Hi @Hank, in contrast to what you found on over-capacity for self storage REITs, I have a friend at work that she and her husband have been building self storage units as a side business and they can't keep up with demand. They have the units rented even before they are built. They got into the business maybe 10 years ago with another person but have since bought him out. She wishes they could afford to expand but they don't want to take on to much debt. I guess multiple units can cost $100's of thousands to build.
In any case, what was interesting to hear was that many of their clients are small business owners, construction, trades, sales people who work from their homes but need a place to store material.

If you open and read this, there is an image of the guy that wrote this blog and he looks like he may have been about 15 years old when REITS crashed in 2007-2009, so I don't think he understands the pain REIT investors felt at that time. I don't know how he can make this summary statement below. If I look at the Vanguard ETF for REITS, VNQ, it lost 70%+ peak to trough during the great recession. Would that be considered a bond alternative with less risk for retirees?

REITs are a viable alternative to retirees and other income investors who desire greater income without having to take significantly more risk.

The above and other posts by MikeM are what I have been saying for years. If I want higher income I use funds like Multisector funds such as IOFIX and PIMIX. If you are looking for high income + a good total return, look no further than PCI,PDI and other Pimco CEFs.
My opinion is that PCI will have a better performance than stocks in the next 5 years and if you are a trader you can avoid the big losses too by using weekly MACD as a good indicator. See PCI (chart) and use it to buy PCI when weekly MACD is positive and sell when it's negative

Great find @Mark,
As folks in these (REIT) funds know, self-storage is often an important component (normally around 10-20% of holdings). The article you linked notes fierce competition, oversupply and cooling of demand in the self-storage market.
“In addition to our report on the homebuilding sector, we also published Self-Storage REITs: Storage Wars Wage On. Once a perennial top-performer in the REIT sector, developers and new operators have flocked to the sector in recent years, adding new supply at a furious rate, weakening fundamentals. 2019 was shaping up to be a strong year for the sputtering self-storage REIT sector, but 3Q19 earnings were a setback on the road to recovery. Competition remains fierce in an oversupplied market. Symptomatic of the ongoing storage wars, marketing spending jumped nearly 60% from last year for these REITs, pressuring same-store NOI growth to essentially zero.”
Got me to wondering if there’s some linkage (albeit a bit stretched) between this and the boomers now being 70+ and possibly ridding themselves of various RV vehicles? Personally, I rid myself of a boat recently after 40+ years of boat ownership and no longer rent a self storage unit for it. I’d imagine other types of RV owners also used these convenient storage options.
Here’s an article documenting a slowdown in RV sales:
The RV industry is slowing down after 10 years of growth https://www.curbed.com/2019/6/17/18682121/rv-campers-industry-economy-economic-impact-jobs-2018
The oldest post WW II boomers are now nearing 75. That generation (to which I and many here belong) has had profound impacts on virtually every economic sector over most of the last century including: education, auto and home sales, RV sales, stock and bond markets, brokerages, health care, insurance. The list goes on ...

@Old_Skeet ,
Thanks. That sounds like a perfectly sane and rational system. (I probably could have written that response for you. :))
A plan, such as you and I both adhere to, serves many purposes. Two of the most important IMHO are: (1) It instills self-discipline & structure upon what might otherwise devolve into a haphazard approach, (2) It provides a clear and easy to interpret picture of how one’s investments are structured and how well different components are performing. The second is useful in deciding how much can be safely withdrawn yearly, as well as when / how to rebalance.
Being a rather disorganized person, I’d be completely lost without a clearly written plan. The allocation model I’ve used for 20 years (with updating for age) must be a pretty good one - because anytime I’ve considered drastically altering it I’ve been drawn back to the existing plan. While many markets, IMHO, have appeared “dicey” to me for years now, I’d hate to have had everything sitting in “safe” money market instruments pulling 1-3% yearly over the past decade.
Regards
OH - The thread is about REITS. I’ve dabbled in the past in a REIT fund as one of the holdings in my “real assets” group (10% weighting). I’d prefer to buy them at depressed prices, as this asset has been through 2 or 3 nasty downtrends over the past 25 years that I’ve closely watched markets. But if you’re young and don’t mind the potential volatility they may be fine. Personally, I’ve vacated my small hold in one and moved on to some more depressed sectors.

Hi @Derf: Years back my family sold off farm land (piecemeal) and went from harvesting cash crops from the soil to havesting cash dividends from the stock market. Currently, the only property I own is my homestead and a scond home located on the coast of South Carolina. In a sense, I'm still farming but the harvest now comes from the capial markets.

@Simon makes an excellent point about how single years can skew figures. Regarding 2009, it would likely be more informative to include both 2008 and 2009 or neither. Volatile funds tended to crash harder in 2008 and surge higher in 2009 than other funds. These effects may have somewhat balanced themselves out.
Another year to watch out for with respect to this fund is 2019. YTD it is beating its category by 25%, even more than the 23% by which it bested its category in 2009. And because 2019 is the current year, this one year of superb performance skews not only the 10 year performance figure, but the five, three, and one year figures as well.
The growth of $10K to $101,253 (a total return of $91,253) is not the growth over 10 years, but the growth over nearly 11 years. Don't let M*'s new pages confuse you into thinking that they're presenting standardized figures.
The growth over the past ten years is shown on this M* chart. $10K grew to $58,483. This chart shows that FSELX left its peers in the dust, even excluding all but 18 days (and fewer trading days) of 2009.
The "new" M* performance page reports a 19.32% annualized 10 year rate of return as of Dec 13. That means that $10K grew to $10K x (1+ 19.32%) ^ 10 = $58,497. Give or take rounding, that's the same result as shown in the 10 year chart.
Here's the chart for the fund for the two years 2008 and 2009. It shows that FSELX crashed and burned relative to its peers, let alone the S&P 500, but it also recovered faster and higher than its peers and the S&P 500. All curves are U shaped, with this fund looking rather impressive, at least for those with strong stomachs.

Going....going....almost gone.
On the main "Quote" page of every fund covered by Morningstar is a chart showing the growth of $10,000 over the last 10 years (for funds that are 10 years or older). In 18 days the return figure for 2009 will disappear. For many funds, especially in the technology and growth sectors, this will make an enormous difference to their headline 10 year total return.
For example, FSELX returned an astonishing 85% in 2009. Yet in the decade since it has frequently lagged its category. Its standout performance in 2009 clearly contributed massively to its 10 year total return of almost $102,000.
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/fselx/quote
Personally, I'll be glad to see the figures for 2009 disappear. They have distorted the performance of many, if not most, mutual funds and ETFs. Hopefully, a more accurate picture will emerge from 2020 onward.
Wishing everyone here a very happy holiday season.

I have owned the Fidelity Real Estate Income Fund (FRINX) for about seven years with it being a member of my hybrid income sleeve. Thus far my total return in the fund has averaged a little better than 9% per year with an income yield of a litte better than 4%. With this, I've had some capital appreciation in this position during my seven year holding period as well as the production of income in the form of dividends and capital gain distributions pusing my income distribution yield upwards and north of 5%.
According to Xray this fund's asset allocation is listed at 7% cash, 30% US stocks, 1% foreign stocks, 38% bonds and 8% other (most likely convertibles and preferreds). I'm thinking that the referenced stocks are actually reits. As I write, according to M*, it is off its 52 week high by 1.42%.
In checking this fund at MFO it carries a MFO rating of 5 (best), a risk rating of 2 (conserative) and a bear market rating of 1 (best).
For me, this is a nice income generating fund and one that I plan to add to my position over time as I grow the income area of my portfolio.

If you open and read this, there is an image of the guy that wrote this blog and he looks like he may have been about 15 years old when REITS crashed in 2007-2009, so I don't think he understands the pain REIT investors felt at that time. I don't know how he can make this summary statement below. If I look at the Vanguard ETF for REITS, VNQ, it lost 70%+ peak to trough during the great recession. Would that be considered a bond alternative with less risk for retirees?

REITs are a viable alternative to retirees and other income investors who desire greater income without having to take significantly more risk.

" And we know what happened to the ACA"
I wonder. Every time I look at provisions of the ACA, I go, oh yeah, I'd forgotten about that. For example, the tax on insurers. No one knows what's going on with that:

The health insurance tax was in effect from 2014 through 2016. Congress approved a one-year moratorium for 2017, and the tax resumed in 2018 at a cost of about $14.3 billion. Congress suspended the tax once again in 2019. If not further delayed, it will be collected again beginning in 2020.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20190910.985809/full/
Regarding who owns munis: Munis were never great investments for much of the middle class. Most of the time, if you were below the 31% tax bracket, you'd have been better off investing in taxable bonds. This is reflected in the statistic that even 30 years ago (1989) fewer than 1 in 20 owned munis.
Rational middle class investors have been getting pushed further out of munis for a long time. Obama made the Bush tax cuts permanent for the middle and lower classes, making munis less attractive. Then the GOP moved even more middle class taxpayers into a 24% or below tax bracket (ordinary taxable income below $160K [single] / $321K [MFJ]).
One can't have it both ways - advocating lower middle class marginal rates and simultaneously bemoaning the fact that munis consequently become less attractive. So long as taxpayers in the highest brackets keep buying munis, states will continue to be able to borrow at lower rates and fund needed work on century-old infrastructure systems.

pipes can range from 15 to 100 years old depending on conditions, although some older northeastern cities operate with pipes that are 200 years old.

America's Aging Water Infrastructure

Point taken @msf. And we know what happened to the ACA. The following numbers are a bit dated (2013), but I think they’re still relatively valid today and serve to make my point:
“ A smaller fraction of Americans owns state and local government bonds today than 25 years ago (2.4% in 2013 vs. 4.6% in 1989), and that ownership is more heavily concentrated among the very rich (the top 0.5% of Americans by wealth held 42.0% of all municipal bonds in 2013 vs. 23.8% in 1989) ...” . https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2016/08/18/a-smaller-share-of-americans-owns-municipal-bonds-does-that-matter/
The substantial majority of hired-guns occupying Senate seats have no incentive to take away the tax break on munis - or remove the tax-free status of Roths, for that matter. Many would disown their own mother first. Some day, after enough jello hits the fan, the tune might change - but not in the foreseeable future.

An Ad for T. Rowe Price. Basically filling the page. Title may be misleading. While the funds may be appropriate for long term investing, they are not designed for those in retirement as title seems to suggest. (Examples: TRBCX, PRHSX).
The recommendation for their 2030 fund seems especially out of place, since it’s geared for someone 10 years from retirement. Doesn’t seem to fit with their long-term focus; but it isn’t designed for someone already in retirement either. They recommend PRWCX without noting it’s closed to new investors. One of their stated criteria is cost. Yet there are much lower cost providers than T. Rowe if that’s what you’re seeking.
A sham job by U.S. News .
@JohnN - Why did you think it imperative to bump this over to the Discussions+ section of the board? Are you normally accustomed to “discussing” matters with yourself? Kindly refrain from doing so here.

*Like*

An Ad for T. Rowe Price. Basically filling the page. Title may be misleading. While the funds may be appropriate for long term investing, they are not designed for those in retirement as title seems to suggest. (Examples: TRBCX, PRHSX).
The recommendation for their 2030 fund seems especially out of place, since it’s geared for someone 10 years from retirement. Doesn’t seem to fit with their long-term focus; but it isn’t designed for someone already in retirement either. They recommend PRWCX without noting it’s closed to new investors. One of their stated criteria is cost. Yet there are much lower cost providers than T. Rowe if that’s what you’re seeking.
A sham job by U.S. News .
@JohnN - Why did you think it imperative to bump this over to the Discussions+ section of the board? Are you normally accustomed to “discussing” matters with yourself? Kindly refrain from doing so here.

Hi @johnN.
John, I want you to know, as a member of the board, I appreciate your endevors to find related investing articles, posting them, thus keeping the board supplied with good reading material.
I'm not sure what has happen to @Ted and the reason for his unannounced absence. However, he remains in my thoughts, often. A good number on the board may remember Ted has been dealing with some illness over the past few years.
Please keep him in your thoughts. And, if you are the praying type ... Prey for him!
Old_Skeet

I have a question, and maybe @msf you know the answer, but I've always heard muni bonds are better suited for a taxable account. My question is, doesn't a mutual fund get tax exemption returns for holding muni's also? And in turn those mutual funds held in a tax-deferred account get the tax exempt return passed on to them, us?
I've held a muni ETF for a couple years now in my IRA, PZA. I've often wondered if the tax exemption is part of total return.

There’s a huge risk in the room with muni bonds: at any moment Congress or the president could decide to make their interest taxable. There has been talk about this in the past few years. I used to think muni bond income would be a significant part of my income in my dotage, but not anymore

I also have had positions in brokerages with less than the required minimum amount for years with no notice; however, I have had some MF positions with less than the required minimum amount when they eventually caught up with me after several years and forced me to liquidate my position or buy more.
Unfortunately, it is hard to buy more shares when the fund is hard closed or you transfer existing position from one brokerage to a new brokerage that does not have an agreement on file to purchase more shares in that particular fund.

I have just over 1 share of SIGIX in two different accounts at Vanguard. It has been this way for a number of years now.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ladder-select-bond-fund-receives-211500859.html
Ladder Select Bond Fund Receives ‘4 Stars’ From Morningstar Upon 3 Year Anniversary
Business WireDecember 5, 2019, 3:15 PM CST
The Ladder Select Bond Fund (Institutional Class: LSBIX) Receives '4 Stars' Overall from Morningstar®, out of 491 Funds, respectively, in the US Fund Short-Term Bond Category, based on 3-years of historical risk-adjusted returns as of 10/31/2019.

A milk man delivered milk next door to me until the woman, age 93, died a couple of years ago. So there was milk delivery still available. We still have a postman that puts a pack across his back and walks door to door to house mounted mail boxes. The paper still delivers but I haven't seen any being delivered around me.