"It's good to start hearing BobC's reflections as he closes a chapter that he'd been writing for 50 years and begins another."
Thanks Bob, I enjoyed your comments !
Derf

With Ed just back and recovered from his European vacation, we'll publish an update soon. That is, we'll add Ed's essay - on the need by professionals investors to reinvent themselves to maintain their "edge" in a rapidly evolving ecosystem - to the May offering. It strikes me as a thoughtful piece.
I regret offering no memorial words for Marty Whitman; he surely deserves them but surely deserves them from people who knew and trusted him. I was afraid I had little more than platitudes to offer.
The Prospector fund looks interesting. I began following them when Ron Howard, the long-time manager of Price Capital Appreciation - the equity fund that had the longest-ever streak of years without a loss - left to co-found Prospector. They feel like T Rowe in a compact package.
It's good to start hearing BobC's reflections as he closes a chapter that he'd been writing for 50 years and begins another.
And I really do appreciate your input on the active share piece. I hope it was worth your time.
Take care,
David

Hi all. I've always been around...just lurking for a while. Some very nice posts here as always. Greetings to everyone!
Right now I am the owner of three 529 accounts for grandchildren. The FAFSA issue has come up, and seems to indicate that the amount of scholarship money available might be reduced far more if the grandparent owns the 529 than if the parent owns it. I swore my brains worked better than this, but it seems like a big muddy mess.
Has anyone deciphered the FAFSA/529 conundrum? TIA
Best, hawk
p.s. I might have posted along these lines a couple years ago. If so apologies for the redundancy

I wonder if SFGIX is still worth recommending? Downside capture is a good attribute. But I don't plan to grow my stake. I know Foster is an expert and knows his shit. Yet SFGIX seems to want to not lose, rather than to win. Just my opinion. I've owned it since 2012. I'm also beginning --- at the next (June) distribution, to start receiving, rather than re-investing profits.

I bailed on it a few months ago as it wasn't living up to my expectations for EM exposure. Upon further review, I see it has struggled YTD and over the past 3 years. I think there are better options.

Hi @Junkster
The below M* link is averages for categories they post, as of April 30 close.
Our house is now at about 50% cash, being money markets at Fidelity at about 1.3% yield.
Not much, but better than going backwards.
Our last big money move will have a 10 anniversary on June 17, when we moved to about 87% cash. Sadly, might have to do this again.
Our two largest equity areas at this time are tech. and healthcare. But, these two continue to get beat upon, too.
Today, May 1 is a flop so far for our holdings in general.......11 am, EST.
Can't bitch about 10 years of nice returns; but I don't want to have to go hide the money, either.
http://news.morningstar.com/fund-category-returns/
Take care of yourself,
Catch

I raised this topic before. It may have been quite some time ago. Perhaps as long ago as the FundAlarm days.
As many of you probably do, I get periodic invites in the mailbox from financial planners. The invite stipulates that the financial planner is having an informational lunch or dinner, and I am invited, if I RSVP in time. No obligations are required. My belief is that, as a Do-It-Yourself'er (DIY) investor, I don't have a need for a financial planner. Or perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps I should attend and will find the services to be of value. And if I do go, is it ethical in this circumstance to attend more than one? How many lunches are reasonable?
If my memory serves me correctly, it was the discussion board's posters, who are financial planners, that thought it was unethical of me to attend, unless I am open to giving serious weight to consider the services of such planners. To their credit, I never did respond back with an RSVP to attend. Their basic objection was that the cost of the lunch comes out of the pocket of the financial planner, and not from the firm that they are employed by.
Usually the invitation is on expensive stationary and is delivered by USPS. Today I received the following email from my credit union.

Register Today! Retirement Planning Lunch & Learn
Join us on [date deleted] for this FREE Retirement Planning Lunch & Learn at the [location deleted]! [Name deleted], Financial Advisor and Registered Principal at [firm name deleted], will discuss critical factors in planning your retirement years, including:
What are my biggest retirement risks?
Will I ever be able to retire?
Will my money last through retirement?
Is it okay to carry some debt into retirement?
Where can I get help?
This seminar is free of charge and lunch will be provided. Seating is limited and advanced reservations are REQUIRED so reserve your place today!

So am I a bad person if I RSVP, because I'm curious. I'll disclose to you that I might be as curious about the restaurant as I am about the informational topic. If okay, how many of these can I attend before I cross a red line in the sand that makes me the moral equivalent of a dictator in the Middle East, not to be named?

Infinite. Attend as many as you want, no problem. They're effectively trying to buy your business. That, to me, is more unethical than attending with little intention of picking up their services.

@Ted, I think it would be helpful if when you post articles hyping one investment or another you also shared at the same time your own personal view on the investment. While those of us who follow the board religiously may know that you are not actually recommending gold here, I fear many who come across something like this may assume it’s your recommendation.
So, you might explain (along with the verbatim quotation) what percentage of your holdings are in gold and whether you’ve added to or decreased the position recently. What funds you like in particular. And what particular points made by the author you agree or disagree with.
Personally, I maintain a small exposure to gold/gold funds (less than 5%) - but I view it very much a “wild card” or “roll of the dice” - possibly useful for diversification. I’ve watched it over enough years to know it to be extremely volatile and unpredictable. I could never in good conscience recommend it to most investors.
Thanks.
Yes - I saw the question mark in the article title. I also saw this in the article: “Gold’s outlook looks rosy.”

@VintageFreak, I own a number of funds that focus on sectors...Tech and Healthcare has worked long term (10+ years). I believe it will continue to be two important growth sectors going forward.
Sector performance in Healthcare sector funds like (VHT, PRHSX, FSMEX), or allocation funds like PRWCX (25% HC), and funds that overweight both Tech/HC (POAGX =65% Tech/HC) have also ranked high in their category for the last 1,3,5, & 10 years.
FSRPX is just a "freak of vintage proportion" in both up and down markets going out 30+ years... owning mostly consumer cyclicals...management here again is key.
FSRPX vs VFINX (1985- present)

A good manager manage risk and reward...call it luck when it works out...I call it success.
I don't second guess success...I just try to find it.
Interest article on Qualitative Driven Funds:
4-best-qualitatively-driven-mutual-funds-fsrpx-vghcx

Obviously counter intuitive, but down markets are buying opportunities. For long term investors, down markets are the most important "buy & hold" time frames for investing success.
In periods of market stress (I'd mentally try and change this wording to market opportunity), non-correlated assets, that have a higher relative value than equities, can help re-balance portfolios and provide downside risk when equities sell off severely.
Cash or "near cash"(ST Treasuries):
1. You can spend cash to get you through the stressful period instead of selling equities low... Cash is what you spend so you can "hold" equities long term.
2. You can "buy" opportunistically with cash when equities are relatively low... The term "Cash is King" fits well here.
Gold (as part of a basket of commodities):

It may take a substantial allocation to commodities to enhance the risk-adjusted returns of a balanced portfolio. Our third graph shows the performance of four hypothetical balanced portfolios over the last 30 years and how they might have been affected by the introduction of a 10% stake in commodities. Only one portfolio—the 90% stock/10% bond portfolio, adjusted to become 81% stocks/9% bonds/10% commodities—would have recorded improved risk-adjusted returns, and the improvement would have been marginal. An allocation to commodities would have increased the volatility of a bond-heavy portfolio and would have reduced returns across the board.

Source:
researchcommentary/article/InvComVIPSCommodityInvestments

Articles related to Non-Correlated Assets & Portfolio Risk:
Long Term Bonds (VUSTX):
The Best Diversifier Has Been the Simplest

Bonds Get It Done
As you can see, the (U.S. OE) long-government category is the only category with a strong negative correlation with both the U.S. large-blend and foreign large-blend equity categories, as well as the moderate-allocation category. That's not just a phenomenon of the bull market, either. While the correlation between long-government bonds and stocks isn't quite as strongly negative during the trailing 10-year period as it has been in the past three years, it's still the most negative relationship depicted on the 10-year chart.

Article:
morningstar.com/articles/697751/the-best-diversifier-has-been-the-simplest.html
Asset Allocation White paper from Schwab:

This paper outlines the appropriate asset mix, based on that evaluation, for different types of investors and explains the process of constructing a diversified portfolio.

https://intelligent.schwab.com/public/intelligent/insights/whitepapers/asset-allocation.html
Finally, will their be a place for a fund like Permanent Portfolio (PRPFX) as we move forward?
is-the-permanent-portfolio-permanently-broken

Vanguard Article:

History suggests that commodity-related investments may at least partially hedge the risk of inflation. It also suggests that exposure to metals, agricultural products, oil and gas, and other hard assets can help to diversify portfolios of stocks and bonds. So why do commodities account, on average, for just 2%–4% of pension funds and nonprofit investment portfolios?1 And why does Vanguard include them in some multi-asset funds but not others?

Findings:

It may take a substantial allocation to commodities to enhance the risk-adjusted returns of a balanced portfolio. Our third graph shows the performance of four hypothetical balanced portfolios over the last 30 years and how they might have been affected by the introduction of a 10% stake in commodities. Only one portfolio—the 90% stock/10% bond portfolio, adjusted to become 81% stocks/9% bonds/10% commodities—would have recorded improved risk-adjusted returns, and the improvement would have been marginal. An allocation to commodities would have increased the volatility of a bond-heavy portfolio and would have reduced returns across the board.

What Vanguard Funds hold commodities?

Only two Vanguard funds, both specialty offerings, tend to invest in commodity futures. As of December 31, 2017, our Alternative Strategies Fund had a target commodities allocation of 20% of net assets, and our Managed Payout Fund had less than 5% of assets invested in commodity futures

Source:
researchcommentary/article/InvComVIPSCommodityInvestments

some of these are pretty easy and have been bruited for years
https://www.kiplinger.com/article/retirement/T051-C000-S002-ways-to-fix-social-security.html
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes

@davidrmoran, nice addition. Not only are safe withdrawal rates important, but (the ORP calculator) optimally selects which savings to spend first to maximize tax efficiencies.
From the ORP website:

The Optimal Retirement Income Planner (ORP) uses the facts of your individual situation to compute a tax-efficient savings withdrawal schedule that maximizes your retirement disposable income. ORP uses the same Linear Programming technology that Operations Research practitioners have, for more than 50 years, been using to manage oil refineries, blend chicken feed, schedule air line crews, schedule corn harvesting, timber harvesting, and now, retirement planning.

ORP Calculator:
https://i-orp.com/fees/index.html

Quick glance: mostly mid to microcaps; range of 20-80% long (20% now); a small (< 10%) stake in international; the principal, per the fact sheet, is a Boston Partners alum, though he was a fund co-manager for only a little longer than two years (according to the M* mini-vita on the mangement page).
Would want to read up as to why he'd extend the range of coverage to international if he's going to put just a relatively insignificant amount there.
One appealing feature could be the market cap range the fund appears to play in. A detractor might be the apparently somewhat limited experience of the team they chose to highlight on the M* management page ... and that E.R., unless they can do well for investors despite it.

Hey, good morning @Ted
I suspect Professor @David_Snowball still considers this forum a learning and educational site.
An obsession with charts for me? No. Just a part of an investing tool box. Today, charting is so much easier to perform and share. I used to do similar charting to my posted electronic link on graph paper. A very slow method, but a nice teaching tool in the way back days before our magical electronic boxes.
As to charts as part of the investing tool box; to me, this is not unlike a group of skill sets needed to build a simple wooden box, briefly noted below.
*** assuming all needed tools are available and that one knows how to use the tools to some degree
1. type of wood, for strength or appearance or both
2. based upon #1, a protective clear coat or enamel for ease of cleaning
3. measure dimensions properly
4. cut/saw measured dimensions accurately
5. determine required connective method(s), i.e. nail, screw, glue
5a. drill pilot holes so that a nail or screw will not split the wood
6. assemble
7. sand the view-able surfaces, before or after assembly
8. apply finish product to the box surface as desired
9. ENJOY the end result
All too soon, beyond our desire, my friend; you and I are going to tip over in our chairs and never write another word here.
You still have a wonderful opportunity to share your investment knowledge here with self authored, original writes about what you have learned over your investing years. I can imagine a series of periodic writes based upon your acquired investing skills. Surely, you would find an appropriate title for such a series.
If only one person finds the charting write of value, I'm satisfied with the effort.
Gift us Ted, with your knowledge.
Have a pleasant remainder.
Catch

@Maurice, maybe its time to jump onboard HSGFX...up 4.31% YTD. Maybe not.
Related topic to your comment:

As the authors stated, “As the size of the fund increases and because the manager’s investment ideas are finite, the new money flows are not able to be put to productive use, which subsequently leads to zero net alpha in equilibrium.”
The authors also stated, “… managers have no ability to generate additional investment ideas when existing opportunities are fully exploited.”
Fund managers cannot “cope with the influx of new money” resulting from the FMOY award, according to the authors.

https://advisorperspectives.com/articles/2017/10/16/should-you-invest-with-the-fund-manager-of-the-year
@JoJo26, Long term - 2 funds are at least 32 years old (PRWCX and FDGRX). PBDZX is 24 years old. Nothing but Long term success.

Have held this fund for at least forty years now. 4.5% of portfolio. Been happy with it all that time.

@willmatt72
Cost of some industrial robotics, not unlike other "new" in many areas; will be a part of all of this, too. The pros and cons, the needs and the wants, will get worked out.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/sam-bricklaying-robot-6x-faster-than-you-can/
You've probably already searched videos, but this link is a good overview for some robotics. ALSO, while at YouTube, if interested; search Boston Dynamics robots. This company is an example of a private company purchased by Google several years ago and then sold to Softbank of Japan. The CEO of this company is on the ball/forward looking and has built a large empire of technology.
@Old_Joe, I know you'll likely enjoy the video links in the below link. Start with the 3rd down.....8 Amazing Robots
https://www.google.com/search?biw=1404&bih=659&tbm=vid&ei=kkbdWoaaJouHjwT0t56wBg&q=robots&oq=robots&gs_l=psy-ab.12..0l10.37093.41458.0.46343.16.9.0.0.0.0.132.726.8j1.9.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..11.5.429...0i7i30k1j0i8i7i30k1j0i13k1.0.JbiOidGth-A
Just the above robotics is the one area; which still leaves machine learning, other A.I., manufacturing, chip makers/engineering and all of the areas these will become involved.
Take care,
Catch

@Hank - This board is used to talk about investments, bounce ideas around and discuss investment topics. People talk about their own investments on a daily basis. I don't need a financial advisor as I've been successful at investing on my own for 25 years. Maybe you missed the part where I wrote, "I'm going to do some further research based on your links as well as some digging on my own." If you don't like the thread, move on.

I always wonder why so many suddenly see the light years after the fact. Entry now while maybe not the worse bond investment out there is certainly more in the late innings than the early. You better hope for continued economic vigor and in turn the Fed continuing aggressive.

For "less-sophisticated" investors like myself, the move to Floating Rate/Bank Loan funds became a no-brainer as the more common bond fund vehicles (i.e. PONAX, PTIAX) have recently stopped generating positive returns (while interest rates climb). There do not appear to be many other great options in the debt universe that can benefit from such a (rising) rate environment.
Clearly these are not "forever" funds.

https://www.guggenheimpartners.com/perspectives/sector-views/q2-2018-high-yield-and-bank-loan-outlook
I have tried to stay out of this one. We have discussed ad nauseum this sector on the Morningstar forums. Everyone and their mother is camped out in this category and for good reasons - rising short term/3 month Libor rates. It has been one of the few beacons in Bondland in 2018. But a lot can go wrong especially when investors think they are in a “sure thing”.
For example a serious rout in stocks much more than what we saw this past February would also lead to a rout in junk corporates. That would bleed over to floating rates as after all, they are junk credits. Check out August 2015 through early February for a preview. I doubt in my lifetime there will be another credit crisis but in that crisis floating rates performed even worse than junk corporates with somevfubdscdown over 30%. Another threat would be the Fed pausing on rate hikes if stocks have a major decline and/or there is some unexpected decline in the growth of the economy.
The above link is a report from a well respected firm for those into fundamentals. Haven’t read the entire report but the default rate for floating rate is already rising albeit below historical norms. It is actually higher than the high yield default rate. Covenant lite issuance is at record highs, not good whenever this long running post credit crisis cycle turns, Still, my largest % holding is in this category with EIFAX which I have mentioned here over the past many months. But my eyes are wide open. The time to have been a player here was 2016 when many floating rate funds had double digit returns and beat the S&P. You can check the archives for my activity there then.
I always wonder why so many suddenly see the light years after the fact. Entry now while maybe not the worse bond investment out there is certainly more in the late innings than the early. You better hope for continued economic vigor and in turn the Fed continuing aggressive.