@MFO Members: If your investing for the long-term,some of your money should be invested in an aggressive LCG fund and or a techonology and health care sector fund. They've had the best annualized returns over time. I can't believe some of the funds that some of you have picked.
Regards,
Ted

Large cap growth, plus technology and healthcare? I agree...which is why my choice would be VHCOX. Second choice would be POAGX. (Obviously I'm a Primecap fan. Those were my top funds over the past ten years, and I see no reason to make a change).

Hi everyone, I'm 49 for another month or so and I have 5 kids ranging in age from 2 to 17. They have 529 plans that will hopefully cover a decent portion of college costs and I keep contributing, although the youngest 2 could be worse off if the cost of education continues rising faster than inflation. I've basically been retired for almost 6 years because I took a nice package to walk away from my job in a downsizing and didn't find something new, but I'm still interested in going back to work for a decent opportunity.
I have a couple of overriding principles for my portfolio that will help explain some of my allocations. First, I believe that emerging markets, especially in Asia, are the future. I want to be overweight. I'm also a believer in healthcare. Considering the world's demographics are getting older and the developed world's demographics even more so, I want to be overweight. In general I want to be equal weight the US and underweight developed international markets because the demographics are the worst there and they are pretty highly correlated with the US in the large cap space. If I want to make currency bets, which I've done before, I'd rather do it in the futures market. I want most of my exposure to developed international markets to be small cap. Finally, other than healthcare, I'm generally sector agnostic. I don't target any specific allocations but I do monitor them compared to the S&P 500 to make sure I know and am comfortable with the opinions my sector allocations are expressing.
My portfolio currently has two parts and a third part is being reduced. The first is a collection of funds that I rebalance or adjust at irregular intervals but mostly doesn't change. The second is what I'd call a modified risk parity portfolio of my own making that trades monthly based mostly on momentum. The part being reduced is made up of individual stocks that I picked based on a newsletter I used to subscribe to or stocks that M* identified as undervalued. That didn't work very well for me. The stocks currently represent about 12.5%. I plan to keep 2 stocks, which are uranium stocks that I'm still comfortable/happy with. They make up 6% of my portfolio and will stay, so a little less than half of my total stocks.
I normally don't count cash as part of my portfolio except in my IRA and the cash there represents 3% of what I consider my portfolio.
Mutual funds
I'll indicate the current allocation as well as my planned allocation once I eliminate the stocks I hold with a comment or two where relevant.
GPIIX 9.65--->8.5 I would have preferred Global Opportunities to International Opportunities but the original intention was to pair International with their intended US fund, which hasn't come yet, and to manage the allocation myself. At the time I wasn't thinking about hard closes that make managing an allocation difficult so if I ever had the chance to switch this for GPGIX I would.
POAGX 8.75--->8.5
GPEIX 7.75--->8.5
SBIO 3--->2
HQL 2.9--->2
OBIOX 2.75--->3.5
MAPIX 2.5--->2
PRHSX 2.25--->2
IWIRX 2.15--->2
MEASX 1.6--->2
QUSOX 1.45--->2
ARTGX 1.4--->0 I don't dislike the fund, just decided I'd prefer OAKWX
MSCFX 1.4--->2
OAKWX 1.35--->2
PRNHX 1.35--->2
TVRVX 1.3--->2
DSEEX 1.3--->2
PTSGX 1.3--->1
SFGIX 1.3--->2
FSCRX 1.25--->0 This fund was great for me but with Chuck Myers leaving I started switching to the Mairs & Power fund.
KGGAX 1.2--->2
GPMCX 0.8--->2 This won't happen by year-end because of the limited annual contributions they allow but I'll get there.
Trading
The holdings currently make up 25.7% of my portfolio and includes EWX, IJH, IJK and VBR. I expect it will be 34% at year-end. I started this approach 18 months ago because I was concerned about valuations and wanted something that would hopefully protect me when things eventually go south but hopefully participate in most of the upside as long as it continues.
I track my overall portfolio as well as each "bucket" against 12 benchmarks on a monthly basis. Broadly speaking those benchmarks include a few all equity options (like the S&P 500 and a total world etf), a few balanced options that are all 60/40 but with different equity options, and a few risk parity portfolios like @hank's Permanent Portfolio, Faber's Ivy Portfolio and David Swenson's Yale portfolio.
For the individual funds I mostly watch category rankings. I do see 1, 3, 5 and 10 year returns in my M* portfolio but I don't use them to make any decisions. I don't change funds very much but manager changes usually worry me and I occasionally change for something I believe will be better. For instance, I used to hold a number of Wasatch funds that I eliminated and bought Grandeur Peak funds and I'm replacing FSCRX with MSCFX because of a manager change.
There are a few funds I'd be happy to own if they open again one day. They are VVPSX and TDVFX. I know I can buy the Towle Fund direct and I may do that at some point but I'd prefer to keep it in my brokerage account if possible. As mentioned I'll buy Grandeur Peak's US fund whenever it launches.
A portfolio X-ray will show you that I'm around 80% small and mid cap stocks. I understand most people would be uncomfortable with that. One third of that is the risk parity trading I do and that will be into other asset classes when the momentum changes. Nonetheless, I've never been uncomfortable with volatility and I don't tend to make emotional decisions. The risk parity idea was specifically designed to make me comfortable with whatever volatility occurs in the mutual funds. X-ray will also show I'm a little more than 20% emerging markets and overweight healthcare but I'll be pretty close to equal weight healthcare at year-end. This is something I want to keep an eye on because I don't want to end up underweight healthcare. I'm actually underweight the US at about 43-44% but that's okay for now because I'm somewhat, less than many but still somewhat concerned about valuations in the US. And I'm significantly underweight developed international markets except for Asia. I think that's mostly because M* calls Taiwan and South Korea developed while MSCI doesn't.
Oh, one last thing, how could I forget, I have no bonds and haven't for a few years. Friends have argued that I either should already regret that or I certainly will in the future. They may be right but I'm well aware of the bet I'm making and I'm more concerned now about getting hurt in bonds than hurt in equities. Time will tell.
Thanks in advance for your feedback.
Jim

Whew. This started out as a simple exercise and will try and provide commentary on my portfolio in addition to allocations and percentages. I have three portfolios. First one , is a taxable account which has a majority of the bond allocation at 80%, which includes 2 munis I am holding til maturity, also have two stocks in that portfolio, one of which I am getting ready to sell for its gains. That portfolio is 27% of my total. The other two are a traditional ira and a roth, and the roth is the larger of the two. You will notice some duplications in fund characteristics, the result of my moving from Merrill Lynch last year to Fidelity. Some positions I could not add to since they are institutional funds, so had to add similar funds from another fund company. I take a barbell approach to the total, balancing aggressive funds with conservative ones. More people seem to use balanced funds, I chose this method. That said, I am 68% equities, 32% bonds and cash, and 66 and retired. SS provides me about 1/3 of my expenses, rest comes from taxable account, which will be the first to be depleted, but I do have to start taking from the ira in four years. I am trying to follow the basic set up that Pudd used, adding my own tweaks. This reflects iras only. I threw in etfs into the mix. Here goes:
Large and multi cap:
MSEGX 1.5%
POGRX 2.6%
RSP 1.0%
SMGIX 6.4%
TWEIX 2.5%
VIG 3.0%
VDIGX 6.5%
VOO 5.6%
VPCCX 2.9%
VWINX 2.7%
Sector funds
CMTFX 3.1%
PHSZX 1.4%
FRUAX 1.5%
FSPHX 1.3%
IHI 2.0%
JRBFX 1.3%
PRGTX 6.2%
RHS 3.7%
SHSAX 1.4%
VPU 2.0%
FRIFX 2.9%
Small-midcap
CCASX 1%
SMDV 1%
UBVSX 1.3%
Global non sector funds (with a minimum of 30% foreign)
APDGX 3.0%
IWIRX 2.6%
Foreign
FMIJX 4.5%
SIGIX 4.9%
GSIHX 1.8%
OSMYX 2.8%
MINDX 2.5%
Stocks
MMM 2.1%
TRV 1.2%
Bonds and cash are 9.6% of total iras, since taxable portfolio has the high bond allocation. I use PONDX, PYACX, CPXAX, GIBIX.
According to Fidelity, in the iras, I am 76% large cap, 17% mid cap, 7% small. The above small cap funds I have do not reflect total small cap exposure since I have small cap stocks in a number of funds that are multi cap. I usually have more stocks, and use them more for trading than investment.
Im sure I have many more funds and etfs than most, but this is cut down from earlier this year :) All comments welcome, good and bad.

Skeet, I used to have M-Star's premium and used that for x-rays but got tired of paying that yearly cost. Now days I don't bother with the x-ray. I do lean to value funds and small/mid caps but that has not been the place to be the last few years. My biggest positions are in the 401 and I don't have many funds available that I am not using. VIGRX and ODMAX are available and I have used them in the past. Just sold both of these earlier this year. I am in the process of reducing small positions with a goal of 5% or more per fund. Allocation just happened, not planned. When you have go anywhere funds then that is what you get. I have made some bad choices, like selling EM to soon, so no tips for others from me other than save as much as you can.

Puddnhead, I will start a new thread for my portfolio.
I am 59, married(3rd time) with plans to retire in 3 years. I will have 40+ years as an IBEW member and have a defined benefit along with a 401 at the workplace. The DB will pay about $150/month per year of service. The exes will get some of that. I also have a small ROTH and IRA. Live in the Midwest. No mortgage. No kids but recent wife has 2 so I inherited grandkids. Portfolio percentages are rounded up or down for convenience. The smaller %'s are in the ROTH and IRA. My wife also has a 401 with DFA and a ROTH. I am not including these monies but when you put it all together and add SS I should have enough money to live on and take the yearly vacation to Florida or somewhere warm, so why do I fret over money spent on kids and grandkids? I guess one of us needs to be conservative while the other spends. Probably like that in most marriages.
PTTDX-22%
Cash-11%
OARIX-11%
PCVAX-10%
CHTTX-10%
OARBX-7%
VFINX-6%
AMRMX-5%
FPACX-4%
EVGBX-3%
FARNX-3%
IVWIX-2%
ARTGX-2%
GPROX-2%
VVPSX-2%

I like Old_Skeet's idea of a global balanced fund for a one-and-done fund. Although it does not have a long track record, RPGAX has both a great start and all of TRP's resources behind it. I'd feel comfortable putting this in a UGTM account or investing on behalf of "widows and orphans" and leaving it alone for a long time. Over the last 25 years I have become disenchanted with several balanced funds and sold them. Currently own BRUFX and RPGAX. My TIAA account has a slice of Vanguard Balanced.

Retail only makes up 2% of the $1T of HY debt maturing over the next 5 years, but as an prior owner of FAIRX (large holding of SHLD) and an investor in FSRPX I've been paying close attention to Retail.
Why is Retail Struggling?

The root cause is that many of these long-standing chains are overloaded with debt—often from leveraged buyouts led by private equity firms. There are billions in borrowings on the balance sheets of troubled retailers, and sustaining that load is only going to become harder—even for healthy chains.
The debt coming due, along with America’s over-stored suburbs and the continued gains of online shopping, has all the makings of a disaster. The spillover will likely flow far and wide across the U.S. economy. There will be displaced low-income workers, shrinking local tax bases and investor losses on stocks, bonds and real estate. If today is considered a retail apocalypse, then what’s coming next could truly be scary.

Article (Bloomberg):
America’s ‘Retail Apocalypse’ Is Really Just Beginning

I'll go with American Funds ... Global Balanced Fund (GBLAX). There are many ticker symbols for this fund including a no load F-1 ticker of GBLEX. This is a team managed fund with global exposure to both domestic and foregin securities. Although, I don't own this fund I do own Capital Income Builder (CAIBX) which is also considered a world allocation fund and one I have owned for a good number of years. From my perspective either one would be a good choice. Capital Income Builder focus more on income generation while Global Balance takes a more balanced approach towards income and growth. Both funds can be opened with only $250.00. So, they are well suited for a starting investor as I was at the age of 12.
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/GBLAX/quote.html
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Trailing comment after reading a few comments below. Folks, remember Old_Skeet's first investment (at age 12) was FKINX a hybrid type fund because it gave me exposure to both the bond and stock markets. Like wise, GBLAX does the same thing but from a global perspective. In addition, it has according to Xray about a 23% weighting in growth along with having about a 25% weighting (combined) in the technology and health care sectors. Being team and sleeved managed reduces manager risk.
Again, I staying with my pick.

Considering that I'm just 31 i might go with GPMCX. Should check ages of its current team leader though.

Robert Gardiner has to be in the neighborhood of 60, he's been in the investment industry since 1981, but I guess he didn't start Grandeur Peak for 10-15 years of his own thing. I'd guess he'll be around most of his life.
The two current co-managers, Amy Hu Sunderland and Mark Madsen are both young. I'd guess somewhere around 40 for both of them.
Blake Walker, who isn't managing the fund anymore but is the CEO and the manager of many of the other funds, is also young. I'd guess he's also right around 40.
With all the GP funds, I'd guess Gardiner is really the key driver of the process. I'd suspect most of those who came with him from Wasatch were people who think a lot like he does and given the team approach to their research process I wouldn't worry too much about ages and/or succession planning.

@hank, I love the logic about PRWCX and I try to do something similar, mostly related to asset allocation decisions but also each fund to some degree. For example, I've owned PRNHX for a long time and at $21BN of assets its way beyond, and has been for quite a few years, what I think is reasonable even for a mid cap fund and certainly for the small cap fund its supposed to be. But it keeps putting up the returns and I keep holding, although I've taken all of my original investment and more out.
It has had the same manager since 2010 and the expense ratio is fine, but the conclusion I've drawn is they have a better process than most others and I'd guess the same for PRWCX, which I don't own. Capital appreciation has done well even with manager changes and I probably wouldn't keep more than a small amount of New Horizons if Ellenbogen left or retired, but T Rowe Price seems to have a good number of funds that seem to have very good processes in order to overcome the logical obstacles they face and I also think they manage succession planning very well.

If I could only hold 1fund, it would be a fund I don't own today, a TRP Target Date Retirement fund. If it is one fund to hold for 10-15 years in a portfolio of funds - PRWCX.

If I was focused only on domestic and even if I wasn't I'd at least think hard about POAGX. I don't like nothing but the US but if I had to bet which funds of the ones I currently own that I'd still own 15 years from now that would be my bet.
I like the idea of go anywhere, do anything flexibility but there's just not many, if any, that I'd really trust with that. Since we wouldn't be able to know anything about the ups and downs along the way I wouldn't have a big issue with sticking to stocks and I'd probably go for something like Grandeur Peak's Global Opportunities or Global Stalwarts, neither of which I own.

Terrible choices in that article if you ask me. If it was just one fund it would probably be best to choose a go-anywhere fund--world allocation--that has the flexibility to buy different kinds of asset classes, stocks and bonds. Who's to say that U.S. small caps or mid caps won't dramatically underperform in the next fifteen years?

It's not a bad choice but he dismissed a lot of possibilities without much consideration. It sounds like he started with the answer and needed to write a 300 word article (or whatever it is) to get there. If you've got 15 years then Schiller's CAPE ratio is pretty much the best predictor that's been found and that wouldn't really lead you to US stocks at this point.

The linked article, though written in 2015, makes a case for the next 10-15 years.
What would be the one mutual fund to hold for the next 10-15 years? He gives the nod to VIMSX.
the-one-best-mutual-fund-to-hold-forever-naesx-vimsx

As the result of a "de-mutualization" of my insurer (NE Financial merged with MET Life) I received 25 shares of MET Stock. These shares, originally held at BNY Mellon, recently were transferred to Computershare which provide shareholder services for the shares. Nothing that I initiated. In fact, I stumbles upon this revelation after doing a yearly checkup on the BNY Mellon account. I never received an email nor a mailing of this change. It was hell finding the correct department at Computershares and then proving to Computershares who I was since I was using BNY Mellon Accont information that I had screenshots of (the account nor longer was accessible to me online).
Anyway, this year MET spun off BHF (Bright House Financial...an annuity service of MET) which provided me with 2 shares of BHF. I realize I am not going to get rich here, but these are the kinds of transactions (that even the owner has a hard time following let alone an heir). It happen all the time and these financial assets get lost in the shuffle of life.
I mention this because my parent (a physician and original member of the formation of Mutual Hospital Insurance later known as Anthem) dead very young. My remaining parent, now 94, discovered (by another family member 40 years later) that she was the beneficiary of over $100K of WLP stock (which bought Anthem at one point in time and now WLP is traded as ANTM..don't try to keep score here).
Here a brief history if you are interested:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthem_Inc.
My point is... Fast forward 40 years from today my MET/BHF stock could one day be a small fortune. The power of compounding over time.
So, organize these financial "loose" ends for yourself as well as your heirs. It may seem time consuming, but it is worth every penny of the time that you spend on it.
Also, has a Mutual Fund ever de-mutualized?

FYI: (I will link episode as soon as it becomes available, early Saturday morning.)
Regards,
Ted
November 9, 2017
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
Question: what have been two of the most distinctive features of the recovery from the financial crisis of ‘08-‘09? Answer: historically low levels of inflation and interest rates. Despite years of numerous predictions to the contrary inflation has stayed stubbornly subdued and, with some help from central banks around the globe, so have interest rates. But is this nearly decade long pattern finally being broken? This week’s guest says yes and there is evidence to back her claim.
As a recent headline in The Wall Street Journal reads: “Inflation the slumbering giant begins to stir.” To illustrate the point the Journal showed a chart of year over year changes in consumer prices in the U.K., U.S. and Eurozone. They bottomed in 2015 and have slowly risen, with fits and starts ever since… Japan has shown a similar pattern.
Meanwhile interest rates on benchmark 10-year government bonds are rising. U.S. rates ticked higher recently and yields in Germany and Japan are off their mid-2016 lows.
There have been other episodes of rising inflation and interest rates before this which didn’t last. This week’s guest is betting this one is for real.
She is Kathleen Gaffney, Director of Diversified Fixed Income at Eaton Vance where she is also the lead portfolio manager of the Eaton Vance Multisector Income Fund which she launched as the Eaton Vance Bond Fund when she joined the firm in early 2013.
The fund is known for its flexibility to seek higher total return opportunities anywhere globally and throughout the capital structure of the companies chosen. As a result it can buy common and preferred stocks, convertible securities and bonds. It also invests in currencies. That approach however has also meant “significantly more volatility” than its peers in Morningstar’s Multisector Bond category. Case in point: the fund declined 17% in 2015 and rocketed up 22% in 2016.
Gaffney is also lead portfolio manager of the somewhat more traditional Eaton Vance Core Plus Bond Fund. It carries a 5-Star rating and has ranked in the top performance percentiles in its category for the last 1, 3 and 5 year periods, both under her leadership and that of former managers.
If you miss the show on television you can always watch it on our website at your convenience. If you’d like to see the show before it airs, it is available to our PREMIUM subscribers right now. We also have an EXTRA interview with Gaffney about how she finds "think time" in the midst of information overload. It will be available exclusively on our website.
If you would like to take WEALTHTRACK with you on your commute or travels, you can now find the WEALTHTRACK podcast on TuneIn, Stitcher, and SoundCloud, as well as iTunes. Find out more on the WEALTHTRACK Podcast page.
Saturday, November 11th is Veteran’s Day. Please take a moment to remember all of those past and present, who have sacrificed so much to give us the freedoms we enjoy today. I personally salute my Dad, Husband and Son. I am so grateful for their service.
Have a great weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one.
Best Regards,
Consuelo
Video Clip:

M* Snapshot EBABX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/EBABX/quote.htmlutm_term=0_bf662fd9c0-2b02004c36-71656893
Lipper Snapshot: EBABX:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/ebabx
EBABX Is Unranked In The (IB) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report

Yes, the 12% allocation = 3 years at 4% each year. Perhaps even one year higher dependent on comfort levels.
The main reason I brought up this issue of cost basis is I have a personal belief that market drawdowns will become more severe during recessions than historical norms going forward. Mostly due to algos/computer trading and ETF proliferation and other pin action things that those two affect that we are not aware of. This is a new phenomenon therefore an investor must be cautious when back testing. One could argue that my opinion is wrong, but the truth is no one really knows yet. Therefore, IMHO cost basis becomes a more important aspect of portfolio management for investors who have the luxury of time.

@msf
>> using asset allocation is mathematically equivalent to using buckets with rebalancing.
yeah, it is from him that I got my construct notions
>> I think one can do better with, say, an 88/12 (cash) bucket strategy without rebalancing.
and this is what I am moving to, though you do have to sell, to replenish cash, a kind of rebalancing, seems to me
>> After waiting it out one can replenish the cash bucket from equities. So I'm comfortable keeping a three year cushion.
I do less than that; maybe should reconsider. Three years in cash, huh.
>> Right now, though, I'd use cash for that cushion because bonds add risk and don't add much to returns.
I often wonder about my Pimco allotment. Why not bail into cash? (Greed.)
>> If a retiree (inferred from the "no income" hypothesis) has $1M and needs $40K/year, staying completely out of the market isn't unreasonable. A 65 year old male can get an annuity paying $40K/year, with 3% annual adjustments, for about $840K. He can have fun with the rest - invest, travel, build a legacy, save for unexpected expenses. Annuities are another way to mitigate risk, as Pfau discusses in his Forbes column cited previously.
My wife has posed, if we have enough to cover expenses (@4% withdrawal), actually just enough, why not go even more conservative than our 50-50 (including SS as bond)? I usually mutter about travel, emergencies, housing loans / help / gifts to kids, future education help to grandkids, health surprises (we do have LTC), and greed.

(Double-dipping here)
Along a similar vein to the card’s professed wisdom ... the simplistic slogan I credit with turning my financial life around more than 25 years ago is: “Pay yourself first.”
I first heard it voiced by an (ironically) unlikely mutual fund promoter of the time, Richard Strong. His Strong Capital Management used the slogan prominently in its advertising. Up to that point I’d thought of saving only as depriving oneself of something. The slogan turns that idea upside-down and makes saving sound much more like a reward. Sure helped me get turned around.