FYI: he Thornburg Investment Income Builder fund was launched in late 2002 with a straightforward premise. “We believed that we were going to have an attractive dividend and grow it over time,” says Brian McMahon, one of the fund’s three co-managers, who took part in the launch.
The $14 billion fund (ticker: TIBAX) has been able to stick to that goal by adjusting its allocation to stocks and bonds, in line with the dramatically shifting market conditions over the past 16 years. The fund has grown its dividend at an annual clip of about 4.5%, and added capital appreciation of 3.5% per annum on top of that. The portfolio’s recent trailing 12-month yield was 4.4%.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.barrons.com/articles/an-income-funds-flexible-strategy-pays-dividends-51545390000?refsec=income-investing
M* Snapshot TIBAX:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/TIBAX/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot TIBAX:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/tibax
TIBAX Ranks #11 In The (WA) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/world-allocation/thornburg-investment-income-builder-fund/tibax

@Ted: Thanks for posting the article on Franklin Income Fund. It was nice to read about one of my holdings once again. At 70+ years in age myself the fund has been one of my holdings since my teenage years. It has also grown through the years to become one of my larger holdings.

FYI: You might expect a 70-year-old mutual fund with $74 billion in assets to be set in its ways.
But the Franklin Income Fund’s holdings have gone through big changes in recent years. Ed Perks, the fund’s lead manager, described those shifts as well as the uncertain investing landscape of 2018 and what he sees ahead.
The Franklin Income Fund FKINX, -0.93% FRIAX, -0.94% was launched in August 1948. The fund’s objective is to maximize income while also seeking opportunities for capital growth, with a diversified, actively managed portfolio of stocks, bonds and convertible securities.
In an interview on Dec. 18, Perks said the fund was about evenly allocated between fixed-income and equity investments. At the beginning of 2018 the allocation was about 40% fixed income and 60% equities. Perks said that this year the fund’s management team has “softened its overall investment posture,” in order to “reduce total expected portfolio risk going forward.”
Regards,
Ted
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/there-will-be-plenty-of-opportunity-for-investors-in-2019-says-manager-of-74-billion-franklin-income-fund-2018-12-21/print
M* Snapshot FKINX:
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/performance-return.action?t=FKINX&region=usa&culture=en_US
Lipper Snapshot FKINX:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/fkinx
FKINX Is Rank #21 In The (30%-50%-E) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/allocation-30-to-50-equity/franklin-income-fund/fkinx

Howdy @expatsp
We've not had PDI or PCI in our holdings; but took a curious look from a technical angle of this complex holding. The recent price action through Thursday showed continued strong downward pricing; and apparently final distributions have already taken place for the year on Dec. 12 and/or 14.
We look at charts like this short term view for watching the moving average lines and which directions they are traveling. In particular the 50 day and its current trend. I've looked at 20 day too; for something we may have an interest in buy or sell.
PDI, 6 months, daily pricing chart
This 5 year is more of an overview of the longer term trend, just to look, eh?
PDI, 5 years, daily pricing chart
NOTE: The 5 year chart pricing suggests there is some correlation to the trend of U.S. equity; as with the 2015-16 period of down and sideways for equity.
As to "income" oriented investments, as with this product; in spite of the hard equity crashes taking place now, even the U.S. treasury issues can not hold a rally into safety assets. I would not expect PCI to benefit from any flight to quality/safety.
I can only offer the chart actions overviews above; for my 2 cents worth.
Take care,
Catch

I chose 4 funds I'm a bit familiar with just for the heck of graph city going back to May, 2011 and to look at the lines as to what anyone may consider a fair or not so fair price from those days, through today.
>>>So, the chart funds.....well, Fido health is a decent long time, fairly broad based fund. Fido balanced, well within the high end of returns for similar funds. Fido Growth has a decent long term record and represents a broad group of growth stuff. ITOT is a kinda SP500 with a dash of mid and sm cap U.S.
>>>The chart starts with May, 2011 when Europe was still having monetary fits and the soon to come downgrade of U.S. gov't issued debt put a bang in the equity markets for a spell. Moving along, part of the 2015 and 2016 period were sideways, as reflected in the charting. And on to now.........
A semi random mix of equity types and bonds with FBALX, all U.S. directed. Non-U.S. is a different critter not covered here.
Go ahead, its okay; decide for yourself. Any of these in the chart undervalued since 6 years or so ago? Me? I'm just a profit pig and attempt to buy as low as I think I "see" and sell with what seems a reasonable profit.
I'll leave the link open for viewing the tickers.
https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?FSPHX,FBALX,FDGRX,ITOT&n=1922&O=011000
OK........pillow time here.....good night.

Mairs & Power past 7 years through November ...

Dollar wise or % wise ? @ hank: Derf

I guess that would be % - wise Derf. Most anything with risk exposure will fall in both dollar terms and percentage terms during a bad market. At the same time, cash and bonds will normally increase as a percentage of your assets. At last look, my normal 38-42% allocation to equity weighted funds (mostly balanced funds) had slipped from 39.5% mid-summer to 38.5%.
Haven’t checked recently because of all the distributions - and being otherwise occupied. Suspect that when the dust settles (distribution season ends) the equity loaded portion will come in a bit under 38%. That’s where my pre-sets would mandate rebalancing back to 40%. Should that portion fail to fall below 38% no rebalance would occur. Other portfolio areas with risk exposure (in particular real-assets) have also experienced losses the past couple months and might be due for a rebalance.
My thinking for a couple years has been that equity valuations had “over-reached” and couldn’t be sustained at those levels. IMHO a steady measured approach (neither rushing in nor rushing out) is a good way to go. I’m off between 3 and 4% YTD. If you’re willing to expose your money to the markets in pursuit of better long-term returns (and inflation protection), that’s a very small loss ... “Ay, ay, a scratch, a scratch.”

Part II of the interview is coming, and I cannot wait. Nevertheless I tend to more agree with Matt McClennan's view after following him for a number of years. His thoughtful approach is particularly appealing particularly in today environment -quite the opposite to Cliff Asness (AQR funds).

Well worthwhile to hear from Ed Hyman and Matt McLennan. Hyman is more optimistic and does not see recession until several years from now. Also he likes the newer tech stocks that create new markets. As usual McLennan discussed how he positions his portfolio (defensively) in today environment,

@AndyJ, Just watch Hyman and McLennan interview - very informative. Ed Hyman likes new technology stock that open up new markets and he thinks recession is at least 3 years away. Matt McLennan takes a defensive approach in his portfolio.

I am puzzled by the article since it got into detail about inversion between 2 and 5 years (which I believe recently happened) but I thought the prediction of recession was an inversion for the two and 10 year bonds. It also suggested you could not use to market time while indicating that it might bea good idea to sell one year after the inversion.(one year result better than 3 year)
Maybe someone wiser than I can explain.

To each one's own. Portfolio visualizer says that these funds have an R² ranging from 76% (DRIOX and GPIIX) to 90% (GPIIX and PRIDX) based on monthly returns. With DRIOX at least, that's not an insignificant degree of differentiation. So I see your point. For me, I'm content waiting for the funds to even out in the long run.
Not really being familiar with Driehaus, I did a little research. Momentum shop. Not my cup of tea - I've invested in a few and found they run hot and cold. Which goes toward explaining their poorer correlation with other funds investing in the same space.
DRIOX has had turnover above 300% (I only looked back five years). While Dick Strong still put that to shame, that turnover rate is still way up there. M* shows, not surprisingly, that this is not a tax efficient fund. So I'd be inclined to use it, if at all, in tax sheltered accounts.
There are various strategies that work. You've obviously found one that works for you. I'm at a point where I'm trying to keep my main funds (i.e. ones other than placeholders) down to a reasonable number, say 20 or so. (Like everything else, "reasonable" is in the eye of the beholder.)

Some years ago, DRIOX and FKSCX (both of which were closed due to incoming monies) were performing well while PRIDX was somewhat as well as the DRIOX and FKSCX. Over the last couple of years or so (until early 2018 when the international market started to sputter) PRIDX was performing well while DRIOX and FKSCX started to perform mediocre. My point is that while some faltered, my others investments picked up the slack. I didn't invest all my money in one particular fund.
I also owned ARTJX which did well in the very beginning when it was first offered in 2002 with AUM nearing $1B at its peak; however, over the last several years, ARTJX started to perform mediocre. I started to look at other options; hence, PRIDX, DRIOX, and GPIIX. I recently sold my ARTJX due to the fund change as well as the large CG paid. We all know the recent change involving ARTJX.

Thanks for the thoughts.
I agree (with slick) that it usually takes some time for a new manager to put his own imprint on a fund. Not infrequently the old fund does at least as well as the new fund even after that. A too easy example is PIMCO/Bill Gross. Sometimes, both funds do well (TCW/Gundlach). Wait and see sounds reasonable.
It looks like DRIOX is open (though it is closed at some brokerages, e.g. Vanguard). It's TF at Schwab and Fidelity, and NTF at Merrill Edge. A quick glance shows performance, asset mix (small, growth oriented; fair smattering of EM), and cost 1.23% all adding up to a reasonable candidate. But what is going on with 143% turnover? I haven't looked closely into this yet. The other funds you (shadow) have are closer to 25% turnover.
I do have access to the other two funds (maintaining a small toehold for just such a use), so that's not a concern for me. Though I checked with T. Rowe Price and they will not move a holding in kind from an IRA to a taxable account. So if one is planning to gain access that way, be forewarned.
Out of curiosity, what's your thinking in holding a few different funds in the same space? Personally, I find that if there are two (I try to keep it down to that number) or three that I really can't decide between, I'll put money into all of them. After a few years, either I feel more comfortable with one of them and stick with that one, or still don't find much difference. In that case, I'll say what the heck and just pick one since the choice among them doesn't seem to make a difference.

@msf: I have held OSMAX for about 5 years, and am watching both ARTJX and OSMAX to see when to switch over to Artisan, likely after first of year. It usually takes a while for the new portfolios to appear. Following Kanovich, as I like what he did at Oppenheimer. They are held in tax deferred accounts, so not concerned over capital gains as each fund sells some of portfolio in favor of their own picks.

A couple of years ago, OSMAX raised its fees and the fund was closed. Since then, its manager (and analysts) left suddenly. Here's the thread on the former:
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/comment/75482
The fund continues to perform admirably, and the replacement manager is excellent. Nevertheless, he is 70, there's no succession plan, and there's still that matter of fees on what is for the space, a jumbo fund. With that in mind, I came up with some alternatives, and thought I'd just toss them out for comments.
Interestingly, a couple of Fidelity funds popped up, and I'm especially curious what people think about them. The management seems stable (Fidelity seems to be improving here).
GISOX (Grandeur Peak seems to be a favorite at MFO), MIDAX (I mentioned in that older post), PRIDX (another seeming favorite here, though closed to new investors), QUSIX (a value fund, unlike the others), and the two Fidelity funds FISMX (blend) and FSCOX (growth). Finally, there is ARTJX, which is where OSMAX's manager Kanovich landed, along with even higher fees.

@john
I didn't find where the author stated that these 3 reits were a buy in case of a market crash. Where does this statement arrive from ???
ADD: nice to view that you changed the subject line to remove the "market crash" aspect (Dec., 2011).
The 3 stocks noted in article, 20 year cycle. The returns are impressive since the market melt, but also have quite the up/down cycle, for the faint of investment hearted. I'll have to review further, these indicated % returns. https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?AIV,EPR,WELL&p=6&O=011000
Below link is for about 2.5 years, being Nov., 2007 - March, 2011 (which allows for a 2 year period after the market bottom). This chart suggests these are not appropriate holds for a down market, IMHO, yes???
https://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?AIV,EPR,WELL&l=2221&r=3062&O=011000

M* (quote page) shows that this bond matures 2/15/2025, so in all likelihood it is CUSIP 645913BD5. As you said, a zero.
According to EMMA, it is currently trading at a YTW of about 4.2% (priced about 77 where 100 is par). While the underlying bond is rated BBB+, its insurance wrapper raises it to somewhere between A and AA (depending on the rating agency).
That seems like a pretty reasonable yield on a six year taxable bond of that quality. (Fidelity shows AA corporates maturing in five years to be yielding around 4%.). Otherwise I'd be wondering what a muni bond is doing in a taxable bond fund. 30% of the fund is in munis (even though M* doesn't show munis among the fund's top sectors).

SPRXX at Fidelity has a 7 day SEC yield of 2.09% and a $0 minimum.
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/summary/31617H201
You may be able to buy Vanguard MMFs at Vanguard and then transfer the shares in kind to Fidelity. At Fidelity, there is no commission to sell the shares. Not a good day-to-day strategy, but could work for holding cash.
I think I did something like this many years ago, well before Vanguard forced people into brokerage accounts. So I don't know whether such a transfer from Vanguard would even be free now.
You might also look at Firstrade accounts. They currently charge no transaction fee on any mutual fund they carry. You can't look up MMFs there by ticker, but if you go to their fund research page and select a fund family, you can find money market funds that are open at Firstrade. I found that VMMXX is open. Its current (Dec 7) SEC yield is 2.33% ($3K min at Vanguard; don't know about Firstrade's min for the fund.)
https://investor.vanguard.com/mutual-funds/profile/VMMXX
https://www.firstrade.com/content/en-us/researchtools/mutualfund
Here's Barron's list of top yielding MMFs (I don't know why Vanguard doesn't show up). The funds listed tend to be high min share classes, but there are usually lower min shares, albeit with somewhat lower yields.
http://barrons.wsj.net/public/page/9_0204-trmfy.html

I'm 2 months short of 4 years since I got into PRSNX. I got nothing but love for that fund. It's held up nicely in terms of share value. TRP tells me I'm down YTD by just a quarter percent. That's -.25%. I've added a big bunch to it a couple of months ago. INCOME for the duration: $2,126.68. SHARE VALUE has sunk by a mere -$187.73. Actual, hard-dollar figures. The TRP performance number, tailored to my own account, tells me that over the past THREE (3) years, it's up +4.16%. No complaints.