The Wall Street Journal is today reporting that car makers are warning the Trump administration of a ‘domino effect’ that would harm U.S. workers and the economy.
"Auto makers, parts suppliers and dealers are joining forces to push back against the Trump administration’s proposal to apply tariffs of up to 25% on vehicles and components imported into the U.S., contending the administration’s trade policy will backfire and lead to higher prices and lost jobs."
"Toyota Motor Corp. said it opposes the tariffs, because even though it builds cars in the U.S., it uses foreign-sourced parts that would be subject to the levy. For instance, about 30% of the parts used in a U.S.-built Toyota Camry come from outside the country. A tariff on those parts would increase the price of a Camry by $1,800, the company said."
"The United Auto Workers union—which represents workers at General Motors Co. , Ford Motor Co. and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV—has expressed support for the administration’s investigation, calling it “long overdue.” The union stopped short of endorsing the tariffs and instead urged a more “targeted” approach, such as taking measures to stop the influx of auto investment in Mexico in recent years."
Note: This has been classified as a "Fund Discussion" because @Ted has decreed that this is allowable as long as a topic involves industries whose securities are held by Mutual Funds. And as we all know, Ted sets the rules.

@MFO Members: Shed no tears for this one. It has been a turkey for many years. Just look at it's performance record.
Regards,
Ted
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/performance-return.action?t=HINVX&region=usa&culture=en_US

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/809586/000089271218000338/hgi497.htm
497 1 hgi497.htm
Registration No. 33-11371
1940 Act File No. 811-4982
Filed Pursuant to Rule 497(e)
HEARTLAND GROUP, INC.
Heartland International Value Fund
Investor Class Shares (HINVX)
Institutional Class Shares (HNNVX)
Supplement dated July 18, 2018 to
Prospectus and Summary Prospectus,
each dated May 1, 2018
The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Heartland Group, Inc. (the “Company”) has approved the liquidation of the Heartland International Value Fund (the “Fund”), subject to shareholder approval. Upon the recommendation of Heartland Advisors, Inc. (“Heartland”), the investment adviser to the Fund, the Board approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) for the Fund on July 18, 2018. After considering a variety of factors, the Board concluded it was in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund be closed and liquidated as a series of the Company.
The Board also determined to close the Fund to purchases and incoming exchanges after market close on July 18, 2018. Exceptions may be made in limited circumstances when approved by the officers of the Company where it is not operationally possible or otherwise impracticable to prohibit new purchases by an account.
Although the Fund will be closed to purchases, you may continue to redeem your shares of the Fund as provided in the Fund’s prospectus or exchange your shares of the Fund for other Heartland Funds, as provided in the Fund’s prospectus. No redemption fees will be imposed by the Fund in connection with such redemptions or exchanges; however, please note that your financial intermediary may charge fees in connection with such redemptions or exchanges.
You should note that on or about July 19, 2018, the Fund will no longer actively pursue its stated investment objectives and Heartland will begin to liquidate the Fund’s portfolio. The Fund’s portfolio managers will likely increase the Fund’s assets held in cash and cash equivalents in order to prepare for the orderly liquidation of the Fund and to meet anticipated redemption requests.
Shareholders will receive a proxy statement discussing the Board’s decision to recommend the liquidation of the Fund and requesting that shareholders vote to approve the liquidation of the Fund pursuant to the Plan at a special meeting of shareholders. If the Plan is approved by shareholders, the Fund will be liquidated on or after the date of the shareholder meeting (the “Liquidation Date”). Any shareholders who have not redeemed their shares prior to the Liquidation Date will have their shares redeemed in cash and will receive one or more payments representing their proportionate interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Liquidation Date, after the Fund has paid or provided for all taxes, expenses and any other liabilities, subject to any required withholdings. The automatic redemption of shares on the Liquidation Date will generally be treated the same as any other redemption of shares for tax purposes, so that shareholders (other than tax-qualified plans or tax-exempt accounts) will recognize gain or loss for federal income tax purposes on the redemption of their Fund shares in the liquidation. In addition, the Fund and its shareholders will bear transaction costs and tax consequences associated with the disposition of the Fund’s portfolio holdings prior to the Liquidation Date. The Fund expects to have declared and paid, by the Liquidation Date, a distribution or distributions, which, together with all previous such distributions, will have the effect of distributing to the Fund’s shareholders all of the Fund’s investment company taxable income and net capital gain, if any, realized in the taxable years ending at or prior to the Liquidation Date. The distribution or distributions may be reduced for any available capital loss carryforward and will include any additional amounts necessary to avoid federal excise tax. Shareholders should consult their tax adviser for further information about federal, state and local tax consequences relative to their specific situation. Because the Fund has been closed to new investments, including those made through the automatic reinvestment of Fund distributions, all distributions made after the date of this prospectus supplement will be paid in cash.
Important Information for Retirement Plan Investors
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax adviser regarding the consequences of a redemption of Fund shares. If you hold your Fund shares through a tax-deferred retirement account, you should consult with your tax adviser or account custodian to determine how you may reinvest your redemption proceeds on a tax-deferred basis. If you will receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA that is terminating as a result of the liquidation of the Fund, you must either roll the proceeds into another IRA within 60 days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year, if applicable, or request the distribution be made directly to another IRA or eligible retirement plan. Please note you can make only one tax-free rollover of a distribution you receive from an IRA to another (or the same) IRA in any 12-month period, regardless of the number of IRAs you own. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) custodial account (tax-sheltered account) or a Keogh account, you must roll the distribution into an eligible retirement plan within 60 days in order to avoid disqualification of the plan and inclusion of the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you are the trustee of a qualified retirement plan or the custodian of a 403(b)(7) custodial account (tax-sheltered account) or a Keogh account, you may reinvest the proceeds in any way permitted by its governing instrument.

I track a number of alternate funds for several years but never invest in them for obvious reasons - high fees and dismal returns. We decided it was better to have cash/cash equivalent now that the interest rates are more attractive.

FYI: In late 2003, after the publication of the revised edition of The Intelligent Investor, the CFA Institute asked me to give a presentation on Graham and his work at its conference on equity research and valuation in Philadelphia.
Every few weeks, someone asks me if I can post a copy of the text. I spoke from notes, but the CFA Institute published a transcript, which is available here: cfa-graham. And, for those who like slide decks, here is my PowerPoint presentation from the talk: bengrahamaimr-copy. I have made some minor changes to the text to reflect corrections and information I have learned in the intervening years
Regards,
Ted
http://jasonzweig.com/lessons-and-ideas-from-benjamin-graham-2/

@MikeM- Yes, I've wondered about that myself, since I've owned NTF ETFs at Schwab on and off over the years. I always assumed (not a good thing to do, right?) that Old_Skeet had some sort of set-up which was a bit out of the ordinary.

Hello dear MFO everyone. I rarely post here (the tone is tricky to engage with) but I read often and am grateful for the many perspectives on financial health and responsibility that many share. So for that: a big thank you.
I just wanted to respond to Catch and Hank's note about people not having financial knowledge or desire to gain the knowledge. I grew up in a poor family in the Midwest. Both my parents worked hard but having money to pay the bills seemed to be what took up most of their time. Investing in the stock market wasn't remotely possible for my family which means there was almost no conversation about investing and managing monies. Flash forward and I was a young writer living in New York -- my "day job" was working as a temp ("word processing" -- remember that nostalgic term?). One of my temp assignments took me to an investment banking firm called The Portfolio Group which was a subsidiary of the old Chemical Bank -- 57th floor of Rockefeller Plaza. They invested money for wealthy individual and foundations. This was the late 1980s. I was just a guy doing word processing around a lot of conversations about millions of dollars. Some of the portfolio managers noticed that I was a curious guy (they knew I was an artist) and offered to tutor me about the stock market. They even convinced me to open an IRA, to fully fund it (it was $2,000 max in those days, I think) -- which I did and continued to do. They gave me articles to read, engaged me in conversations, and made me feel like I was someone who had the right to know more about financial/investing opportunities. That was all I needed -- someone taking an interest in me and my financial future. I've been invested through Fidelity for nearly 30 years now. And that was last temp job I ever had. I've made my living as a writer ever since (which means financially there have been some incredible years and some awful years). It also means I've been self-employed all these years and so my retirement is fully self-funded. One reason I can still do my work is because I invested fairly young and never stopped. But I needed help to not be intimidated. I was lucky to have gotten that help. I just wanted to point out that some folks come from families and places where the very idea of participating in the stock market is not possible. It isn't just laziness or disinterest. (And if anyone happens to read this from The Portfolio Group: thank you!)
Sorry for the long post. I'll now go silent again! Thank you for reading.

Morn'in @hank
Agree with your overview. I have not watched or read Cramer since the market melt; and only then were a few days off and on during the market melt of 2008. I did not watch "his" show, but portions when he was at the desk with others in the morning.
His linked write here shows me his appears to be in a disconnect with today. I also won't argue that there remain too many funds that over charge and under perform.
But, this circumstance is upon the backs of individual investors to be at least a little bit curious and studious to discover fees and performance, but it on their own or via a managed account.
A few thoughts, somewhat along this thread line.
However, it remains that the individual investor of the type likely found here are few and far in between, of all individual investors; IMHO. Yes, there are millions who hold monies in IRA, 401k or 403b accounts, but my experience is that a very small percentage have much knowledge or desire to gain the knowledge. My current personal reference point is from questions I still receive.......as to, what do you think about this or that? These family and friends don't know anyone else who has had "their face" in the markets for 40 years.
One question from 2 months ago went like this, no quotes: My adviser in Ann Arbor thinks I should sell some or all (she couldn't remember) of my healthcare holdings. Oh, when did you switch advisers and why. A few years ago; because a friend felt she did a good job. Okay. What is the percentage of your healthcare holdings related to "all" of your investments? I don't know. Why does she feel you should sell? I don't know. Give me a list of your investment holdings by category (no dollar values for your privacy) and we can review your market positions. Okay. Still no follow up.
I suspect this is typical. Not to point a finger towards an adviser; just that too many individuals do not have any clues into the world of money.
As to the accounts type that @Old_Skeet mentioned, needing a brokerage wrap account for purchase of etf's; I will state that I/we at this house are spoiled (from our own choice) as to wide open accounts from 40 years ago into today. Old_Skeet's background of holdings and where they evolved from, over many years, is a different circumstance than we deal with at our house; and his choices will be much different from ours. As an investor, he is in a good place monetary, I suspect. Hats off to you, Old_Skeet for keeping your investment mind to the wheel.
Relative to our Fidelity brokerage accounts; we have access to just about whatever and from whomever without having to deal with wrap account fees. These brokerage accounts have always been "self directed", although one can have a managed account (fee) at Fido.
Strictly from an etf view, Fido has 81 no commission etf's. I imagine this is more than enough for anyone to "build their own", eh? Five standard marketplace equity/bond I-shares etf's have an expense cost of between .04 and .11%. Damn, this is just about free, eh? Fido also offers index (equity/bond) funds with similarly small expense cost.
http://etfdb.com/type/commission-free/fidelity/
Yes, I too; don't quite get Cramer's take on etf's and A.U.M. thing.
I view the AUM chase as having to stay current and in the game. Hell, this is marketing, yes? So, new products are introduced. The percentage investment houses obtain from AUM is fully understandable from a business stand point.
I still call this the "K-Mart" model from 50 years ago, at least relative to large scale retail.
Sell a boat load of product from a tiny markup to generate volume and pull in customer traffic. Bingo. Everyone wins, eh?
The model remains in place today with the likes of Walmart and Amazon, to name two.
The wrap account and input from those who either use or know others who use such an account could be an interesting thread.
I've always been averse to "fees". Several folks I knew in the mid-'80's continued to look at investing with Merrill-Lynch and their funds. I recall the "load" was 7.75%. Ouch! Yes, Fido had loads on some funds then, too; (I have a list in a file) but I recall the most common load for their best funds was 3%. These disappeared as Fido became more aggressive with obtaining AUM.
'Course, the obvious is that these loads + taxes + inflation can pretty much wipe out a gain from a fund, eh?
I apply the same thought to a wrap account, although one is supposedly obtaining some form of investment expertise from an adviser. Better, I suppose in the long run; than not investing at all. The worse case could perhaps be a break even scenario.
Take care,
Catch

BEWARE ...
For me to own these "low cost" etf's that Cramer speaks of I will need to hold these type of investments in a wrap fee based account. The fee on wrap accounts that I have looked at charge about about 1% (and up) plus there are the fees on the "low cost" etf's themselves that has to be considered to compute total expense cost. This puts the total cost at about 1.25% and in some cases more. Currently, there is no wrap fee on my accounts and Morningstar estimates my total expense ratio at 0.75% on all my mutual funds when combined. So, for me, to go Cramer's "low cost route" I'll actually wind up paying more by about $5,000.00 (perhaps even more) annually over what I currently pay. Seems, to me, Cramer forget to mention that many firms now charge wrap fees on accounts that hold these low cost etf's that he speaks of. Nope, for me, I plan to continue to hold my American Funds plus some others as I have now done for many, many years in no fee based accounts. Plus, I can do net asset value (nav) exchanges between funds I own inside their fund family without any charges.
For me ... After looking at this a couple of times over the past couple of years I'm still thinking I've got the low cost deal. Pehaps, you do as well?

FYI: When my nephews, Tyler and Adam, were six and eight years old respectively, I helped them start a portfolio of index funds. At the time, their mother insisted they split their weekly allowance three ways: a third for spending, a third for charity and a third for investing.
Regards,
Ted
https://assetbuilder.com/knowledge-center/articles/dont-punish-your-kids-teach-them-this-financial-lesson

what is risk parity ?

I just stay with PRWCX even though it has been closed to new investors for some time. BTW it has been doing well among the asset allocation funds this year.

It’s hard for me to explain that fund’s success against similar funds. I’ve puzzled over it for years. Defies all logic. Keep expecting it to “fall off the wagon” some year - but it never does. :)
Own a modest chunk of the fund and have been a big fan of TRP for the 25 years I’ve with them ...
Still puzzling ...

Pretty much agree with @Catch22 ’s graphic illustration and @MikeM ‘s wry humor. :)
Well, here we are half way into the year and HSGFX is having one of it’s “better” years with a gain of +1.12% while sporting a 1.3% ER - which ain’t exactly cheap. Over 10 years the fund is still down around 6.5% annually. There must be some cash equivalency instruments that would have matched that 1.2% YTD for lower ER - but with less excitement.
Catch is correct that there’s a tradeoff between risk exposure and return. All depends on one’s situation. Don’t know if the board still draws youngsters in their early cumulative years (ages 20-40). Haven’t heard from them lately. But those folks having a 40-60 year investment time horizon should be all or nearly 100% in low-fee aggressive growth funds. For those of us over 70 and well into retirement & drawdown it’s a bit more complicated.
One added thought: If you consider balanced funds to be among your more risky assets, than there may be a bit of room for some of the more exotic hedge-like instruments for added diversification - allowing for the fact that, as Mike says, they’re high fee vehicles. I’ve got a small foothold in Price’s new TMSRX which certainly looks like a hedge fund on paper. Yet Price bills it as an “income” fund. Their definition agrees with its placement on their risk/return spectrum where it’s listed as comparable to old faithful RPSIX for anticipated risk/return. I’m currently “underwhelmed” by TMSRX’s performance - but, to its credit, it often runs opposite stocks, rising on down days for equities also moving in the reverse direction on up days. Anxious to read their first fund report which hasn’t been released yet.

Geez, today; more than ever, one can build their own (risk parity), eh?
Build your own "risk parity" is readily available via etf's or managed funds, if one chooses to be fully aggressive via whichever.
What ya want ??? ETF category list
From a male perspective, what one builds depends how much exposure to one's gonads on a chopping block is "enough".
'Course, you may want to have your own benchmark, yes?
I'll offer only these two that travel the 50-70% equity/bond mix:
--- FBALX with a 15 year annualized total return of 8.4%
--- FPURX with a 15 year annualized total return of 8.1%
what is risk parity ?
In the end (choose your own time frame), one will have their very good and mediocre performance years. Being in the right place at the right time with particular holdings, lends to the good and bad periods.
Sidenote: This house could have obtained a much larger return in the few years after the market melt, if we'd only known the market burn was really finished, well except for the ongoing burn(s) in Europe. But, we also escaped the market melt; so our base money starting point was higher than those who sold too much near the bottoms.
Good fortune with your ongoing, being in the right place at the right time with your investments; as well as attempting to determine what a reversion to the mean really is today.
Regards,
Catch

Count me as among the ignorant who might have used “shyster” innocently. (But I’ve committed much bigger blunders along life’s way). Fortunately, the law makes clear distinctions in guilt based on intent, and I firmly believe there was no intent here to insult anyone or any group. I do like being made aware of the sensitivities of different religions, social groups, nationalities, sexual orientations, etc. Once aware of those sensitivities, I try very hard to respect them.
I remember when as a young lad I thought the Confederate flag a stately symbol. Displaying it in southern states 50-60 years ago was seen as a tribute to loved ones lost in battle and a symbol of one’s love for his homeland, Over time the connotations thus associated changed drastically (Language is a living organism - and symbols are a form of language.) So when I see some jerk driving around in northern Michigan today flying a couple confederate flags from his Harley or high-lift PU, I know darned well it isn’t intended as a tribute to a fallen loved one or as a loving symbol of his homeland. It’s a despicable display of hate and a needless provocation. Such is the state of man.

Emphasis on not.
I think VF meant what he wrote (rereading what he posted I am positive), and you're off-base, badly reaching without any cause to find it a slur other than the usual derogatory meaning. And bringing up money-lending, wow.
I can point you to the recent handful of times it has been used in the newspaper, some of the instances by Jewish writers, but this is getting silly.
Of course it's not a compliment. We are in violent agreement about that.
This is not unlike the uninformed sharp reactions to a school admin (I think it was) a few years ago using the word niggardly.

I've periodically noted here regarding bond yields and the yield curve of U.S. Treasury issues.
The curve continues to flatten among 30, 10 and 5 year issues.
This morning, reflecting some of yesterdays actions find 10 basis points between the 30 and 10 year, and 11 basis points between the 10 and 5 year issues.
---
30 year at 2.95%
10 year at 2.85%
5 year at 2.74%
As this time is different remains, since the market melt of almost 10 years ago; does the yield curve spread still provide meaningful indicators. One must think so, yes?
Big money is apparently still supporting long term bonds.....the pension funds, etc.; whomever is buying.
Well, just a blip of what is visible in part of the bond arena.
Take care,
Catch

I don't have an opinion. Sadly I also own this fund bought after years of due diligence.
And now this... :-(
Normally it is automatic sell for me when manager quits. I'll at least HOLD till NTF platform I hold it on does not charge me fee, then see. Gives me time to figure it out.
Let me know what you decide.

I doubt it would help -- placing ads to inform people of what they're risking supporting this insane economic policy.
Many elected officials prefer an ignorant and/or selectively-disinformed citizenry, since they don't know enough about such things to challenge whatever policy/action is taken "on their behalf" as Americans or citzens. Plus not knowing the facts makes it hard to objectively keep government officials accountable on pretty much anything they say or do -- which is one of the reasons why the media is being labelled an 'enemy of the people' these days. Heck, government 'accountability' has been pushed farther and farther away from the public despite claims of increasing 'transparency' in recent years - remember the 'most transparent Administration' that ended in 2017 was anything but.
MAYBE .. MAYBE when trade-related consequences (ie, inflation/tariffs) hits certain voters where it hurts most, and they see their meager benefits from the vaunted 2017 tax 'cuts' disappear as a result, MAYBE they'll take note. But I suspect they'll probably still just accept whatever they're told and just blame someone else for their woes anyway.....because that's the new normal for a large swatch of America these days. :/
On a semi-related note, it's funny that Harley (and others, I hear) as a public company accountable to its shareholders is making what it considers prudent business decisions in the current economic climate and is slammed by the very person responsible for causing this situation --- and apparently someone who does not know that a public company's first loyalty lies with its shareholders and maximizing their profits.

I looked at this ( and I think i owned it too ) years ago. Mathers preceded Hussman as a Perma Perma bear always complaining that the stock market was overvalued. Why he couldn't even beat a money market fund I don't know. Why he still has $8 million in assets is even more inexplicable

@hank- Seems to me that it wouldn't take much effort for a mutual fund company to take a representative sample of accounts in the RMD phase, and keep an eye on the average (not in the mathematical usage) cash account level once the transfers have been made. If, for a number of years before the RMDs the cash accounts maintained a certain average level, and then that level increased after the RMDs began, it would be a fair guess that those account owners didn't need the RMDs for spending purposes. Rough guess, but probably indicative.
OJ