Question for Charles.
For trying to answer question "was it worth it" you provided returns of indices over 10 years, and also over full market cycle, i.e. around 12 years beginning 2007. However, for the "best" performing funds, why not provide market cycle returns? It will be good to see if these "best" performing funds were also "worth it" over the full market cycle, no?
Under the assumption any given period(s) over which data is compared to reach any desirable/undesirable conclusion, it is important to know if people should even bother to pick individual funds or just invest in an index.
Just my 2 cents.

Why would it be any different than the last 10 years or so?

@msf. Thanks very much for making me aware of a new set of funds to research. Particularly the Grandeur Peaks one. That one has held up better than all of the other ones in the family that have had a few disappointing years. I always appreciate the ideas here on the board. I would also add MIOPX to your list which has about 30% in EM and is available no load at Schwab and other brokerages.

Yes, well even his hedging is sub-par. I owned HSGFX many years ago, but didn't keep it for very long. Not a fan of Hussman. His execution is poor.
Best of luck with this one.

This is the articles proposal. But, it's an increased tax on the wealthier amongst us (earning >$400,000/year), so what chance does that have? But, sounds good to me. Not sure how else you sustain the program.

The act does this without cutting benefits. In fact, it increases them: An across-the-board benefit increase of about 2%, a better cost-of-living adjustment, and an increase in the minimum benefit. To pay for those increased benefits and to address the actuarial deficit, the act would increase the Social Security payroll tax from its current 6.2% to 7.4% in increments over the next 24 years, for both employee and employer, and begin levying the Social Security payroll tax on earnings above $400,000. (Currently that tax isn’t levied on income above $132,900, which means that, if this act became law, income between $132,900 and $400,000 would be untaxed.)

You better be a very disciplined investor to do that. Although the long term returns for EM might be good, they are extremely inconsistent. Spectacular returns some years, punctuated by equally bad returns other years. Even in good or average years, volatility is typically high. Personally, I wish that I had never invested in EM, but I’ve been in it so long that I figure that it’s due for a rebound. BTW, many diversified foreign funds hold 10-25% in EM stocks, which is probably enough for most investors.

Without discussing the merits of the proposal, let me highlight one paragraph:

On the cost side, the act would increase the Social Security tax rate by 1.2 percentage points, for both you as well as your employer. Landis downplays the significance of that increase, since it will take place over 24 years, meaning that the increase in any given year (for both you and your employer) will be 0.05 of a percentage point. He says that his “grocery and gasoline bills change more than that every month.”

While the price of your gasoline bill may fluctuate more than that every month, the rate of taxes on your gas bill doesn't.
This is important because we're talking tax rates, not dollars. Your wages go up year by year, which means that your payroll tax goes up year by year even when the tax rate remains constant. Increase the rate and you've now got two sources of higher taxes - increasing wages and an increasing percentage. Its a flawed analogy.
Regarding print friendly format: Had Gary done that, I wouldn't have seen all the reader comments. Specifically, Dink Singer (Marketwatch comments) seems very good on fact checking and filling in info.

Ahhh, mid 40's. I was there once.

...when I hit retirement I still expect to still be practically all-in on equities as I am now in my mid-40s. While I won't be 'diversified' across so-called "asset classes" I will be 'diversified' by my own comfort levels,

@rforno , I wouldn't recommend that in retirement without a cash bucket (another asset class), unless you don't need to withdraw from your savings. Withdrawing from a full-in equity portfolio during a bear market could be detrimental to your savings, especially if that bear market is at the start of retirement. So if you had that cash bucket, 1, 3, 5 years, whatever your comfort level is, I think 100% equity for the remaining portfolio is perfectly fine for a risk taker like yourself. Probably do better than most.

And no, I don't care about LC/MC/SC G/B/V designations

I don't disagree with you on this at all, but you know these are not asset classes.

What I am trying to say that many uncomplicated and reasonable strategies will work if given sufficient time for accumulation and growth.

I believe that you and Pfau/Kitces are addressing two different halves of one's investing lifetime. My fault - you had been talking about your investing up to retirement and I tossed in a study of glide paths after retiring.
Put the two halves together and what you wind up with is a U shaped curve for equity exposure - high when young, declining (probably further than the traditional glide path) to retirement, and then rising.
I introduced this for the purpose of illustrating that glide paths (even during accumulation) could do with a bit of scrutiny. For example, as I hinted at above, one might be better off shooting for a lower equity allocation at the target (retirement) date.
They're addressing sequence of return risk in retirement. Since that's an early retirement risk, they find that starting with a low equity allocation deals with that risk, and increasing equity over time compensates for the lower starting point. At least that's what I got from skimming - it's been awhile since I originally read the full writeup.
No question - uncomplicated is good. My portfolio (like almost everyone's, I suspect) falls somewhere between Skeet's three dimensional portfolio and a couch potato portfolio. I'm gradually pruning. This could take many years though. Think half-life - the more the portfolio "decays" (is pruned), the slower the pruning gets.

I too have made sizable changes in recent years. More than half are broad based Index funds and ETFs while the rest are actively managed funds and individual stocks. These days there are much other things to do with kids in college and gardening. My kid's 529 plans are still on target date funds and they work out great today.

Well, maybe it is one of those cosmic coincidences, but Western Asset (a Legg Mason subsidiary) recently introduced a very similarly named ETF, Western Asset Short Duration Income ETF.
With an inception date of 02-07-2019 and a 29 bp ER:

https://www.etf.com/WINC
https://www.leggmason.com/en-us/products/exchange-traded-funds/western-asset-short-duration-income-etf.html
https://www.leggmason.com/en-us/products/mutual-funds/western-asset-short-term-yield-fund.html
[Sponsored Article] https://www.etf.com/sections/etf-industry-perspective/legg-mason-case-active-short-duration-income

Was the closing fund [LGSYX, et al.] a placeholder for the ETF? Or simply a 'hedge', in case the rollout for the ETF was delayed? Hmmm....
FUND (56 bp ER)
Seeks to generate current income and a low sensitivity to interest rate volatility via an actively managed fixed income strategy focused on U.S. dollar-denominated investment grade securities...
Total portfolio effective duration is expected to be one year or less while average effective maturity is expected to be 18 months or less. In any event, average effective maturity will be three years or less.
ETF (29 bp ER)
The Western Asset Short Duration Income ETF is an actively managed, low duration (0-3 years) fixed income strategy that seeks current income via a diversified portfolio with an emphasis on lower interest rate sensitivity, higher credit quality and active credit selection.
Low Duration. An effective average duration target of 3 years or less.

I hadn’t heard this term before. A bit hard running it down, but did come across an Investopedia article that discusses it as one allocation approach.
https://www.investopedia.com/investing/6-asset-allocation-strategies-work/
Each will have his / her own take on this. I get the general drift that the approach is designed to cut losses. But it runs contrary to everything I know and feel about investing. Would you sell your home if its assessed value fell below a certain level? How about the vacant lot in the neighborhood you bought for spec? Or the antique auto you own and admire?
When I invest in funds I’m investing in the underlying assets (companies, commodities, gold, infrastructure, secured debt, etc.). I expect these will vary in value over the years (as a home might). But if I believe it’s worthwhile owning those underlying assets, than why would I sell them just because their market value dropped?
I remain optimistic that over the longer term (10+ years) a well diversified portfolio that has exposure to many types of investments (read: not 100% invested in VFINX or TRBCX) will keep me at least on pace with inflation - and probably somewhat ahead of it. Generally, I’d rather own “things” than pieces of paper with $$ signs printed on them.
—
@DavidV - I have not addressed the issue of age (which you mention). Your question seemed to be more about a specific allocation strategy. I’m aware 2 or 3 prominent board members mentioned during the past year that they were moving almost entirely to cash. The reasons seemed to be related primarily to age. IMHO that’s an entirely separate decision that everyone with the help of family and friends needs to make at some point. Call it an “allocation strategy” if you like. Whatever works. :)
(I’m not a qualified financial advisor.)

I have suggested, to him, that he take all fund distributions in cash and stop the automatic reinvestment process since he is now in the distribution phase of investing.

I think that is good advice to your friend @Old_Skeet. I'm not at distribution phase yet. At 65 I keep putting off retirement, but my intent when I get there is to do what you suggested and change my fund and stock distributions to go to cash instead of reinvesting. My plan is to have about a 3 year cash bucket to draw from and add those distributions to the bucket. That should stretch out the replenishment time past 3 years and assure I don't have to replenish in a bear market.
Thanks for the feedback. You do seem to handle multiple accounts and the complexity that goes with that pretty well. That takes discipline. I have to say, the older I get the simpler I want to make things. I like investing, but I came to the conclusion a few years ago my tweaks and typically late adjustments added little to no value.

Hi @hank: While my sleeve system seems complex to some ... it is really quite easy to manage. Besides, if I started selling off mutual funds to reduce their numbber I've have a really large tax bill form realized capital gains from the sell proceeds. About 60% of my consolidated portfolio is in taxable accounts. Remember, one of my investment positions and largest (Franklin Income) goes back to my early teenage years; and, my second largest (Income Fund of America) goes back a good number of years as well.
My father's broker was a pretty wise person. I remember him telling me that these funds will give you exposure to both stocks and bonds. Plus, they generate good income. And, income never goes out of style.

Hi @MikeM:
Thanks for making comment.
It all boils down to managing risk. The type of fund you reference was not around back in the 80's when I began to invest family money via the sleeve system. With this, I've kept my system in place. And, yes I enjoy it. Plus, I beleive that it puts more coins in my pocket over a more simple strategy. And, agreed ... it is probally not suited for the average retail investor. However, in my system if a fund falters there are others within the sleeve that can continue to propel the sleeve. Thus it diversifies manager, strategy and fund risk and spreads it over many.
My high school buddy who by profession was a successful engineer today uses one bond fund and one equity fund and rebalances between a 40%/60% allocation based upon his read of the markets. At times, his performance leads mine and at time mine leads his. He has to sell securites to meet his withdrawal distribution needs while I do not as my portfolio generates the necessary income to meet distribution needs plus leaving some for future investment purposes. Both portfolio's are about the same size and distributions needs are about the same. His portfolio has a yield of about 2.1% while mine is about 3.2% plus both portfolios produce fund capital gain distributions which I take in cash and which he reinvest all fund distributions. I have suggested, to him, that he take all fund distributions in cash and stop the automatic reinvestment process since he is now in the distribution phase of investing.
It all boils down to what works best for each of us as being the best route for each one of us to travel.
I wish you continued "Good Investing" in the years to come.
Skeet

My thinking is that if you can't manage what you have then you've got to many funds. Being a prior corporate credit manager for a regional distribution company I had to have a receivable system in place to manage a fairly large customer base. This skill set lead to my development of my sleeve management system to better manage my family's investments. Through the years it has worked fairly well. You can read more about this below.
Sleeve Management System ... Last Revised on 03/01/2019
Now being in retirement here is a brief description of my sleeve management system which I organized to better manage the investments held within mine and my wife's portfolios. The consolidated master portfolio is comprised of two taxable investment accounts, two self directed retirement accounts, a health savings account plus two bank savings accounts. With this, I came up with four investment areas. They are a cash area which consist of two sleeves ... an investment cash sleeve and a demand cash sleeve. The next area is the income area which consist of two sleeves ... a fixed income sleeve and a hybrid income sleeve. Then there is the growth & income area which has more risk associated with it than the income area and it consist of four sleeves ... a global equity sleeve, a global hybrid sleeve, a domestic equity sleeve and a domestic hybrid sleeve. And, then there is the growth area where the most risk in the portfolio is found and it consist of five sleeves ... a global growth sleeve, a large/mid cap sleeve, a small/mid cap sleeve, a specialty/theme sleeve plus a special investment (spiff) sleeve. Each sleeve (in most cases) consist of three to nine funds with the size and weight of each sleeve can easily be adjusted, from time-to-time, by adjusting the number of funds held along with their amounts. By using the sleeve system I can get a better picture of my overall investment landscape. I have found it beneficial to Xray each fund, each sleeve, each investment area, and the portfolio as a whole quarterly for analysis. My positions and sleeves can be adjusted from time-to-time as to how I might be reading the markets through using my market barometer and equity weighting matrix system. The matrix system is driven by the barometer. All my funds with the exception of those in my health savings account pay their distributions to the cash area of the portfolio. This automatically builds cash in the cash area to meet the portfolio's disbursements (when necessary) with the residual being left for new investment opportunity. Generally, in any one year, I take no more than a sum equal to one half of my portfolio's five year average return. In this way principal builds over time. In addition, most buy/sell transactions settle from, or to, the cash area with some net asset exchanges between funds taking place. In addition, my rebalance threshold is + (or -) 2% from my target allocation for both my income, growth & income and growth areas while I generally let cash float.
Consolidated Master Portfolio
Here is how I have my asset allocation broken out in percent ranges, by area. My neutral allocation weightings follow. They are cash area 15%, income area 35%, growth & income area 35% and growth & other asset area 15%. I do an Instant Xray analysis of the portfolio quarterly and make asset weighting adjustments as I feel warranted based upon my assessment of the market, my risk tolerance, cash needs, etc. I have the portfolio set up in Morningstar's portfolio manager by sleeve, by area and the portfolio as a whole for easy monitoring plus I use brokerage account statements, Morningstar fund reports, fund fact sheets along with their annual reports to follow my investments. I also maintain a list of positions to add (A) to, to buy (B), to reduce (R) or to sell (S). Generally, funds are assigned to a sleeve based upon a best fit basis.
Currently, my INVESTMENT FOCUS is to increase my portfolio's income stream through positioning new money into income generating assets while letting equities run on the high side to their upper threshold limit.
Target Asset Allocation (Balanced Towards Income): Cash 20%, Income 40%, G&I 30% & Growth 10%
Consolidated Master Portfolio Asset Allocation: Cash 16%, Income 39%, G&I 32% & Growth 13%
Rebalance Action Needed: Decrease Growth Area 1% and Increase Income Area 1%
CASH AREA: (Weighting Range 10% to 20%)
Demand Cash Sleeve ... Cash Distribution Accrual & Future Investment Accrual
Investment Cash Sleeve ... Money Market Funds: AMAXX, GBAXX, DTGXX, PCOXX, CD Ladder(A) &
Cash Savings(A)
INCOME AREA: (Weighting Range 30% to 40%)
Fixed Income Sleeve: CTFAX(A), GIFAX, LBNDX(A), NEFZX, PONAX(A) & TSIAX
Hybrid Income Sleeve: APIUX, AZNAX, BAICX, DIFAX(A), FISCX(A), FKINX, ISFAX(A), JNBAX, PGBAX & PMAIX
GROWTH & INCOME AREA: (Weighting Range 30% to 40%)
Global Equity Sleeve: CWGIX, DEQAX, DWGAX & EADIX(A)
Global Hybrid Sleeve: CAIBX, TEQIX & TIBAX
Domestic Equity Sleeve: ANCFX, FDSAX, INUTX(A) & SVAAX
Domestic Hybrid Sleeve: ABALX, AMECX, FBLAX, FRINX(A), HWIAX & LABFX
GROWTH & OTHER ASSET AREA: (Weighting Range 10% to 20%)
Large/Mid Cap Sleeve: AGTHX, AMCPX & SPECX
Small/Mid Cap Sleeve: AOFAX, NDVAX & PMDAX
Global Growth Sleeve: ANWPX, NEWFX & SMCWX
Miscellaneous, Specialty & Theme Sleeve: LPEFX, PCLAX & PGUAX
Ballast & Spiff Sleeve: No position held at this time.
A credit manager's belief is that there are safety in numbers so spread the risk and limit how much any one account class can have on open credit. And, for those with a bad debt write off history ... it's CIA (cash in advance).

@shipwreckandalone
https://www.google.com/search?q=Google+book+invest+bond&oq=Google+book+invest+bond&gs_l=mobile-heirloom-serp.12...4360.13206.0.14009.24.19.0.5.5.0.183.2441.1j18.19.0....0...1c.1.34.mobile-heirloom-serp..9.15.1486.jbvUOXro7Kk
Hi sir/mam
Not Ted but investing in private corp/muni bonds for quite while
I usually buy bbb- bonds or higher (sometimes bb+ too) do diligence resreach s on cusip before buying. Check company data sheets and devaluation ovtime if companies high risks for default. Google the cusip and if several etf or funds hold the bond you know that bond maybe good to buy
If you do it for a few years you will get 'hangs of things'
Read at least 3 or 4 books about bonds before buying... At least this is what I did
Best thing about buying private Corp or muni bonds you don't have pay annual fees and you can sell Anytime.
Ted gave a great example hzt Corp grading is bad but the cusip has many etf and funds holding the Corp bond. I also set up a junk Gmail account and place google.com/alerts w 'hertz bankruptcy' title search engine to that Gmail acct. You will get tone junk emails and you will know quickly if you need sell bond or not if any fishy comes up.
I buy Corp or munis bonds from Vanguard Merrill edge or schwab. Schwab has Corp very safe all bbb- or higher and Vanguard has many bonds include high risks defaults bonds (I tend to stay away from those)
You can do diligence research w/company evaluations w schwab research (probably one of best research engines in market stick research) before buying bonds...
You may consider buying just few bonds and see how they do at first.
Most bonds take at least 1k to 5k to 10k to buy (plus 10 or 20dollars commissions one time fees) . Some good corp bond you think may never bankrup (one time I found) has at least 250k to buy - I could never touch this bond not enough $$ lol. Great bout bonds u never worry about additional fees., good hedge to put in Corp bonds instead of cash, and if u choose safe Corp bonds you maybe sleeping better at night not too much worrying.
One question I always ask myself is 'is it better to buy 10k of Att Corp bond which yield for 6%over 10or 20+ years or buy Sp500 etf which you will never know yields but risks higher... So the simple answer maybe owing both and owe both vehicles.. You know ATT CORP will never bankrup do its like having cash
I am 45 yo but have about 20 or 25 %of portfolios in private corp bonds
Worst thing about corporate individuals bonds are you have to pay capital income taxation to irs and every year you will have to Pay because if Sp500 went down by 20% you do always make 6% from att coupons rate yield
I had total 3 or 4 defaults bonds and loose all $$capital on the bonds in 2009 and 2010 - I did not know much back then and was too greedy bought b graded bond (which is very badly graded was yield 20%annually)... These bonds belly up over next few yrs and loose all $$... Credit crisis years so lots small companies went out business
I never buy private reasury bonds Yields so low plus I have 401k at work and part of my portfolio has Treasury automatic placed in it already
Good luck

With retirement, I had planned to let this fund manage my money for the next 20 to 35 years. I'm concerned that a new single manager has been assigned. While I trust my judgment for a few years, I know it will decline.
What's up here? Vanguard rarely relies on a single manager. The fund had some mediocre years, but it was still a M* 4* fund on M*.
GMO says foreign and/or international funds have the best 7 yr prospects, but the January rally may have changed that assessment.
While I would like to follow GMO's recommendations, I don't have the resources to engage their services.
Suggestions appreciated.

Hi guys: As @hank noted ... Here is how Old_Skeet rolls and manages a consolidated portfolio of 49 funds. My thinking is that if you can't manage what you have then you've got to many funds. Being a prior corporate credit manager for a regional distribution company I had to have a receivable system in place to manage a fairly large customer base. Thus, I developed my sleeve management system to help manage my family's investments. Through the years it has worked fairly well. You can read more about this below.
Sleeve Management System ... Last Revised on 03/01/2019
Now being in retirement here is a brief description of my sleeve management system which I organized to better manage the investments held within mine and my wife's portfolios. The consolidated master portfolio is comprised of two taxable investment accounts, two self directed retirement accounts, a health savings account plus two bank savings accounts. With this, I came up with four investment areas. They are a cash area which consist of two sleeves ... an investment cash sleeve and a demand cash sleeve. The next area is the income area which consist of two sleeves ... a fixed income sleeve and a hybrid income sleeve. Then there is the growth & income area which has more risk associated with it than the income area and it consist of four sleeves ... a global equity sleeve, a global hybrid sleeve, a domestic equity sleeve and a domestic hybrid sleeve. And, then there is the growth area where the most risk in the portfolio is found and it consist of five sleeves ... a global growth sleeve, a large/mid cap sleeve, a small/mid cap sleeve, a specialty/theme sleeve plus a special investment (spiff) sleeve. Each sleeve (in most cases) consist of three to twelve funds with the size and weight of each sleeve can easily be adjusted, from time-to-time, by adjusting the number of funds held along with their amounts. By using the sleeve system I can get a better picture of my overall investment landscape. I have found it beneficial to Xray each fund, each sleeve, each investment area, and the portfolio as a whole quarterly for analysis. My positions and sleeves can be adjusted from time-to-time as to how I might be reading the markets through using my market barometer and equity weighting matrix system. The matrix system is driven by the barometer. All my funds with the exception of those in my health savings account pay their distributions to the cash area of the portfolio. This automatically builds cash in the cash area to meet the portfolio's disbursements (when necessary) with the residual being left for new investment opportunity. Generally, in any one year, I take no more than a sum equal to one half of my portfolio's five year average return. In this way principal builds over time. In addition, most buy/sell transactions settle from, or to, the cash area with some net asset exchanges between funds taking place. In addition, my rebalance threshold is + (or -) 2% from my target allocation for both my income, growth & income and growth areas while I generally let cash float.
Consolidated Master Portfolio
Here is how I have my asset allocation broken out in percent ranges, by area. My neutral allocation weightings follow. They are cash area 15%, income area 35%, growth & income area 35% and growth & other asset area 15%. I do an Instant Xray analysis of the portfolio quarterly and make asset weighting adjustments as I feel warranted based upon my assessment of the market, my risk tolerance, cash needs, etc. I have the portfolio set up in Morningstar's portfolio manager by sleeve, by area and the portfolio as a whole for easy monitoring plus I use brokerage account statements, Morningstar fund reports, fund fact sheets along with their annual reports to follow my investments. I also maintain a list of positions to add (A) to, to buy (B), to reduce (R) or to sell (S). Generally, funds are assigned to a sleeve based upon a best fit basis.
Currently, my INVESTMENT FOCUS is to increase my portfolio's income stream through positioning new money into income generating assets while letting equities run on the high side to their upper threshold limit.
Target Asset Allocation (Balanced Towards Income): Cash 20%, Income 40%, G&I 30% & Growth 10%
Consolidated Master Portfolio Asset Allocation: Cash 16%, Income 39%, G&I 32% & Growth 13%
Rebalance Action Needed: Decrease Growth Area 1% and Increase Income Area 1%
CASH AREA: (Weighting Range 10% to 20%)
Demand Cash Sleeve ... Cash Distribution Accrual & Future Investment Accrual
Investment Cash Sleeve ... Money Market Funds: AMAXX, GBAXX, DTGXX, PCOXX, CD Ladder(A) &
Cash Savings(A)
INCOME AREA: (Weighting Range 30% to 40%)
Fixed Income Sleeve: CTFAX(A), GIFAX, LBNDX(A), NEFZX, PONAX(A) & TSIAX
Hybrid Income Sleeve: APIUX, AZNAX, BAICX, DIFAX(A), FISCX(A), FKINX, ISFAX(A), JNBAX, PGBAX & PMAIX
GROWTH & INCOME AREA: (Weighting Range 30% to 40%)
Global Equity Sleeve: CWGIX, DEQAX, DWGAX & EADIX(A)
Global Hybrid Sleeve: CAIBX, TEQIX & TIBAX
Domestic Equity Sleeve: ANCFX, FDSAX, INUTX(A) & SVAAX
Domestic Hybrid Sleeve: ABALX, AMECX, FBLAX, FRINX(A), HWIAX & LABFX
GROWTH & OTHER ASSET AREA: (Weighting Range 10% to 20%)
Large/Mid Cap Sleeve: AGTHX, AMCPX & SPECX
Small/Mid Cap Sleeve: AOFAX, NDVAX & PMDAX
Global Growth Sleeve: ANWPX, NEWFX & SMCWX
Miscellaneous, Specialty & Theme Sleeve: LPEFX, PCLAX & PGUAX
Ballast & Spiff Sleeve: No position held at this time.

@Ted: Thanks for posting. Frankin Income Fund is Old_Skeet's largest holding followed by Income Fund of America. I'm now 70+ years in age and have owned Franklin Income Fund since my teenage years. It's done me right!
I was able to navigate around Barron's paywall. Here is how. I Googled the article title and found it a featured article in MarketWatch. Then to read I had to open it in a incognito tab.