and the snapback in these markets has validated, to a modest degree, my thinking at the time. I still believe the following: 1) that we did not then, and do not today, have the necessary conditions to say that today’s world has a bubble in any of the most important asset classes; 2) that we are unlikely, given the beliefs and practices of the U.S. Fed, to end this cycle without a bubble in the U.S. equity market or, perish the thought, in a repeat of the U.S. housing bubble; 3) the threshold for a bubble level for the U.S. market is about 2300 on the S&P 500, about 10% above current levels, and would normally require a substantially more bullish tone on the part of both individual and institutional investors; 4) it continues to seem unlikely to me that this current equity cycle will top out before the election and perhaps it will last considerably longer; and 5) the U.S. housing market, although well below 2006 highs, is nonetheless approaching a one and onehalf-sigma level based on its previous history. Given the intensity of the pain we felt so recently, we might expect that such a bubble would be psychologically impossible, but the data in Exhibit 1 speaks for itself. This is a classic echo bubble – i.e., driven partly by the feeling that the substantially higher prices in 2006 (with its three-sigma bubble) somehow justify today’s merely one and one-half-sigma prices. Prices have been rising rapidly recently and at this rate will reach one and three-quarterssigma this summer. Thus, unlikely as it may sound, in 12 to 24 months U.S. house prices – much more dangerous than inflated stock prices in my opinion – might beat the U.S. equity market in the race to cause the next financial crisis.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3973997-always-cry-spilt-milk

What counts is a long term real money track record using the various forecasting models referenced. I spent decades monitoring the real money results of the so-called experts from Futures Truth, MoniReserach, Hulbert Financial Digest, and Dalbar, to name just a few. There are no experts and there is no magic bullet for predicting/forecasting the markets. If anything the best approach to successful trading/investing is a contrarian approach. But that is a story for another time. As to why some are more successful than others it is best summed up by Charles Faulkner in Jack Schwager's The New Market Wizards. "The bottom line is that these methods (some you have referenced above) seem to work only because the people who use them have developed some sort of *****intuitive***** experience about price. The ***** is my emphasis. Trading/investing is both an art and a science albeit I would say much more of the former than the latter.

Hi Catch,
Thanks for your interesting perspective. I agree that each investor gets to choose his own poison, although sometimes well meaning and well paid financial advisors intentionally usurp that responsibility. Regardless, investors are responsible for their decisions either made by themselves or some paid consultant.
I have had a dear and long-term relationship with one such advisor. I suspect we remain on friendly terms because I don’t invest through him, and I rarely accept his market pronouncements without careful due diligence.
The man is a flake. He is far too overconfident of his own knowledge base and the market’s projected direction. I suspect that he doesn’t keep score of his forecasts, but I informally do and its not pretty. He does play an aggressive tennis game, but, once again, he consistently overplays his perceived skill level. No surprise there.
It seems like every time one of his market forecasts goes haywire (quite often), he adds another parameter to his market prediction model. Not unexpectedly, the revised model reproduces the database with improved fidelity; that is, until the next market scoring period. If enough parameters are added, a near perfect match is likely.
Well, over several years, my friend’s market model has grown from about a 6 parameter model to perhaps a 15 parameter model. Yes, it does a better prediction today when contrasted to yesterday, but I suspect yet another revision will be implemented in the near future. If the number of open parameters are increased to exactly match the number of data points, a perfect reproduction (not a prediction) of the data set will happen.
Each of us has our own way of making a projection. As a general rule, the simpler the model, the more likely it will prove to be the better in terms of its robustness and longevity. Jack Bogle makes that precise point in many of his books.
But overall, precise market forecasting is a fool’s game. On an annual basis, returns are almost completely random in character. Adding parameters might make us more comfortable investors (a feeling of control), but they will not make us any wealthier than an Index-based plan. That might be a sad judgment, but it is fundamentally true except for a few very rare individuals.
I agree with Junkster. Everyone can control their money management with discipline, but forecasting the markets is an impossible task.
Best Wishes to All.

Yes, a week of normal breathing and regular heart rate. A nice respite. But as this continues, and the financial MSM only pumps up the positive to keep the momo going (in their service to the industry), it might be smart to start looking for trouble developing under the covers, as all good runs come to an end someday. In that regard, here are some data and commentary I ran across by Wolf Richter on his blog last week; all is not well in the shadows.
http://wolfstreet.com/2016/07/01/investors-fleeing-junk-bond-funds-leveraged-loan-funds/
http://wolfstreet.com/2016/07/06/big-unravel-u-s-commercial-bankruptcies-skyrocket/

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
Turmoil, volatility and uncertainty have long been considered enemies of stock markets. They certainly proved that once again in the days immediately following Brexit on June 23rd, when British voters passed a referendum to exit the European Union. For a few trading sessions investors fled stocks and other assets perceived to be risky and flocked to traditional safe havens such as gold, long-maturity U.S. Treasury bonds and debt of other countries considered to be of high credit quality, including Germany, France and Japan.
According to bond rating firm Fitch, sovereign debt with below zero yields increased by $1.3 trillion in the month of June to a total of $11.7 trillion, boosted by the Brexit vote. Longer maturity debt was particularly popular. Japan’s negative yielding debt grew about 18% to $7.9 trillion, France’s by 13% and Germany’s by 8% to over $1 trillion each.
Britain is the first country to exit the 28 country European Union, which took its current form in 1992 as a single market allowing goods, services, money and people to move freely among member states, as if it were a single country. It has its own parliament, located in Brussels, with the ability to regulate a wide range of areas including the environment, transportation, consumer rights, employment rules and even such things as mobile phone charges and electric tea kettles.
Its single currency the Euro wasn’t created until 1999. The United Kingdom opted to keep its own currency, the Pound Sterling, as did several other member countries including Denmark and Sweden.
Why did the Brexit vote set off such a firestorm in global markets? How much of a threat is it to the global economy and financial markets now?
Joining us on WEALTHTRACK this week are two market pros who have been tracking these developments closely. Philippe Brugère-Trélat, Executive Vice President of Franklin Mutual Series is a contrarian, value investor with years of experience investing in Europe and other international markets. He is Co-Portfolio Manager of three funds, all rated 4-star by Morningstar. He has managed Franklin Mutual European Fund since 2004, and both Franklin Mutual Global Discovery Fund and Franklin Mutual International Fund since 2009.
Our other guest is one of our Financial Thought Leaders. Jason Trennert is Co-Founder, Managing Partner and Chief Investment Strategist at Strategas Research Partners, an independent investment strategy and macroeconomic firm celebrating its tenth anniversary this year.
Identified by Barron’s as one of “Wall Street’s Best Minds”, Trennert and his team are known for their original and timely economic, political and market analysis and identification of investment themes. The firm recently started Strategas Asset Management to enable clients to invest in portfolios based on three of those themes. One is Policy Opportunities, another is Large-Cap Dividend Growth and the third is New Sovereigns, formerly their Thrifty Fifty portfolio which we have discussed on previous episodes. I will ask Trennert for an update.
If you miss the show on television this week you can always catch it on our website. We also have an EXTRA interview with both of our guests. As always, we welcome your feedback. Click on the Contact Us link on our website, or connect with us on Facebook or Twitter.
Have a great summer weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one.
Best Regards,
Consuelo

I'm with Catch- as Bob C. has opined, Brexit may not be a factor in the long-term. But there is a very real chance that the world-wide banking system is in for an extended nasty patch of uncertainty until the European politics settle down. With interest rates where they are there is almost no way that the international European banks can prosper, and there are way too many large financial swans flying around over there. Not only Greece and Italy, but even some large German and Swiss banks are finding themselves against the wall. Additionally, I won't be surprised if England and the EU drag out the resolution issues for a couple of years, leaving the future of London as a banking and financial center a major unknown.
Before this settles out we may be very glad that the US banks have been forced to increase their capitalization, despite their kicking and screaming every inch of the way. While the US is in better shape than Europe, the interconnectedness of world finance could very well make things more difficult over here also. Now the Fed not only has to worry about the US directly, but also what ricochet effects the US system might have elsewhere, which in turn would come back to affect the US. Things are far from promising in the banking sector, worldwide.

:) Might be more value to come from some financial sector holdings.....

Totally agree with fundalarm. A fund to invest in is the least of her concerns when there is so much other financial responsibility to contend with. Good advice fundalarm.

i think she needs a financial advisor - just picking funds is not enough. someone needs to look at the entire picture. now that she is a sole provider for the tho teenagers, does she have enough life insurance?...she needs to put 2 kids through college while saving for her own retirement. does she have a 529 for each daugther?...
investments are but one part of the family financial planning. she needs clarity on the whole picture.

Tough call without knowing the person's risk tolerance, financial goals, and sources of funds. Since she has account with Vanguard, it would be equally as wise to talk with Vanguard advisors, even without using their advisor services.

Hi Guys,
I wish you all a happy and safe Independence Day. I will definitely overeat.
On recent posts some considerable concern has been expressed over the current length of several zero returns delivered by indices like the S&P 500. I don’t share that concern.
It is not a rare happening. In a very rough measure, it occurs something like one-third of the time based on long term market history. Not to worry because a regression-to-the-mean is always operative. The data support this observation. Here is a Link to a recent article by excellent financial writer Morgan Housel that reviews that data:
http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/06/30/when-stocks-give-you-nothing.aspx?source=iaasitlnk0000003
Housel subtitled his piece: “the long wait”. That’s appropriate. Patience can be severely tested. The quandary for investors is that nobody can forecast how long that wait is and when it will end. But be confident that it will end. Figure 2 in the Housel article illustrates the potential length of that long wait from historical data.
Nobody likes running in-place, but a regression-to-the-mean will eventually kick-in. Unfortunately, not any expert can predict when that will happen in a reliable, reproducible manner. That’s the nature of the equity marketplace. But as the zero return environment lengthens, the odds of a recovery to the historical average annual returns increases.
I completely agree with Housel’s observations that patience and a cash reserve are mandatory requisites for successful investing. Incrementally increasing your equity positions during this difficult period will surely not maximize your total end wealth since only precisely picking the market bottoms can do that. But that’s an impossible goal; it can not be done.
In that sense, investors should be satisficers and not maximizers. There just are too many fund choices and too much uncertainty to ever fully realize maximizer perfection. Any attempt to do so will ultimately end in unhappiness at our failures to accomplish that lofty target. Instead, being satisfied with near Index returns is easily accomplished with little effort and even little time commitment. I practice that discipline.
The percentage of professional money managers who successfully maximize returns, using an Index as a measure of their success, is grimly low. The evidence is in their dismal performance records.
Please enjoy the fireworks and the feasting.
Best Regards.

I agree with @Ted as to the funds he mentioned and KISS. I will add VWENX which is available to Vanguard account holders. This fund is active managed varying from 50-70% in equity. The long term return performance is excellent, with this fund having an expense ratio of .18%. Not knowing the tax status of current or these new monies, one may also consider a Vanguard muni bond fund for some of the monies, if investment taxation could be a problem. Also, if applicable; maximizing a Roth IRA contribution with some of the monies. The above is offered with the presumption that these monies are directed properly towards any and all other financial needs first, as deemed appropriate.

I invested in WAFMX because I wanted exposure to frontier markets and because I saw promise in its consumer-heavy weighting. There are not a lot of options for frontier markets funds in general, and I believe all the others are more focused on financial stocks. So that would make WAFMX still the best choice given what's available.