@Simon ah yes forgot about that.... excellent suggestion. I'll also email him. Another fund thats looking great.in risk adjusted terms over the last 7 years is FAMEX. David wrote up an analysis of them several.years ago. I was going to see if he could update it.

I'm thinking as the market currents change so will the fund's sector orientation. TGUNX reminds me of a fund that I was invested in a few years back ... Ivy Asset Strategy, WASAX. When it was a relative small and nimble fund it was able to followed a sector rotation and positioning strategy in short order; but, as it grew in size it became more difficult for it to position and then reposition. Some say it's repositioning one day lead to the flash crash. With this, I sold the fund since it no doubt was left to modify its investment strategy.
I have linked below a Morningstar article that covers the flash crash and WASAX in more detail.
https://www.morningstar.com/articles/356552/our-take-on-ivy-asset-strategys-flash-crash-fallout
Then there was Marketfield (MFLDX). While it was small it indeed was an exciting fund to be invested in before Mainstay bought it. Assets continued to grow and the fund became bloated and inefficient. Old_Skeet then sold his shares as the fund flamed out as Mainstay would not close the fund to new investors.
Below is a link that covers MFLDX's flame out.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/what-happend-with-alts-flame-out-mainstay-marketfield-1473949171
Perhaps, the managers of TGUNX will govern with better wisdom than the managers of WASAX and MFLDX did.
No doubt ... time will tell.

Since you mentioned WATFX, have you looked at WBND? Same management team. Seems to fall somewhere between WATFX and WACPX. Duration closer to WATFX (around 6 years), portfolio sector distribution closer to WATFX (½ MBS, ¼ IG), but with the flexibility of WACPX (per prospectuses) and similar 10% foreign currency exposure. All three have about the same ER.
WATFX is NTF with a $100 min at Schwab. WBND is NTF at many brokerages these days (lots of places giving away stock/ETF trades), though there's still a small "SEC fee" on sales and a bid/ask spread.
Side note: M* analysts (humans) rate the people and the process for both the OEFs as positive. M*'s AI system rates people and process as negative for WBND, even though it's the same people and as near as I can tell a similar process.

PIMIX lost its mojo since early 2018. In 2019 PIMIX managers continue to make fatal mistakes which put its performance in the bottom 10% for YTD until several weeks ago. The managers finally got it right (about rising rates) but it still ranks in the bottom 20%. I think its best days are over, PIMIX may still be an above-average fund
but not in the top 10%. PIMIX was my biggest % fund for years (40-50% and more) and the easiest fund to hold. In the last year I have been using JMSIX,EIXIX and IOFIX instead.

FYI: We are always on the lookout for the exceptional on WEALTHTRACK. It’s not easy to find among actively managed mutual fund managers. Only 23% of actively managed funds in all major categories, including stocks, bonds, and real estate outperformed their passive index fund rivals over the last ten years. And only about 8% of U.S. large-cap funds outperformed passive, the smallest margin among all active fund categories winners. No wonder that active U.S. stock funds are experiencing substantial outflows and passive stock funds are gaining assets. In a historic shift, passive assets in U.S. equity funds recently surpassed those in actively managed ones for the first time ever.
This week’s guests are bucking all of those trends. They are active managers in primarily large-cap U.S. stocks. They have been beating the market and peers by substantial margins over the last decade and they are attracting more assets.
Joining us for a rare interview is Chuck Akre and John Neff of Akre Capital Management
Regards,
Ted
https://wealthtrack.com/finding-compounding-machines-with-the-great-investor-chuck-akre-his-gen-x-co-manager-john-neff/
M* Snapshot: AKREX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/akrex/quote
Lipper Snapshot AKREX:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/akrex
AKREX Is Unranked In The (LCG) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/large-growth/akre-focus-fd/akrex

I remain a Meb fan. He's helped shape the ETF landscape these past 10 years. His seminal paper on trend following, entitled A Quantitative Approach to Tactical Asset Allocation, remains the most downloaded paper on SSRN. His straight-forward books, including The Ivy Portfolio. His podcast, which now exceeds 100 episodes, with some spectacular guests are great. We started following him on MFO with Existential Pleasures of Engineering Beta, when he launched his first Cambria ETFs. He invests in his own strategies. But to one of David's points, the firm now has 11 ETFs and several so far have struggled to beat their category peers, which puts him in some good company. I believe he also considers himself as much a part of the 4th estate as he does a money manager. Maybe that, if there is a conflict there, is part of what David picked-up on in a setting like AAII.

“I again would argue that investors need to review their allocations and comfort zones with those allocations, especially as to their ability to replenish their assets in the event of a permanent capital loss. Things that were five or ten years ago are often no longer what they seem ...
“First, don’t be afraid to hold more cash than you usually would. Secondly, if you are going to be invested in equities, try and make sure that they and your other assets are as uncorrelated to the general markets as possible. Look for things that are unloved ... And try to protect yourself from asset managers who are talking their own book.”
I may have altered Ed’s emphasis a bit here through my edit. But he strikes me, as usual, as being very prescient. Than again, after a record setting 10-year romp, how many are listening?

@David_Snowball: Thanks for your comments, which do help clarify the situation at Homestead. I did not realize what an important advance rural electrification represented to our country until I read Robert Caro's biography, "The Years of Lyndon Johnson." Caro, aided by his wife Ina, thoroughly researched daily life in Texas in their effort to understand LBJ's contribution in bringing electricity to the Hill Country. So, kudos to Homestead.
Another small MF company whose story is laudatory is Bridgeway. They contribute well beyond the norm to their community. Their investment results, unfortunately, have not always been stellar.

The Bottom Line pieces are distinctly collaborative efforts. Mark Gill says they've been thinking about storyline "X" and asks if I could suggest, say, 10 funds that fit their parameters. Usually the parameters are perfectly sensible, so usually I suggest 10-20 funds - with snippets of commentary - that might be credible. Mark then works with their editors and reader panels to draft a story that meets their incredibly restrictive style guide. I get the draft from his editor with a "let us know if this works for you." I tweak, sometimes suggest caveats, but mostly respect their judgments because mostly they're respected mine.
That sometimes translates to a situation where the top five funds in my mind aren't the five best suited to the needs of their readers, though three of them might be and the other two were in the discussion.
On Homestead, I do like organizations (RE in this case) with a mission. There was a generational change in leadership six years ago with Prabha Carpenter's arrival. Two of the three long-tenured managers - in Mr. Morris's case, he'd been managing for RE since the mid 1970s - departed after a short transition, then the last of them - Mark Ashton - retired in 2018. So, not quite a coup so much as a pretty orderly, low-key generational transition. She's been solid at Value. Small Company, not so much but I haven't had occasion to figure out why.
On LEXCX, it is a very much old-economy fund. That means it's not a green fund. The point that I usually make about it centers on the notion that you're often better off doing nothing than doing something. The Corporate 100, with a 23% turnover and sort of twitchy rules about auto-selling, is a quasi-index which hasn't quite sparkled.
For what that's worth,
David

Hi, ff!
Sorry, but I left after about 25 minutes. At that point, the focus of the talk still wasn't clear. I think, based on the teaser, that he was going to endorse investing in the EMs but that hadn't yet been mentioned. My departure was mostly occasioned by matters of style.
The one argument he made appeared to be that asset allocation is irrelevant, only expenses matter. He attempted to substantiate that with a reference to a series of "guru" portfolios that he constructed and modeled over (I believe) a quarter century. Before expenses, differences in returns were negligible (I believe he said 2%) and after imposing a uniform 1.25% expense ratio on the portfolios, the differences collapsed to nothing.
I hedge with "I believe" because this wasn't an argument being carefully laid out, it appeared to be a sort of fly-by of a talk he'd given in Las Vegas. Because I'm not a member of AAII, I don't have the ability to download conference presentations. Sorry.
I found the method suspect (why 1.25% on Buffett's rec to buy the S&P500 index or on the Permanent Portfolio, which charges 0.88?) and the conclusions unpersuasive (since they didn't, for example, take into account risk which influences an investor's willingness to hold on to portfolio). A real-world test of this claim is available by looking at the long-term performance of a family's target date funds, which differ only by asset allocation. In the case, for example, of the Wells Fargo funds, the most long-dated fund has returned 7.5% APR for 25 years and the most short-dated one has return 4.6%. On an initial investment of $10,000, that's the difference between a $30,000 portfolio and a $60,000 portfolio.
The longest-dated fund has also had a 50% max drawdown against 10% for the shortest-dated one.
I have no opinion about the Cambria ETFs themselves, since I haven't had occasion to study them closely though I believe Charles has. In broad terms, there are twelve with a 13th in registration. Eight of the 12 have trailed their Lipper peers on a total return basis since inception, four have led them. Six have trailed by more than a percentage point a year, one has led by more than a percentage point a year. Eight of 11 rated funds have MFO ratings in one of the bottom two tiers, one has a rating in the top tier and one is too new to be rated. Expenses range from 0.34 (GAA) - 1.23% (CCOR).
David

I was interested to see David endorse Homestead Value, or more specifically the firm behind the fund. HOLVX seems to be doing fine at this point, having survived a total management changeover in 2017. At that time, Mark Ashton and his team all stepped down from that fund and also from another former good fund, HSCSX. The small company fund had shot the lights out up until the changes. Both the value fund and the SC fund declared massive distributions for two years, as is often the case when new managers take over and start selling. I would tread cautiously given the disastrous (-26%) 2018 that HSCSX posted under new managers Prabha Carpenter and James Polk, as they are the two running the value fund also. I know Homestead because I used to own HSCSX and now own Homestead Growth, a fine find that is managed by T. Rowe Price.

Although I have never owned LEXCX I have owned, in the past, a fund which is the modern day version of LEXCX. It is IACLX (Corporate Leaders 100). It holds and equally weights the top S&P 100 companies and has a value approach as it rebalances quarterly. And, over the past five years IACLX has out performed LEXCX.
In reducing the number of funds that I owned, several years back, I discarded IACLX. However, I did keep it in my son's (age 33) Roth account which I have oversight over. Although it has not been one of his top producers it is one of his steady Eddie equity funds and carries three stars from M*. It's ten year average total return is better than ten percent which, in gereral and on average, are what stocks are suppose to do.

Agree with @MikeM (assuming he means “Better safe than sorry” here).
You don’t know until it’s you out of your life’s work with ongoing expenses and at the mercy of what we collectively term “the markets”. Guess wrong and you might find yourself out looking for a job on your 95th birthday.
I’’m atypical in that I have a DB pension. Wish everybody did. So with that I went 6-7 years into retirement without having to touch the IRA. If you can do that, it’s a great way to build up that nest egg. But 4% yearly? I’ve been able to take a bit more than that over the past 10-12 years and not really “ding” the balance. In fact it’s grown. But I’ve been lucky. Most years I pull 5-7% out. But a couple years, for new car purchases, it’s been a bit higher than 7%.
I doubt the linked OP article even addresses the traditional vs Roth issue. If you’re pulling $$ from a Roth IRA, it’s quite likely that $10 withdrawn from that Roth will buy you as much as $12-$15 pulled from a traditional IRA would (after taxes are accounted for). So, with a Roth, you need to pull out a significantly smaller percentage to maintain the same lifestyle.
The markets are a real wild card. I’d be loath to try and draw too many conclusions from the past 10 or even 20 years. That’s too short of time. History has a much longer memory. Final comment - It seems as if the bond market is hooked on “downers” today while the equity markets are doing steroids. One wonders how long that dichotomy can persist.

A lot of optimism in this collection of reports. The tricky question is, is this one of those Christmas rally years? I'm thinking so, but I tend to be wrong 50% of the time, same as a flip of the coin. I may play the game this year.

"They know best." And they don't care how long it takes to fix things.
They're taking features from Premium and making them part of more expensive institutional packages, IIRC. And the site redesign is catering toward (allegedly) a younger crowd ... their badge-worthy forum, which I quit after many years this summer, certainly is - but not getting much traction.

This sounds like a rhetorical question, but it's not. I would truly like to know:
How can the people running the Morningstar website be so stupid? They can read. They have had plenty of honest feedback from their users. What are they doing? They could easily fix it. What is going on?

Hi Catch,
Thanks for the info. Since I'm slowly going into energy, this post is of importance. Have heard from several reads they expect oil to rise in 2 to 3 years.....due to lack of investment by companies because of price. And we all know how oil prices fluctuate over time. Thanks, bro.
God bless
the Pudd
p.s.
A few years back when oil crashed and fracking went bust for a while, there was a cat dealer whose place was overrun with equipment for months because of fracking from upstate PA. Have started to see it again.
......also......
Ted, go to bed!

This topic could affect some of your holdings that are more focused in this sector.
Frackers scrap field equipment
Real estate prices and development went wacko several years ago when the Bakken fields were put into production. I've not checked prices for years, but those first in and first out made some serious cash. This area may not be affected by fracking downturn. Oklahoma and Texas, perhaps more so. Williston, ND prices still look pricey to me.
Williston ND real estate Zillow

Thanks Ted. The third British general election in four years (!!!) is now underway. I think the Conservatives will win again, but they may have to form an alliance with Nigel Farage's Brexit Party to gain overall control and finally push through Brexit. The Labour Party's policies of mass renationalization and tax increases for the middle classes are probably unpalitable to a great many voters.
Following the Fed cut yesterday a couple of my low duration bond funds dropped a tick or two, and a couple rose a tick (including DLSNX). My ultrashort funds (TRBUX, SEMRX) were on best behavior as always and slept through it all.

Retirement accounts are prevented from buying or exchanging into tax-free mutual funds through the electronic channels.

Wow, that seems very strange to me that a fund company would decide what is acceptable in your portfolio. I don't believe Schwab does that. I've owned a municipal bond ETF for the last couple years, PZA, in my IRA with pretty good results in total return and a nice 4.7% yield. I could be fooling myself but I think of it as lower risk than say corporate bonds.

I was a paid M* user for years but quit 2 years ago given the neverending site woes, bad data, redesign, etc.
I've found much of the data points I need for stock or fund analysis are on SeekingAlpha, for free, and in a much more usable format. And of course, MFO Premium is a rock-solid resource, too!