Again, about keeping DODGX and M* accountable for a clear standard.
The webpage of D&C states (as of June 30), 10 year returns 5.89% - compared with S&P 7.18%. Let's please not search for excuses for underperformance. Without discussing the yearly tax cost of 0.98%.
In relation to the fund performance during the past 5-years, more volatile funds that missed in the downside in 2007-2008, typically have better returns in the more recent period. For this reason I tend not to rely on 5-year returns.
What is different about DODGX (in relation to other outstanding funds!) is that its returns, after the 07-08 underperformance, were not adequate for the fund to catch up with the S&P.

FYI: Dennis Gartman is the man behind The Gartman Letter, a daily newsletter discussing global capital markets. For almost 30 years, The Gartman Letter has tackled the political, economic and social trends shaping the world's markets. ETF.com recently caught up with Gartman to discuss the latest developments in the financial markets.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/gartmans-favorite-trades-right-now?nopaging=1

@davidmoran, For sure we have different point of view and personal experience. I used to invested with D&C for many years, most notably the Stock and International funds. The team approach in my opinion failed in risk management and time it took to full recover was longer than their peers. In addition, the management never owed up to mistakes made either in interviews or shareholder reports.

This large cap value fund outpaced the S&P 500 Value Index over the last 10 years (5.78% annualized vs. 5.01%) as well as over the past fifteen years (9.56% vs. 8.51%), 5 years (16.72% vs. 14.01%), 3 years (8.83% vs. 7.98%) and 1 year (25.45% vs. 13.37%). All data as of 7/17/17, per M*.
If you don't want a value fund, that's fine. Invest in a blend or growth fund. But if you are looking for a large cap value fund, what do you feel is a better one than DODGX?
If one finds indexing attractive, one might consider VSPVX ( your index company of preference appears to be Standard and Poors)? Or perhaps VRVIX (M* seems to like comparing DODGX against the Russell 1000 Value index). Note that these both have had returns falling short of DODGX. (FWIW, DODGX has better 5 year performance than any 5* LCV fund as rated by M*, so its performance does come at the expense of some extra risk - hence its lower 4* rating).
Lipper rates DODGX a 5 as a large cap value fund for consistent return and for total return. The fund drops to 4 on consistent return, which, like the M* rating, suggests that the fund is not the very best LCV fund around for short term investing.

I am trying to understand how a fund can be considered outstanding when for the last 10 years it could not keep pace with the S&P, for the last 15 years was ahead of the index by only 0.46%, with volatility higher than the benchmark - for most of the period. If this is considered 'enviable long-term results", then indexing is indeed attractive.

+1

I am trying to understand how a fund can be considered outstanding when for the last 10 years it could not keep pace with the S&P, for the last 15 years was ahead of the index by only 0.46%, with volatility higher then the benchmark - for most of the period.
If this is considered 'enviable long-term results", then indexing is indeed attractive.

Thanks LLJB,
Wasn't always the case, but in the past - maybe 20 years - they did come out with a way to own bullion thru an ETF.
BTW - You'll also need to come up with 10% worth of Swiss francs, some highly aggressive growth stocks, some real estate and some natural resource stocks to go with those other holdings. Than you'll need to rebalance once a year buying/selling among those assets - perhaps more often when one segment runs hot or cold. It can all be accomplished of course.
For simplicity, I'll sit on my chunk and see what happens. Converted to a Roth in January 2016. Believe that was near its recent bottom. Nice bounce since then. Am certainly not predicting success for this fund going foreward (and I don't give investment advice). But for diversification purposes I'm willing to hold both winners and laggards. There are many here who disagree with that "mix it up" approach and concentrate only on winners. I'd wish them "investing success" - except that they don't need any best wishes. They're excellent investors in their own right.
Thanks again for the informative posts & the reply.

I discovered Mr. Foster from Matthews Asia Growth & Income fund and followed him through the Seafarer Oversea Growth & Income fund. He is one of rare manager who I like to invest with many years to come as I did with Micheal Price (before he sold his company to Franklin and retired). It is when the EM index lost over 60% in 2007 while MAPIX lost half of that and recovered much quicker. Having long term investment horizon is key to keep everything in the proper perspective.

@LLJB - No quarrel with your overall take. One question - Do those gold or precious metals ETFs you're citing for comparison invest directly in bullion (per PRPFX) or in the miners? I honestly don't know enough about ETFs to say. However, with a toe-hold in PRPFX, I'm quite certain they hold their bullion directly per their benchmark (and also own some mining stocks). It could be that only @rono is qualified to address this authoritatively. But I do know there is a big difference between holding bullion and owning miners.
If those ETFs are investing in mining companys, it would (partially) explain the outperformance you note - since equities have generally been in a bull market for as long as some of the members here have been alive (with a couple dramatic corrections along the way) and would have bolstered the miners. That said, I've no doubt you'd be better off owning the assets of PRPFX directly and avoiding those outrageous fees.
Thanks to @BobC for noting the dramatic move in AUM away from PRPFX. The move into that fund was, I believe, nearly equally dramatic as gold soared from near $300 an ounce over the decade beginning around 2000. Highlights the performance chasing that goes on. I'll refer to it as "indirect performance chasing" in this and many instances. While a lot of investors wouldn't dream of buying gold or gold shares, they'll chase an allocation fund or a fund like PRPFX anyway - perhaps oblivious to how much of the glowing performance is/was related to its p/m holdings. Human nature I guess.
PS - DavidS made essentially the same argument you're making here re PRPFX ... umm, maybe 6 or 7 years ago (memory like an elephant here - when it works) :)

FYI: Jamie Dimon’s (CEO of JPM) definition of a financial crisis is “something that happens every five to seven years.” It’s been eight since the last recession. As you get old enough to observe cycles, as actual cycles, you begin to recognize the economic time you’re in is a point on a curved line and, sooner than you think, the direction of the line will change. Better or worse.
An asset bubble is a wave of optimism that lifts prices beyond levels warranted by fundamentals, ending in a crash. I promised myself that I’d be smarter the next time. “Next” meaning on the cusp of a pop or recession. So, how do you ID when we’ve entered the danger zone, and should you adjust your behavior / actions?
Regards,
Ted
https://www.l2inc.com/daily-insights/no-mercy-no-malice/every-seven-years

I have no reason to believe Foster has suddenly taken dumb pills. He has ably managed dollars for my clients and me for about 10 years, first at MAPIX and with SIGIX since he started that fund. I frankly do not care if the fund under-performs during an EM bull market. It is up about 12% year to-date. I'll gladly take that. The way bigger test for me is when EM is struggling, as they did in 2013, 2014, 2015, and even 2016 to some extent. In those years, SIGIX came through as I expected it would. If you bought SIGIX for outsized gains during EM bull markets, you bought the wrong fund. That is not how the fund is run. While I am sure Andy would like to be at the top this year, and that he is frustrated to be near the bottom, that does not bother me one bit.

Another way to play the "Innovators" Concept is with IWIRX , more than just Asia, it is global and beats MATFX in 1, 3, 5 10 and 15 years. It has not done as well as MATFX ytd, but worth looking at if you like the Innovators concept. I own it and plan on keeping it for the long haul, recently added to it. There is an interview with David Snowball a few years ago on MFO.
http://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2014/08/guinness-atkinson-global-innovators-iwirx-august-2014/

It looks like they all did only that some did it better than the others. The only trouble I have is the usual and customary past performance is ..... blah-blah.

Yeah - Me too. If humans lived to be 300 and spent 100 years in retirement these kinds of simulations would be a lot easier. Market cycles are more predictable over 100 years.
Just for fun, from January, 1992:
Dow - around 3000.
NASDAQ - around 600
10-year Treasury - around 7%
Gold - around $350
Never considered PRPFX an income fund. Not sure why it was included. If anything, it's a "wild card" - liable to do almost anything over 25 years - with the potential to hold up better during periods of unusual financial stress due to investments in precious metals (25%) and Swiss Francs (10%).
Personally, I don't think in these terms (generating income in retirement). Probably because my overall positioning is quite conservative, having a lot of hybrid products, I pull distributions "off the top" without the concern about market fluctuations many voice. (That's not to say I don't include income generating investments for diversification within the whole mix.) Guess my approach is quite unorthodox - based on board discussions.
@Mark - I hope @ Old_Joe gives us the color of those things he never thinks about. :)

@catch22 - I think you misconstrued the point of the article/exercise. The exercise was to determine how these 4 funds would hold up over a 25 year withdrawal period assuming a 4% withdrawal rate with a 3% inflation kicker each year of withdrawal.
Set up another way lets say you decide to quit working in 1992, so you take all of your savings ($100K), plop it down in one of these funds, and then withdraw the 4% and the added 3% of that over the next 25 years. Will any or all of the funds hold up?
It looks like they all did only that some did it better than the others. The only trouble I have is the usual and customary past performance is ..... blah-blah.
It was just a barebones look at the numbers, a "what if" if you will.

Hi again @bee
Opps, you did have the question; which fund?
I would vote VWINX, too. We have some money in this fund.
A chart compare of the 4 funds starting with Jan. 1999.
A few points:
---one may see the market melt area
---also reactions to the U.S. AAA downgrade in July of 2011
---there was also a bond blip/psuedo sell off in mid-July, 2015
Also, that after the begin of the U.S. recovery in markets in March of 2009; Europe in particular, but also Japan were still very twitchy markets for several years after and for whatever reason, as I recall, most of the market jerks were in the late spring months. We know that Europe has just began to find some favor within the last 9-12 months.
PRPFX seems to have had a stumbling time since early 2011.
USBLX and GLRBX appear to have flattened a bit from early 2015.
Jan. 2015 to date:
---USBLX = +15.3%
---VWINX = +14.7%
---PRPFX = +7.7%
---GLRBX = +3.6%
The last two above remind me of VILLX , which was a very decent fund and then fell on its face in 2014 and 2015 and has not been very happy since. I read about investment rotations with this fund moving more into sm/mid cap and apparently the fund is still stuck in a funk.
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/perf.php?VWINX,PRPFX,USBLX,GLRBX&n=4662&O=011000
Regards,
Catch

My daughter starts college this fall and it is completely funded by a 529 account. Knowing that we have only 18 years investment horizon, we started a month after arrived once we got her social security number. We continue to invest through the ups and down including the 2007 downturn. Thanks to monthly automatic investment and many discussion on this board. And it all pays off now.

Hi @bee
A few quick observations, with a quick read of the article, as outside chores await.
---Writer didn't note whether the investments are all, any or partial IRA monies
---Writer didn't note any other income/living sources
---Writer didn't state age....over 59 1/2 ???
I don't follow why the writer moves the dividends to a money market account. This move skews all of the data work he did with his graphics. How the hell does he think the 25 years of data he noted arrived? Not from removing distributions.
If these monies were rollovers into IRA's or mostly IRA's at the time of his write, he wold be required to pull about 4% after age 70 1/2. We don't have any reference to any of this.
I could not offer any opinion or suggestion to this writer, as there isn't enough information provided.
Regards,
Catch

The following Article was posted here at MFO back in February and I wanted to rekindle the conversation regarding your strategies for generating retirement income from your investments.
The article looks at 4 open-end mutual "conservative allocation" funds using the following criteria:
VWINX, USBLX, GLRBX, PRPFX
The Retirement Income withdrawal will be 4% of the beginning investment value with each successive year's withdrawal increasing by 3% to allow for inflation. Any dividends collected in excess of this will be accumulated in a money market account (MMA) until the year the mutual fund produces less in dividend income than is required and the difference between the next year's household income need and the dividend collected is taken from the MMF. I'm assuming the interest rate on the MMA is zero. If the collective cash reserve is not sufficient…or non-existent…and the dividend collected that year is not sufficient to meet household income need, then sufficient shares will be sold at the end of the year to provide the required cash. This is repeated each December at the end of the month (last trading day).
The clear winner over the the last 25 years?
Read on:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4050402-long-term-growing-income-open-end-mutual-fund-possible

Hi @Catch22,
Thanks for your inquiry.
Since, your question references back many years know at the time I was in my early teenage years. Here is how I remember things. The two fund families that I had investments in were Franklin and American Funds with the two first funds being FKINX and AMECX. Latter on as I aged into my mid teens I begin to build the number of yards I serviced during the summer months cutting grass. At this time I began to pay more attention as to how my father moved some of his money around from time-to-time (seasonal strategy). Most of his money was invested in stocks and bonds but he did hold a couple of mutual funds he used to play the seasonal strategy. This is where he'd make seasonal shifts between the stock fund and his bond fund. With this, I started doing the same and started purchasing bond funds during the summer and did as he did moving some of it to stock funds during the fall, winter and early spring. I still do this today with part of my portfolio. I remember, my father saying that the bonds funds cost less to buy than the stock funds but I should buy some of each along the way when I had the money. Since, I had the money during the summer months ... I purchased mostly bond funds although I did buy some stock funds as well.
Then ... you guessed it ... I followed the seasonal strategy that I learned form my father and started moving money between my bond fund and stock fund through nav exchange transfers based upon the calendar. And, through the years I learned more strategies and thus the number of mutual funds owned grew along with my asset base.
I don't remember the exact year that I had to start filling income tax returns but it was before I entered college.
There you have it as I remember it.

Hi @Derf,
Not all the nav transfers were in retiremnt accounts as ira accounts were not available (I believe) until sometime in the 80's. And, I started investing during my early teenage years around 1960. Therefore, some nav transfers were subject to capital gain taxation on profits.
Skeet