Is there a way to find out when M* made these funds "medalists"? I thought in their fund table they would have said how long the funds have been medalists.
Asking because I can look at the top funds for last 15 years year after year, make them ANALists, and then say I won!
Also, who will remember to wait 15 more years to see how these funds fared? No one. Unless of course they fare well, in which case M* surely will. But, wait. In another 15 years there would be more medalists. Nice gig, eh?

I'm still concerned about market valuations here, and May is around the corner. Examples of high current price to historical TTM free cash flow ratios (data from Morningstar): MCD 28.7; AMZN 45.2; CSX 52.3; FB 36.9. I'm whittling away at my equity allocation, being up to about 66% bonds/cash now. Although I'm 64, I'll weight back into equites when valuations are more reasonable. I've been on this train ride before when derailments can happen quickly. And so it goes...

Market Valuations were higher 1 month back. They may be higher 1 month in future.
Every prediction is based on hindsight. Based on what happened in the past. I'm the last one to ask anyone to ignore history. They do so at their own peril. However it is not about identifying market tops or market bottoms. It is about gradually buying in and gradually fading out. There was a time when you could just plonk money into balanced fund. Not sure that will work any more, and *this* is not about past history, but about future. Past history says invest in balanced funds if you are wimp because it was predicated on interest rates going lower and lower. So it is important for one to be able to manage his/her cash position.
I'm not 25 years old. I can't keep DCAing into VFINX. Between 2000 and 2013 index went nowhere. I'm not going to waste my time figuring out how DCA worked because each situation is different. Maybe someone can calculate $100 invested each month in that interval and find out how much money they had in 2013, then we can discuss. In 13 years I might be dead, so I will not bother making that calculation.

Hi @BobC,
My bonds have about 3.5 years of effective duration and my cash is in U.S. Government MMFs for now. I'm up to 74% bonds/cash now after a little trading today (incuding a little tax loss harvesting to offset some LT capital gains I took back in February). Thanks for your input, and I agree on avoiding long-term bonds or even intermediate-term bonds that are on the long-term end of the scale.

FYI: After 10 years, my $60,000 investment in a private gin company finally paid dividends. Initially, given the company was sold for about $49M after expenses and I had invested in the company at a $10M post money valuation, I was thinking I had made a ~3X return ($180,000). Since over time shareholders get diluted with subsequent funding rounds, I thought that was a reasonable assumption. -
Regards,
Ted
http://www.financialsamurai.com/just-say-no-to-angel-investing/

FYI: (Attention John Bogle, here are 10 needles in your haystack !)
While it's true that most funds won't beat market indexes over long stretches after accounting for fees, here's a closer look at a handful of Morningstar Medalists that did.
Regards,
Ted
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=804177

The amount of dollars you should have in cash/CDs/short-term bonds depends on what you need to withdraw from your portfolio. We advocate 4-6 years, some folks use longer time frames. Let's assume a person needs $1,250 per month from their investments. That would mean $15,000 per year multiplied by five for five years of protected income stream. This does not account for any taxes that might need to be withheld. You would gross up the monthly amount to accommodate that.
On a $300,000 portfolio, that would require $75,000 be in cash/CDs/short-term bonds. Have at least 6-12 months of this in cash or CDs maturing in the near term. The remaining portfolio can be invested as aggressively as your risk profile and time horizon allow. In years when the stock markets are good, you would capture gains from your equity investments to replenish the $75,000. In lean years, you use dollars from your set-aside stash. The last two market crashes have meant recovery of values in about 5 years or less for our clients. The stash means you won't have to sell devalued assets in a down market.
Does this work? Yes. We have used this strategy with many clients for 30 years. The variables are the dollars needed, the number of years selected for protection, whether to withhold taxes from distributions in retirement accounts. Many clients reduce spending in years when returns are not good or negative. Some do not have that option. The key is to establish a very conservative total return projection for your retirement, and be able to adjust your cash flow need. If you base your lifetime income projection (to age 100) on a 7% annual return, you may be asking for a rude awakening.

FYI: Portfolio returns in the early years of retirement could have a large bearing on the success or failure of a retirement income strategy; a few years of early market appreciation means a high likelihood for a healthy retirement, while a flat or declining market in the early years could throw a wrench into the calculation.
It is called sequence-of-return risk, and it poses a serious conundrum for advisers putting together a retirement-income plan for client
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20170425/FREE/170429938?template=printart

Hi @VintageFreak,
I'm pretty much with you on the subject ... as I average in (or down) when making changes within my portfolio; and, I also keep some powder dry (cash) for the unexpected pullbacks that most did not see coming in the markets. When stocks are selling towards their lows I hold more and when they are pricey I hold less. Currently, based upon the TTM P/E Ratio of 24.4 (April 21st) for the S&P 500 Index they are pricey in my book. And, if you buy on the come line of forward estimates ... you are buying just that estimates. Most times these forward looking estimates get revised downward and although you may win some come line investments often times you'll lose by buying when they were very richley priced.
Before, someone calls me out on the TTM P/E Ratio for the S&P 500 Index I'm linking my reference source(s).
http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3021-peyield.html?mod=wsj_mdc_additional_ustocks
and, here ...
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/04/04/is-the-stock-market-cheap
Yep, I'm thinking stock prices are extended and they usually by history go soft during the summer months and rally during the winter months. Still with my plan to reduce my equity allocation towards its low range during the summer. Come late summer or early fall I'll let my market barometer and equity weighting matrix be my guide as to when to start to average back upward. And, I also know that some say that this strategy (Sell in May) does not work in modern day investing. The below link will provide an article that explains the Sell in May strategy in some detail.
http://www.etf.com/sections/features-and-news/should-you-sell-may-go-away?nopaging=1
Perhaps, this is Old_School investment mythology ... but, for me, it has worked more times than not. With this, I plan to "keep on keepin' on."
Old_Skeet
Trailing Note: Since, comments were made below about bond duration and maturity I thought I post mine. My portfolio as a whole bubbles, according to Morningstar Portfolio Manager, with a bond duration of 3.4 years and an average maturity of 5.9 years while my fixed income sleeve bubbles with a duration of 2.71 years and an average maturity of 4.91 years. So my hybrid funds seem to be carrying longer durations and maturities and run the overall numbers upward for the portfolio as a whole.

"Live in the present" might work better as a matter of tactical allocation (stocks or bonds this year? here or there? defensive or aggressive?) but the strategic question (how much do I need to squirrel away over each of the next 35 years to have a reasonable chance of meeting my goals) has to include a "likely market return" variable.
David

I just know I suffered 50% losses in the first correction and 20% in the second correction. That's what I meant by invest in the present. Sometimes it is best to leave the battlefield and live to fight another day. Now if you are wrong and the party you left ended up winning the battle, then you don't partake on the spoils. However, what I've learnt is you get over missed opportunities in 1 week, while you never get over ...death.
I think that works for me.

I can remember Mr. Know-All Gross and a lot of other self-appointed poobahs predicting low, single-digit returns for the last decade (2000-2010), then just about every year thereafter. Mr. Gloom, Jeremy Grantham has certainly been forecasting similar numbers for some time. Gosh, if you listen to him, the only place to make real money is investing in timber. The "baby-boomer" concept has also been floating around for some time. I can't speak for all the other baby boomers, but I don't intent to pull money from my retirement accounts until the RMD rule forces me, and then only the minimum amount. At least that is the plan. As for inflation, most folks have been terribly wrong about that since the 2007-08 economic meltdown.
All the predictions for low returns are based on interpretations of current valuations, economic growth, and other guesses. And keep in mind that the prediction in question is for the S&P 500. What about other U.S. markets, developed international, and emerging markets, not to mention non-traditional investments? It seems to me that there is no way to predict this with any accuracy - heck, the weather people can't even get it right for the next 24 hours, and they have all sorts of ways to monitor things. The best thing is to assume your portfolio will achieve a very conservative return during your retirement years, and then run some scenarios to see if your dollars will outlast you. I would urge a similar strategy for the accumulation phase up to retirement. If the numbers turn out to be better, wonderful. You will have saved "too much".

@davidrmoran
Agree. I have always pushed those I've know over the years to invest early (compounding) and continuous, and let the distributions be reinvested.

Hi @Derf
This most recent chart (6 months) and the chart (Oct. 2013 to present) I posted a couple of posts above/back (Apr. 24) both show the far right %'s you ask about.
These percentage numbers reflect the "time period" selected for "total return" during this time period; as stockcharts includes all distributions for whatever one is viewing.
EXAMPLE: The 6 month chart spans from October 31, 2013 through April 30, 2014. So, with these start and stop date points, the % returns during this period are what you see.
You may also place your device cursor/pointer onto any of the graph lines to "view" a % return at a different date, without having to move the "slider day box".
NOTE: stock charts may not let you use a "ticker" that is less than two years old; as my understanding is, that they do not consider enough data is available for a short time frame.
You may also want to read a reply to davidrmoran above for other details.
Regards,
Catch

@davidrmoran
You are correct, this is not a $10K chart like at M*. This is performance based charting.
@Derf, some of the below may answer your question. If not, let me know here.
The below link describes a bit about how stockcharts adjusts their performance data. I have not read through this link for some time; but recall either from this site or at another info piece somewhere; that the performance is adjusted for any distribution type, including splits; so cap. gains, etc are part of the total return performance numbers. I have used prior data from Vanguard to check a total return for whatever fund for year "x" and the numbers match with what I have found at StockCharts. There may be other sites for this, but I am not aware of such sites.
Additionally, I see @Old_Joe has added some other details, too. Wait there's more.....
Using the 6 month graph and move the days box to somewhere in the middle of the graphic and then you may also "right click and hold" onto either end of the "days slider" and move the right end or the left end to "stretch" the days forward or backward.
I'll probably think of something else, but outside I must go to finish a few chores before the sun leaves my time zone.
Lastly, all of what we are doing with this chart is FREE! And this chart, as you know is active (as has been linked). You may replace any of the tickers in the box below the graph and work with other stock, etf or fund ticker symbols. Just place the cursor at the right of an existing ticker and backspace to remove. One may enter up to 10 tickers separated by a comma. If you have not, save this particular graph page to return to and play with other tickers, too.
http://stockcharts.com/articles/mailbag/2014/01/how-can-i-plot-dividend-adjusted-data-and-unadjusted-data.html
NOTES: This site has a "chart school" and here is a video show and tell video link.
OPPS, did forget one item that I generally don't use; but one may "right click" onto the "day" box and a few other default time frames appear to choose. Keep in mind that if one is viewing, say 3 funds, as with our working example, the looking backward date for all 3 funds will stop at the date of the "youngest" fund. So, if one ticker is only 4 years old, this is as far backward one may view comparisons, although the other 2 funds may be older. ALSO, I recall graph data will not be available backward past 1999.
Regards,
Catch

Thanks for posting this article Ted, excellent read. Been awhile for me posting since I had some serious health issues and was in Phoenix at Mayo, but had successful surgery and now back at home. Right now proves that we sure live in interesting times. Holding on to what I have except dumped BX finally, watching for 3 years my investment going down was enough. It really wasn't needed, I added a bank fund FRBAX a few months bank, will just stick with that.
Keep on posting, glad you are doing better.

"Live in the present" might work better as a matter of tactical allocation (stocks or bonds this year? here or there? defensive or aggressive?) but the strategic question (how much do I need to squirrel away over each of the next 35 years to have a reasonable chance of meeting my goals) has to include a "likely market return" variable.
Over 35 years, shifting the assumed annual return from 4% to 6% annual return changes your end value by 100%. (That's a simple compounding calculation assuming nothing other than a fixed amount invested and held for 35 years.)
I'd also be cautious about taking double-digit growth in the stock market as an entitlement. It might return 15% a year this century and the dividend checks might be delivered by unicorns, but I'm not sure that's the way to plan. Market returns are a combination of capital appreciation plus dividends. Capital appreciation is a combination of economic growth plus P/E expansion (a/k/a the supply of greater fools). The lower your starting P/E, the greater the prospect of expansion.
In the 20th century, per capita US GDP grew 2.3% annually; in the current century, it's been about 1%. P/Es in the 20th century averaged in the low teens; in the 21st, they're in the mid 20s.
Perhaps the rise of our Robot Overlords will change everything. Perhaps The Chinese Century will be different. Perhaps Mr. Trump's tax package will sail through Congress unscathed by partisans or lobbyists, hundreds of billions in overseas earnings will be repatriated and American corporations will again be the envy of the world.
Don't know. For me, the question is just, do I want to bet my future security on it?
David

Earnings are one of three data feeds in Old_Skeet's market barometer. If I were to use only forward earnings estimates as my guide to set my equity allocation I'd currently be heavier in equities. I currently use three data feeds to gague the S&P 500 Index ... an earnings feed comprised of both reported and forward earnings estimates, a breath feed and a technical score feed which consists of a combination of RSI and MFI. With the combined feeds incorporated into the barometer which in turn feeds my equity weighting matrix I get meaningful information which assist me in setting my equity allocation within my portfolio. In addition there is Old_Skeet's SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guess) as a back up that takes other things into account such as seasonal trends, my personal market outlook along with news driven events which I have used a good number of times in the past as buying opportunities for special investment positions.
Folks ... if you don't wish to actively engage the markets as I do with part of your portfolio then there are asset allocation funds that will do this for you. As I have aged, I am turnning more over to the more active professional asset allocators and throtteling back my own activity. This is the reason I narrowed the band width of my equity allocation form a 40% to 60% range to a 45% to 55% band width a few years ago. In the next few years as I enter the 70's, age wise, I'm thinking of going to an equity band width range of 40% to 50% equity. This will still allow me to be active within my own portfolio but put me in competition with my conserative asset allocation funds held within my hybrid income sleeve which now consist of nine funds with plans to expand to twelve. In doing this, I'll be reducing the number of my all equity funds held from the current number of twenty to sixteen trimming in the growth area of the portfolio by four funds (13 to 9).
Back to earnings ... Forward estimates are just that "estimates." And, often they get revised downward more so than revised upward. Come to think of it I can't remember of to many upward revisions. Once announced they become as reported (TTM) earnings. For March 2017 ending S&P reported earnings (TTM) for the S&P 500 Index at $99.70. Seems, this is a big spread from where they currently are to what the article suggest they might be going forward.
Below is a link to a S&P as reported earnings recap.
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/04/04/is-the-stock-market-cheap
The question ... How much faith do you wish to place in forward estimates?
From my perspective stocks are extended based upon reported earnings. Thus, I am in the process of rebalancing my portfolio towards its low range for equities. I am, at this time, not willing to bet the forward earnings "come line" although I am expecting earnings to improve I'm thinking forward looking estimates stated in the article are currently more of a dream than a reality.
And ... so it goes.

If I were seeking financial advice, I think I would trust someone named Jack Bogle more than someone who calls himself "The Linkster." Bogle's calculations are based on earnings growth, dividend yields and valuation. Those are the fundamental units of return for those who believe stocks move on anything besides speculation. Simply saying well stocks returned 10% annually or whatever annually in the past, therefore they will produce such returns indefinitely in the future is assuming past performance is always prelude to the future without any analysis of the underlying cause for that performance. If the cause is earnings growth, valuation and dividend yields, and valuations are much higher than they have been in the past and dividend yields are much lower while earnings though high may have peaked, then it is logical to assume lower returns than historical ones going forward.
There are of course a number of wildcards here, but one thing Bogle doesn't do is make short term predictions. In the short-term markets always move on speculation. In the long-term, fundamentalists like Bogle believe stocks move on earnings yields--which is the inverse of the p/e ratio--and dividend yields relative to inflation and interest rates. Inflation, interest rates, taxes--this year's wild cards--and geopolitical events are always unpredictable and could throw any prediction off--long or short. Ideally, a prediction based on fundamentals should be made for a full market/economic cycle--at least five years--and factor in some sort of inflation and interest rate expectation. And still those can be grossly off. But at least making a prediction based on current stock valuation and yields is forward looking as opposed to simply looking at historical performance which is backwards looking.

FYI: France’s CAC 40 (it’s most widely followed equity index) gained 4.14% today (in local currency), which was its biggest one-day gain since August 2015. Below is a chart of the CAC 40 over the last four years. While the index was set to close at a new 4-year high today when we got into the office early this morning, it actually closed the day at 5,268.86, which is just 0.05 points below its closing high of 5,268.91 reached on April 27th, 2015! French investors will have to wait at least one more day for a new closing high.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.bespokepremium.com/think-big-blog/france-germany-test-multi-year-highs/

Any index is a portfolio of stocks, selected by using some rules. I am wondering what is so special about S&P 500 index, that it is very difficult to beat its performance. It seems to me that, at least theoretically, it is possible to create another index that consistently beats S&P 500. One example is CAPE index that showed outperformance for the last 15 years. Probably some smart ETF try to accomplish that, but I am not sure whether they are successful.

It's 55% of my entire investment net.
To some degree I understand on paper what it does. What I am still trying to get my mind around are worst-case scenarios and how it would compare with some combo of conventional LV and broad bonds. The leverage explanations are interesting but the msf conclusion
>> think this as a 2x leveraged fund.
and the downside capture ratios that M* lists are confusing to me in terms of its actual performance.
I have begun analysis of every 2-week or longer dip since inception as compared w/ CAPE and w/ SP500. I am through 2014 and into the beginning of 2015, with the more recent years tk.
Thus far all that I see, from a sample of seven such dips, is as follows:
- no delta to speak of, though leveler (smoother) performance than SP500
- smooth outperformance, small, marginal
- smooth underperformance, small, marginal (only one of these valleys thus far)
- first one and then the other, smooth underperformance followed by smooth outperformance, with the result, at the end of the recovery point, higher than CAPE, which is higher than SP500.
Now, since its inception, 4.5y ago, it is true that we have not had long or deep dips ("drawdowns"), so this investigation of mine may not speak to what one can comparatively anticipate in a plummet of length. But thus far I see no increase in volatility, and depth or speed of drop (insofar as one can tell from M* data).
Maybe it would be the case that during a bad set of months and years it would be better to hold TWEIX [or insert your favored broad index here] with some mysterious bond portion.
But I ain't seein' it, and thus far I ain't finding it either.
Will report further results later, for dips the last two years.